The Complaint

In early August, a pair of international students who relocated from overseas to begin their university studies in London had arranged to rent a two‑bedroom flat in a desirable south‑east London development. The letting agency assured them the property would be ready to move in on 21 September, and the tenants arranged their flights and arrival to coincide with the start date.

On 14 September, the letting agent called to say the start date had been pushed back to 25 September. The tenants, already booked to arrive on 21 September, had to arrange for short‑term accommodation at premium rates.

When they landed on 21 September, a quick check of the agency’s online portal revealed the start date had shifted again, this time to 28 September. The agency did not inform them until they asked. Forced to extend their temporary stay, they also discovered they couldn’t even store their luggage at the flat as originally agreed.

As the tenants prepared to move into their flat, the letting agent let them know the property wouldn’t be available until 2 October. This notification came less than 24 hours before the promised move‑in day. By then, the students had already spent over a week and £2,419 on last minute housing and storage costs.

The letting agent explained that the delays were due to extensive repair work needed after the previous tenants left the flat in a very poor condition. They pointed out that the tenancy agreement only became legally binding once signed by both landlord and tenants, officially on 2 October, so they argued they were not responsible for costs incurred between 21 September and 2 October.

The investigation

The Property Ombudsman adjudicator’s investigation determined that while protecting the landlord’s interests was important, the agency also had a duty to treat the tenants fairly. The adjudicator found:

– The agent had arranged the tenancy knowing that extensive works were needed at the Property.
– The letting agent arranged the move‑in date before confirming a realistic repair schedule.
– Delays were worsened by poor communication, notifications arrived late or only after the tenants discovered changes themselves.
– Despite knowing the students couldn’t easily secure alternative housing, the agent offered no assistance or genuine options to help their situation.

The Award

The adjudicator awarded the tenants £2,419, enough to cover their temporary accommodation and storage costs. This decision aimed to restore the tenants to the position they would have been in had the move‑in proceeded as expected.

For agents, this case study highlights that fair treatment and proactive communication are essential. When delays are unavoidable, prompt, transparent updates and offering support options help maintain trust and avoid costly disputes.