Sorry for the dumb questions but I'm new to the 'Letting Agent' thing.

If more than one person shows interest in a flat, who gets it? The first one to sign and show the money, I presume? or do bidding wars develop?

The reason I ask is that I'm currently viewing places and keep being told that 'others are viewing too'. One place has just come up and it looks superb but I fear that if it's right for me, then I'll have to sprint down to the LA's office with my cheque book?

Also, can you tell me how to 'keep up with the rest'. ie Just looking on the web is no use, others are ringing every day, camping outside the office etc just to see the 'new stuff that has come in'. I haven't the time to ring round every day. Is there a special trick I can use, as I'm aware some stuff never makes it to the agents website.

Sounds to me like your starting the believe the agents BS. The only problem with the web (particuarly with lettings) is that they leave stuff on which went weeks ago.

Best bet is find ones on the net you are interested in (even if only a little) and then ring round and register with the agents, it's a major pain but thats the best route. There are some good agents and some bad, the good ones will send you details of anything new that comes on the market and will be on the phone to the point of being a pain in the ****, just make it clear you are serious about looking for somewhere and they will be over you like a rash.

I have never seen a bidding war on rental places, seems to be if you are interested you make an offer on the rent and then place a deposit (not much, £150 to cover reference checks etc), at that point it's basically yours, unlike selling houses the Landlord can't afford to have the place empty so there is no place for playing silly buggers and playing people off each other.

Just for the record you need cold hard cash, they generally won't take a cheque which might bounce and generally are too tight to have the facility to take a card payment. They know that they are the only place you can get property X so have no need to make paying for it any easier than it needs to be for them.

The agents give the property to the tenants that will pay the most money and will sign the most outrageous lease. They choose the people that they think are the most open to exploitation - that the agents think will obey all the rules and regulations (that the agent impose).

The agents want people that they can sell to the LL, so they chose for superfical reasons (no pets, a nice professional couple, both in work). Then from that pool they choose the applicants who met that criteria but are as raw as possible.

As a young single professional women I was frequently "chosen" by male agents who then became pests.

I've not had a problem at all in central London in the past 8 years getting a property at below the advertised weekly rent, but that is not going to be the case in many areas. My experience in "very popular areas" was that I visited the agents all in person and really pushed our attributes. Then I rang them reguarly.

I'm not aware of any special tricks to use. Sorry about that. The properties that come on the books and disappear, may go to the agents friends or to tenants already on their books (and have been easy to control) that have lost a flat when the LL sells or similar. Many agents give perference to company lets.

Just re-thinking the "tricks" bit... When we were looking for a property to buy and then registered with the letting section, we noticed that we got a far better service. The trick there being that we were looking for a rental whilst still house-huting for somewhere to buy.

Many EA's regard tenants as scum but "scum" who were looking to buy was a bit better in their eyes.

Hope others have better ideas.

Re: the comments "open to exploitation etc" - that's not my experience, either from my own employment or from working closely with other agents in my area.

However, agents generally do not want to let to troublemakers (particularly if they are going to manage the property), and I have been known to turn people down on the basis that they potentially fitted that description. I must say, however, that letting agents do not generally find themselves fortunate enough to play one applicant against the other, nor do they have anything resembling a "pool" of applicants from whom to choose.

Nonetheless, applicants do get turned away for being potential troublemakers. This may seem "unfair", but given that I and/or my client will be involved with them for months and perhaps even years into the future, and any breakdown in the relationship might well be financially crippling for my client, this is merely commonsense, and it would be naive and a dereliction of duty to act otherwise.

It is regrettable that I frequently find myself having to remind un-punctual and/or ill-mannered and/or unduly argumentative applicants that the referencing process begins the moment they first meet or speak to any one at the agency ie: it is not just a case of passing credit checks - they are being assessed constantly for signs of stroppiness or a bad attitude. In that respect it is similar to applying for a job.

I remember recently deciding against one applicant on the basis that he swaggered into my office and despite it being the first time he had ever met me, he called me "mate". Other applicants have been rejected for slouching/sprawling in the chairs in the office or on one occasion, for wearing sunglasses in the middle of winter.

My advice would be to approach the process in a similar fashion to applying for a job. Be punctual, be polite, be pleasant and be professional.

Simple really.

While I don't generally disagree with what you have said, is that the same professionalism shown to me on Saturday when the agent didn't bother turning up for a viewing, or the one that was 30 minutes late on Thursday morning or the on that showed up 15 minutes late or the ones I left more than one message asking to return a call and so on and so..... However as you say I "rejected" all those agents as they couldn't keep a simple appointment they were likely to be more hassle down the line.

I have a list of prefered letting agents, a decision to take a property from them would be much easier for me to make.

Thanks for the advice so far. I didn't realise that there was so much to the letting process.

It's interesting because I was considering wearing some smart attire for my next viewings - only because it occured to me that at the viewing yesterday, when I was told that the landlord would choose his tenant, I realised that the agent will give him feedback. I wear jeans in my job, even though I'm pretty well qualified and respectable It's basic human psychology but I guess that I'll have more gravitas (ie be able to negotiate the price down) if I present my true image and not that of mr denim casual!

So you're saying that in most cases, LA's can't play people off against one another? I've noticed that the good stuff goes quickly and a cracker has come up for grabs. It's pricey but I'm sure I will like it. Of course, the LA knows this too and will play on this, I guarantee.

I wish I'd started looking earlier, so I could identify the 'stickers' and beat them down.

I wouldn't by any means say it is necessary to turn up for viewings in a suit - my comments were more aimed at the interpersonal aspects of the process. If you are cocky, argumentative and condescending, or display any other unfortunate character traits that make you look like you might be hard work, then you are just asking to be put at the back of the queue.

Our agency conducts its business ethically, so as soon as we have a holding deposit on a property, it is taken off the market and there is no question whatsoever of trying to ride up the price by playing applicants off against each other. On the occasions when landlords have asked me to do this or have stated that they themselves will not take it off the market and will keep trying to achieve a higher rent either themselves or through other agents, I have threatened to return the holding deposit to the applicants.

However, if we genuinely have 2 people interested in the same property at the same time and before we have taken a holding deposit, then it makes perfect commercial sense to use this as a negotiating tactic. What I don't do however, is invent "phantom applicants" to achieve this end.

typical Estate agent/letting agent ******** to get you to sign

Why is it necessarily ********? Do you honestly imagine that they are going to be the only people viewing the property? It often helps to sharpen applicant's minds to let them know that decent property at a good price doesn't stay on the market for long. If I had a pound for every applicant that has called me to put down a holding deposit a week after seeing a flat they really liked, only to be told it was let 6 days ago, then I'd be a very rich man indeed.

I'm afraid your comments are just an example of typical lazy, knee-jerk thinking.

It`s just a big game.

Turn up in whatever you want to wear, ignore all the horse-shite about plenty of others are keen on the place etc, take your time, make your decision and then when you are sure, do the deal.

Be yourself and if someone does get in before you then it was not meant to be.

no but a Letting agent doesn't make money unless he/she sells the place and that's the numero uno "sales pitch" line to spin to someone to get them to hand over the money. I'm not saying that there's NO OTHERS viewing...all I'm saying is that it's THEE common used line used to get someone to rush into a decision to take the property.

In my experience letting agents and the property owners are in it for themselves and no one else. They don't give a shit about the tenants as long as the money is handed over when it's asked for and that's the bottom line. Yeah yeah ok go on and say well YES that IS the bottom line but that just re-enforces my comments in that they want the tenant to hand over money quickly and dont' give a shit how they get the money. I know of LOTS of properties that had a viewing...friends of mine only last month...to be told "it's been viewed earlier today" only for the letting agent to forget where the kitchen was....that house was no more viewed earlier than I'm the pope. Thomas, my friend, happened to make that point, not viewed earlier, to the agent, only to be told that the viewing was over and he was asked to go as the letting agent had someone else viewing.

I'm assuming you're an agent going by your replies and of course your name, I can only hope you take a bit more professional pride in your job than some others that end up giving you all a bad name

Exactly !!

That happened to me a few days ago. Agent was searching high and low for the washing machine, I found it....... in the boiler cupboard.......but they'd just shown someone round prior to me.......