Tenants face eviction over landlord dispute

Posted by: sikandar Thursday, 29 October 2009 5:11 PM[UAE] - uae

The tenant should go to the Rulers Office and lodge a complaint. There has to be consumer protection here. How and why are these agents allowed to operate???. Why is there no control??

Posted by: Hamid Thursday, 29 October 2009 2:33 AM[UAE]

As far as I know RERA doesn't verify ownership when registering the lease, and is not able to either. Because the landlord may have purchased the property but have not registered it with RERA yet. I think the best RERA can do is to make sure the lease is not leased twice, and this is only possible if both tenant try to register their leases. The best way is for the agent to see the original contract and passport copy/TL of the owner and don't rely only on the copies. Copies are fine for beginning the marketing of the property, but not sufficient signing a leas. Also, the agent must verify the ownership with developer and/or REAR, depending if they have got a copy of first page of contract or the Title of the property for verification. RERA can defiantly improve, but for this case the agent is responsible.

Posted by: The Consultant Tuesday, 27 October 2009 9:04 AM[UAE] - UAE

Perhaps the answer is to introduce a standard, compulsory professional indemnity insurance policy which is a pre-requisite for RERA-registered agents. Potential tenants and buyers need reassurance that they will be protected if something goes wrong. Agents likewise need to be confident that they do not face ruin if they are caught in the middle of a cleverly organised fraud through no fault of their own.

Posted by: Cash Flow Messiah Tuesday, 27 October 2009 1:42 AM[UAE]

Pam - You're right about keys being available with security personnel usually, but I wouldnt agree with you on the same for 38 apartments keys altogether! Let's all at least admit that there may be something more than just a broker/agent scam here. I'm not trying to defend any broker/agent, just trying to establish some plausible cause that may require future notice by general public like us. In my opinion, AJ put the example quite right, in his last comment. This event must put all of us on guard with not just agents but landlords alike. Agents take a certain fee for whatever job they do (or not). Ultimately it is our money at stake v/s entities that we cant fight, right? How far do we want to push RERA or authorities alike, to protect us against issues that we end up hastily finalizing? RERA is an organization that is working hard on helping the market mature. We must give them time. As far as the agents are concerned - sharks or not, the tenants are most likely not gonna be able to get anything out of them, besides whats already been offered. I'm actually not surprised that people prefer to focus more on them rather than who they should on, at this point. In my opinion, thats not being realistic. AB, please bring some facts out quickly.

Posted by: A M Rawof Monday, 26 October 2009 4:56 PM[UAE]

Your article says ?The tenants say they rented the flats through property agents Palma Real Estate, Imperial Real Estate and Homeland, all registered with Dubai Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA). Palma has since offered to pay tenants back their AED2,250 commission if they sign a letter absolving the firm of any liability and preventing any ?action, transactions or decisions done or taken during dealings with CBS.?? You may not debate, responsibility of real estate agents or brokers, but if provide option either total ban or liability of tenant?s payment, most agents and brokers will accept their liability., Many of the tenants are aware, mostly landlords are renting out their properties thru their own real estate firm some cases even charging 5% commission from the tenants. It is unusual that, any non property owning broker or agent will show their principal or landlord to the tenant, he/she know, tenants will prefer direct deal.