Hallo Ihr Lieben, wir durchleben gerade das Drama der Wohnungssuche mit all seinen Facetten. Hier etwas, was letzte Woche passiert ist.

Hello Mr Hooker!
>
> We have put in an application incl. option fee on Friday (22.8) for a
> rental property and got a call on Monday (25.8) from Cheryl Bailey
> stating the following:
>
> “We have received a lot of applications for this rental property and
> some of the applicants added a note saying they would be willing to pay
> a higher rent as advertised. This is normally not our practice, but
> would you be willing to do the same?
>
> My answer to this was: No. The place has been advertised for a certain
> amount and if you wanted to get a higher rent out of this, you should
> have advertised so.
>
> I did not expect LJHooker to work with these kind of methods.
>
> Cheryl’s answer: Yes I know, but would you be willing to pay more?
> My answer: No, we are paying more at the moment, it is not a question of
> finance.
> Cheryll: Oh , you are paying more at the moment? So would you be willing
> to pay more?
>
> The conversation ended and it was clear that our application was being
> rejected.
> Basically, I was asked three times to agree to a higher price than
> advertised and this comes down to bribery.
>
> When I picked up my deposit on Wednesday, fortunately it was Cheryl
> again who was at the reception.
> I addressed Cheryl directly about this code of practice, saying:
> Are you Cheryl? Didn’t you ring me and ask if I was willing to pay more
> for this rental property?
>
> Cheryl’s reluctant answer: Yes , usually this is not how we work, but..
>
> My answer: Well. This isn’t an Arabic bazaar, is it? (I assumed that
> Cheryl didn’t know what I was talking about)
>
> Cheryl’s answer: It is up to the owner, all we do is forward the
> applications.
>
> My answer: Exactly, you put the applications forward.
> Do you know what that is? This is bribery (a sly smile on Cheryl‘s face)
> .This is illegal.
>
> Cheryl shrugged her shoulders, apparently LJHooker’s image isn’t of that
> much of importance to her.
>
> My answer: Cheryl, I will put in a complaint against this.
>
> Cheryl’s answer: Sure, you can do this.
> .
> My answer: No worries, I will make sure this goes public.
>
> Cheryl’s answer: Go ahead.
>
> And so she walked of.
>
> Mr Hooker!
>
> Three facts you should keep in mind:
>
> 1. You have wasted my time, money and effort because during these days
> I could have applied for different rentals. It is absolutely disgusting
> how LJHooker is taking advantage of the current rental market.
>
> 2. The question is, whether the rental has been advertised for a low
> price to start with and waiting to see how much applicants are willing
> to pay more- this is called “baiting” , isn’t it
>
> 3. Whether or not you are aware of this:
> In the near future we will be possible homebuyers and so will be our
> friends and family and work colleagues, and you can be 100% sure that we
> will not buy over LJHooker.
>
>
> To cut a long story short:
>
> I have lodged a complaint against LJHooker with the department of
> consumer protection, and as well as that sent a copy of this email to
> various newspapers and several other institutions.
>
>
> Thank you, Mr. Hooker!

Hallo 0013klbe!
tja, viel ist dabei nicht herum gesprungen, aber ich kann zumindest diese Vorgehensweise verbreiten - man muss sich nicht alles gefallen lassen.
Es gab sogar eine "Antwort" dazu ... (muss von unten nach oben gelesen werden)


__________________________________________________

Thanks for your comments I will take them on board.



Regards,

Andrew Johns
Director

__________________________________________________



Andrew.

As I can say again: If LJHooker had advertised this rental for a higher
amount to begin with we probably would have applied as well.
But this is not about the rental at all, it is about codes & practices
LJHooker seems to be familiar with.
In terms of "the act states we must work in our principles best
interest at all times" does not imply to work with any kind of method.
So Cheryl's statement " this is usually not our practice" doesnt really
have any ground to stand on...
In terms of "giving us an equal opportunity" : LJHooker / Cheryl did
not give us an equal opportunity at all - By giving every tenant an
equal opportunity, applications containing "handling fees", "higher
rents" etc. should not be accepted.

I have noticed another property advertised by LJHooker (82 Forrest St)
with an interestingly low rent. I wonder if this will be auctioned as
well - It wouldnt surprise me at all.

__________________________________________________


Hi thankyou for your email we had many applications on the property
concerned when processing rental applications we refer all applications to
the owner, the act states we must work in our principles best interest at
all times, had cheryl not asked you to increase your rental amount the
property would have been leased to the applicant with the higher rental
amount as instructed by the owner, cheryl was only trying to give you an
equal opportunity to sucure the property, I am sorry you feel this way about
ljhooker best of luck finding a property regards andrew johns. Ljhooker
fremantle 0408920335

__________________________________________________

LJHooker - der Name ist Program.

Auch wenn es anscheinend "ueblich" ist so zu handeln, muss man das noch lange nicht hinnehmen.
Ja , an today /tonight hatte ich auch schon gedacht..

Wir suchen etwas in der Gegend von Hamilton Hill / Spearwood.
Also, wer etwas weiss...