Tenants, landlords and workers left out of pocket after Real Est-8 letting agents closes

Bournemouth Echo: Graham Thomas by the Winton office of Real Est-8, which has gone out of business owing him money Graham Thomas by the Winton office of Real Est-8, which has gone out of business owing him money

TENANTS, landlords and maintenance men have been left out of pocket after a lettings agent closed.

A sign has gone up at Real Est-8 Property Solutions in Bournemouth’s Wimborne Road stating the business has ceased trading and those affected by the closure have been gathering outside hoping their rent money, deposits and pay will still be handed over.

Emma Taylor rents a house with her family in Throop and said she was not sure what had happened to her deposit.

The 27-year-old said: “There are quite a few people who’ve been affected.

“I’ve checked and my deposit has not gone into a deposit account. My landlady has been trying to contact them.”

Graham Thomas of Lynx Locks said he was owed £570 for work already done for the owner Clifford Wheatcroft.

He said: “There was a commotion outside with people wondering if they still have a home or not.

“It’s a shambles.”

And landlord Karl Baxter said he had been struggling to get hold of his rent money.

“We don’t know where all the money from the deposits has gone,” he said.

The Mark Liddle Partnership has been appointed by Mr Wheatcroft as a business adviser to manage the closure.

Mr Liddle said deposits had been used as working capital.

He said: “The business has closed and we’ve been asked to assist the owner of the business Clifford Wheatcroft.

“He is probably going to have to go personally bankrupt.

“He is a sole trader and not a limited company.

“We are trying to sort out the problems we’ve got with tenants and landlords.

“I think the money has been lost in the business.”

Comments (24)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

1:29pm Mon 9 Dec 13

HDI says...

"The Mark Liddle Partnership has been appointed by Mr Wheatcroft as a business adviser to manage the closure.

Mr Liddle said deposits had been used as working capital."

In which case Wheatcroft should be charged with fraud. Since 6th April 2007 there has been a legal requirement to hold deposits in an approved tenancy deposit protection scheme (https://www.gov.uk/
tenancy-deposit-prot
ection).
"The Mark Liddle Partnership has been appointed by Mr Wheatcroft as a business adviser to manage the closure. Mr Liddle said deposits had been used as working capital." In which case Wheatcroft should be charged with fraud. Since 6th April 2007 there has been a legal requirement to hold deposits in an approved tenancy deposit protection scheme (https://www.gov.uk/ tenancy-deposit-prot ection). HDI

1:54pm Mon 9 Dec 13

Huey says...

HDI wrote:
"The Mark Liddle Partnership has been appointed by Mr Wheatcroft as a business adviser to manage the closure. Mr Liddle said deposits had been used as working capital." In which case Wheatcroft should be charged with fraud. Since 6th April 2007 there has been a legal requirement to hold deposits in an approved tenancy deposit protection scheme (https://www.gov.uk/ tenancy-deposit-prot ection).
You beat me to it. That money never was his. I hope he is financially ruined and arrested/charged for this fraud. How upsetting for those concerned.
[quote][p][bold]HDI[/bold] wrote: "The Mark Liddle Partnership has been appointed by Mr Wheatcroft as a business adviser to manage the closure. Mr Liddle said deposits had been used as working capital." In which case Wheatcroft should be charged with fraud. Since 6th April 2007 there has been a legal requirement to hold deposits in an approved tenancy deposit protection scheme (https://www.gov.uk/ tenancy-deposit-prot ection).[/p][/quote]You beat me to it. That money never was his. I hope he is financially ruined and arrested/charged for this fraud. How upsetting for those concerned. Huey

2:22pm Mon 9 Dec 13

Old Colonial says...

Perhaps in this case the Mark Liddle Partnership are being a bit incautious with their comments, again! See: http://www.asa.org.u
k/Rulings/Adjudicati
ons/2013/6/Mark-Lidd
le-LLP/SHP_ADJ_22512
1.aspx
Perhaps in this case the Mark Liddle Partnership are being a bit incautious with their comments, again! See: http://www.asa.org.u k/Rulings/Adjudicati ons/2013/6/Mark-Lidd le-LLP/SHP_ADJ_22512 1.aspx Old Colonial

2:56pm Mon 9 Dec 13

BoscVegas says...

Old Colonial wrote:
Perhaps in this case the Mark Liddle Partnership are being a bit incautious with their comments, again! See: http://www.asa.org.u

k/Rulings/Adjudicati

ons/2013/6/Mark-Lidd

le-LLP/SHP_ADJ_22512

1.aspx
I believe these ads may have even appeared in this paper.
[quote][p][bold]Old Colonial[/bold] wrote: Perhaps in this case the Mark Liddle Partnership are being a bit incautious with their comments, again! See: http://www.asa.org.u k/Rulings/Adjudicati ons/2013/6/Mark-Lidd le-LLP/SHP_ADJ_22512 1.aspx[/p][/quote]I believe these ads may have even appeared in this paper. BoscVegas

3:04pm Mon 9 Dec 13

Talkingheadera says...

This is why regardless of if landlords use an agent they should keep the deposit themselves and protect it in 'my deposits scheme'.
I always insist that the deposit is passed to me in case an agent goes bust as the responsibility is still with the landlord.
Any tenant out of pocket will now need to persue the landlord direct who's details will be in the tenancy agreement together with where the deposit is held.
If it is not the the tenants can claim something like 3 months rent on top.
This is why regardless of if landlords use an agent they should keep the deposit themselves and protect it in 'my deposits scheme'. I always insist that the deposit is passed to me in case an agent goes bust as the responsibility is still with the landlord. Any tenant out of pocket will now need to persue the landlord direct who's details will be in the tenancy agreement together with where the deposit is held. If it is not the the tenants can claim something like 3 months rent on top. Talkingheadera

3:38pm Mon 9 Dec 13

pete woodley says...

Talkingheadera wrote:
This is why regardless of if landlords use an agent they should keep the deposit themselves and protect it in 'my deposits scheme'.
I always insist that the deposit is passed to me in case an agent goes bust as the responsibility is still with the landlord.
Any tenant out of pocket will now need to persue the landlord direct who's details will be in the tenancy agreement together with where the deposit is held.
If it is not the the tenants can claim something like 3 months rent on top.
Fair comment,but how many landlords do this.
[quote][p][bold]Talkingheadera[/bold] wrote: This is why regardless of if landlords use an agent they should keep the deposit themselves and protect it in 'my deposits scheme'. I always insist that the deposit is passed to me in case an agent goes bust as the responsibility is still with the landlord. Any tenant out of pocket will now need to persue the landlord direct who's details will be in the tenancy agreement together with where the deposit is held. If it is not the the tenants can claim something like 3 months rent on top.[/p][/quote]Fair comment,but how many landlords do this. pete woodley

3:42pm Mon 9 Dec 13

BoscVegas says...

Talkingheadera wrote:
This is why regardless of if landlords use an agent they should keep the deposit themselves and protect it in 'my deposits scheme'.
I always insist that the deposit is passed to me in case an agent goes bust as the responsibility is still with the landlord.
Any tenant out of pocket will now need to persue the landlord direct who's details will be in the tenancy agreement together with where the deposit is held.
If it is not the the tenants can claim something like 3 months rent on top.
3x value of the deposit is the fine but you have to go to court to obtain it. I would anticipate that most tenants would be happy to have their deposit returned. .
[quote][p][bold]Talkingheadera[/bold] wrote: This is why regardless of if landlords use an agent they should keep the deposit themselves and protect it in 'my deposits scheme'. I always insist that the deposit is passed to me in case an agent goes bust as the responsibility is still with the landlord. Any tenant out of pocket will now need to persue the landlord direct who's details will be in the tenancy agreement together with where the deposit is held. If it is not the the tenants can claim something like 3 months rent on top.[/p][/quote]3x value of the deposit is the fine but you have to go to court to obtain it. I would anticipate that most tenants would be happy to have their deposit returned. . BoscVegas

5:32pm Mon 9 Dec 13

Bob49 says...

Perhaps some might care to put his name in Google - and maybe have a look at what turns up in the .....companiesintheu
k.co.uk link

http://www.companies
intheuk.co.uk/direct
or/6576900/clifford-
wheatcroft
Perhaps some might care to put his name in Google - and maybe have a look at what turns up in the .....companiesintheu k.co.uk link http://www.companies intheuk.co.uk/direct or/6576900/clifford- wheatcroft Bob49

7:39pm Mon 9 Dec 13

HAY123 says...

This doesn't surprise me! We put a deposit down on a flat, were lied to by the men working in there, once we secured with our deposit we chased for a move in date and all communications stopped, the agents kept closing during opening hours making them not contactable. They denied all responsibility for making us homeless and we were left fighting for our money back! They made a series of excuses as to where our money went and why they couldn't give it back to us. We took it further seeking outside help and stood in the store refusing to leave until the money was handed over. Mark one of the agents had a black eye, probably from upsetting someone else, made excuses saying the manager cliff wasn't available to give us the money. We fought until the money was back to us. I hope everyone gets their money back. Looks like we were the lucky ones..
This doesn't surprise me! We put a deposit down on a flat, were lied to by the men working in there, once we secured with our deposit we chased for a move in date and all communications stopped, the agents kept closing during opening hours making them not contactable. They denied all responsibility for making us homeless and we were left fighting for our money back! They made a series of excuses as to where our money went and why they couldn't give it back to us. We took it further seeking outside help and stood in the store refusing to leave until the money was handed over. Mark one of the agents had a black eye, probably from upsetting someone else, made excuses saying the manager cliff wasn't available to give us the money. We fought until the money was back to us. I hope everyone gets their money back. Looks like we were the lucky ones.. HAY123

10:41pm Mon 9 Dec 13

Sworyhy84 says...

HAY123 wrote:
This doesn't surprise me! We put a deposit down on a flat, were lied to by the men working in there, once we secured with our deposit we chased for a move in date and all communications stopped, the agents kept closing during opening hours making them not contactable. They denied all responsibility for making us homeless and we were left fighting for our money back! They made a series of excuses as to where our money went and why they couldn't give it back to us. We took it further seeking outside help and stood in the store refusing to leave until the money was handed over. Mark one of the agents had a black eye, probably from upsetting someone else, made excuses saying the manager cliff wasn't available to give us the money. We fought until the money was back to us. I hope everyone gets their money back. Looks like we were the lucky ones..
It is shame you feel this way as it sounds like you got your money back and it would off been the holding/administrati
on fee that you paid and not the deposit. Also in this instants the landlord did not want you as tenants due to your personal situation.
Also making up a fictional story that Mark received a black eye from upsetting someone is very unprofessional and shows potential signs of immaturity and a possible difficult tenant.
Looks like the landlord was the lucky one.
[quote][p][bold]HAY123[/bold] wrote: This doesn't surprise me! We put a deposit down on a flat, were lied to by the men working in there, once we secured with our deposit we chased for a move in date and all communications stopped, the agents kept closing during opening hours making them not contactable. They denied all responsibility for making us homeless and we were left fighting for our money back! They made a series of excuses as to where our money went and why they couldn't give it back to us. We took it further seeking outside help and stood in the store refusing to leave until the money was handed over. Mark one of the agents had a black eye, probably from upsetting someone else, made excuses saying the manager cliff wasn't available to give us the money. We fought until the money was back to us. I hope everyone gets their money back. Looks like we were the lucky ones..[/p][/quote]It is shame you feel this way as it sounds like you got your money back and it would off been the holding/administrati on fee that you paid and not the deposit. Also in this instants the landlord did not want you as tenants due to your personal situation. Also making up a fictional story that Mark received a black eye from upsetting someone is very unprofessional and shows potential signs of immaturity and a possible difficult tenant. Looks like the landlord was the lucky one. Sworyhy84

11:54pm Mon 9 Dec 13

Bob49 says...

Sworyhy84 wrote:
HAY123 wrote:
This doesn't surprise me! We put a deposit down on a flat, were lied to by the men working in there, once we secured with our deposit we chased for a move in date and all communications stopped, the agents kept closing during opening hours making them not contactable. They denied all responsibility for making us homeless and we were left fighting for our money back! They made a series of excuses as to where our money went and why they couldn't give it back to us. We took it further seeking outside help and stood in the store refusing to leave until the money was handed over. Mark one of the agents had a black eye, probably from upsetting someone else, made excuses saying the manager cliff wasn't available to give us the money. We fought until the money was back to us. I hope everyone gets their money back. Looks like we were the lucky ones..
It is shame you feel this way as it sounds like you got your money back and it would off been the holding/administrati

on fee that you paid and not the deposit. Also in this instants the landlord did not want you as tenants due to your personal situation.
Also making up a fictional story that Mark received a black eye from upsetting someone is very unprofessional and shows potential signs of immaturity and a possible difficult tenant.
Looks like the landlord was the lucky one.
dearie me

if this in the level of intellect involved in running this agency it is no wonder it went bust

presuming that there was no financial mismagement of any kind .. whatsoever
[quote][p][bold]Sworyhy84[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HAY123[/bold] wrote: This doesn't surprise me! We put a deposit down on a flat, were lied to by the men working in there, once we secured with our deposit we chased for a move in date and all communications stopped, the agents kept closing during opening hours making them not contactable. They denied all responsibility for making us homeless and we were left fighting for our money back! They made a series of excuses as to where our money went and why they couldn't give it back to us. We took it further seeking outside help and stood in the store refusing to leave until the money was handed over. Mark one of the agents had a black eye, probably from upsetting someone else, made excuses saying the manager cliff wasn't available to give us the money. We fought until the money was back to us. I hope everyone gets their money back. Looks like we were the lucky ones..[/p][/quote]It is shame you feel this way as it sounds like you got your money back and it would off been the holding/administrati on fee that you paid and not the deposit. Also in this instants the landlord did not want you as tenants due to your personal situation. Also making up a fictional story that Mark received a black eye from upsetting someone is very unprofessional and shows potential signs of immaturity and a possible difficult tenant. Looks like the landlord was the lucky one.[/p][/quote]dearie me if this in the level of intellect involved in running this agency it is no wonder it went bust presuming that there was no financial mismagement of any kind .. whatsoever Bob49

1:20am Tue 10 Dec 13

Jaffacake123 says...

Sworyhy84 wrote:
HAY123 wrote:
This doesn't surprise me! We put a deposit down on a flat, were lied to by the men working in there, once we secured with our deposit we chased for a move in date and all communications stopped, the agents kept closing during opening hours making them not contactable. They denied all responsibility for making us homeless and we were left fighting for our money back! They made a series of excuses as to where our money went and why they couldn't give it back to us. We took it further seeking outside help and stood in the store refusing to leave until the money was handed over. Mark one of the agents had a black eye, probably from upsetting someone else, made excuses saying the manager cliff wasn't available to give us the money. We fought until the money was back to us. I hope everyone gets their money back. Looks like we were the lucky ones..
It is shame you feel this way as it sounds like you got your money back and it would off been the holding/administrati

on fee that you paid and not the deposit. Also in this instants the landlord did not want you as tenants due to your personal situation.
Also making up a fictional story that Mark received a black eye from upsetting someone is very unprofessional and shows potential signs of immaturity and a possible difficult tenant.
Looks like the landlord was the lucky one.
It's lovely to see companies taking responsibilities for their actions when money goes missing and they can't put it back because they clearly lost it in "their business" ... More like their "personal business" ... Putting confidential information even about old clients or old potential clients is the unprofessional part.
As a member of the public I am absolutely shocked at the lack of care for the people who actually pay your wages... Your clients... We are meant to trust you and you wonder why when people loose a significant amount of money they get a little rude... The high percentage of your clientele are families and taking money away from them and not returning it when it's clearly your error in the business is disgusting... Previous notes I've seen and quotes from families shows your inability to handle money or a business in a professional manner ... I'd think about how you present yourselves to the public..... No wonder your out of business ....
[quote][p][bold]Sworyhy84[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HAY123[/bold] wrote: This doesn't surprise me! We put a deposit down on a flat, were lied to by the men working in there, once we secured with our deposit we chased for a move in date and all communications stopped, the agents kept closing during opening hours making them not contactable. They denied all responsibility for making us homeless and we were left fighting for our money back! They made a series of excuses as to where our money went and why they couldn't give it back to us. We took it further seeking outside help and stood in the store refusing to leave until the money was handed over. Mark one of the agents had a black eye, probably from upsetting someone else, made excuses saying the manager cliff wasn't available to give us the money. We fought until the money was back to us. I hope everyone gets their money back. Looks like we were the lucky ones..[/p][/quote]It is shame you feel this way as it sounds like you got your money back and it would off been the holding/administrati on fee that you paid and not the deposit. Also in this instants the landlord did not want you as tenants due to your personal situation. Also making up a fictional story that Mark received a black eye from upsetting someone is very unprofessional and shows potential signs of immaturity and a possible difficult tenant. Looks like the landlord was the lucky one.[/p][/quote]It's lovely to see companies taking responsibilities for their actions when money goes missing and they can't put it back because they clearly lost it in "their business" ... More like their "personal business" ... Putting confidential information even about old clients or old potential clients is the unprofessional part. As a member of the public I am absolutely shocked at the lack of care for the people who actually pay your wages... Your clients... We are meant to trust you and you wonder why when people loose a significant amount of money they get a little rude... The high percentage of your clientele are families and taking money away from them and not returning it when it's clearly your error in the business is disgusting... Previous notes I've seen and quotes from families shows your inability to handle money or a business in a professional manner ... I'd think about how you present yourselves to the public..... No wonder your out of business .... Jaffacake123

7:30am Tue 10 Dec 13

Talkingheadera says...

And it I fraud by the agent as the law states the deposit must be protected in one of 3 schemes and the details are passed to the tenants.
When you hand over a deposit whether it's a holding deposit or a full deposit insist on a receipt.
Regarding the comment that most tenants would just like their deposit back , they must be given it back by the landlord.
It's their responsibility not the agent.
The fact the agent used all these deposits for his own cash flow basically means he is utter scum.
And it I fraud by the agent as the law states the deposit must be protected in one of 3 schemes and the details are passed to the tenants. When you hand over a deposit whether it's a holding deposit or a full deposit insist on a receipt. Regarding the comment that most tenants would just like their deposit back , they must be given it back by the landlord. It's their responsibility not the agent. The fact the agent used all these deposits for his own cash flow basically means he is utter scum. Talkingheadera

10:20am Tue 10 Dec 13

objective2 says...

It is shame you feel this way as it sounds like you got your money back and it would off been the holding/administrati


on fee that you paid and not the deposit. Also in this instants the landlord did not want you as tenants due to your personal situation.
Also making up a fictional story that Mark received a black eye from upsetting someone is very unprofessional and shows potential signs of immaturity and a possible difficult tenant.
Looks like the landlord was the lucky one.
In response to the comment above it is both ageist & discriminatory, I would suggest that a diversity course should be attended.

Also what has been written is factually incorrect, please read the T & C's of posting on this site. The potential landlord sacked you as their agents due to the amount of incorrect information that was passed to the potential new tenants & decided to find their own tenants due to your incompetency. The amount of deposit advised was incorrect & left them in a position to not be able to afford the property, the garden was full of boxes & crates & due to the fact they have a toddler Mark advised the landlord had agreed to clear. On meeting with their new potential landlords a catalogue of lies became clear & at this point the landlord pulled out. Fact !!

The potential new tenants contacted Trading standards & then on their advice Shelter who then rang your firm. They spoke to Mark who advised they were still moving in the next day even though he was told it had already fallen through..another lie!

It took several calls & a visit to the office before the admin fee was returned. The fee was supposedly in part for references which were never completed. The work reference contacted tried to email the pay info etc over but the email kept bouncing back & their former landlord was supposedly contacted by phone but she had no missed calls. Weeks later she visited her let property to find a reference letter there at her Bournemouth property, she lives in Northampton as advised! When the landlord asked for copies of the references you supposedly couldnt provide them because of 'data protection'. These were never completed. Another lie!

There was no accusation that Mark had been punched by a client. However having a member of staff sat in the office with a black eye does not give out professional impression. And of course seeing how clients have been treated it might be a fair assumption that he has upset someone along the way.

You state the Landlord has had a lucky escape, Yes they have & so have their potential new tenants who are now very relieved that they are no longer d/w you!

I am happy to respond to any of the comments above. Unfortunately the truth hurts & making incorrect & discriminatory comments is only making you look in a worse light, if that is possible.

I hope that the Official Receiver manages to obtain the monies from your assets to repay all the money that has been stolen from your clients.
It is shame you feel this way as it sounds like you got your money back and it would off been the holding/administrati on fee that you paid and not the deposit. Also in this instants the landlord did not want you as tenants due to your personal situation. Also making up a fictional story that Mark received a black eye from upsetting someone is very unprofessional and shows potential signs of immaturity and a possible difficult tenant. Looks like the landlord was the lucky one. In response to the comment above it is both ageist & discriminatory, I would suggest that a diversity course should be attended. Also what has been written is factually incorrect, please read the T & C's of posting on this site. The potential landlord sacked you as their agents due to the amount of incorrect information that was passed to the potential new tenants & decided to find their own tenants due to your incompetency. The amount of deposit advised was incorrect & left them in a position to not be able to afford the property, the garden was full of boxes & crates & due to the fact they have a toddler Mark advised the landlord had agreed to clear. On meeting with their new potential landlords a catalogue of lies became clear & at this point the landlord pulled out. Fact !! The potential new tenants contacted Trading standards & then on their advice Shelter who then rang your firm. They spoke to Mark who advised they were still moving in the next day even though he was told it had already fallen through..another lie! It took several calls & a visit to the office before the admin fee was returned. The fee was supposedly in part for references which were never completed. The work reference contacted tried to email the pay info etc over but the email kept bouncing back & their former landlord was supposedly contacted by phone but she had no missed calls. Weeks later she visited her let property to find a reference letter there at her Bournemouth property, she lives in Northampton as advised! When the landlord asked for copies of the references you supposedly couldnt provide them because of 'data protection'. These were never completed. Another lie! There was no accusation that Mark had been punched by a client. However having a member of staff sat in the office with a black eye does not give out professional impression. And of course seeing how clients have been treated it might be a fair assumption that he has upset someone along the way. You state the Landlord has had a lucky escape, Yes they have & so have their potential new tenants who are now very relieved that they are no longer d/w you! I am happy to respond to any of the comments above. Unfortunately the truth hurts & making incorrect & discriminatory comments is only making you look in a worse light, if that is possible. I hope that the Official Receiver manages to obtain the monies from your assets to repay all the money that has been stolen from your clients. objective2

10:27am Tue 10 Dec 13

objective2 says...

In response to the comment above it is both ageist & discriminatory, I would suggest that a diversity course should be attended.

Also what has been written is factually incorrect, please read the T & C's of posting on this site. The potential landlord sacked you as their agents due to the amount of incorrect information that was passed to the potential new tenants & decided to find their own tenants due to your incompetency. The amount of deposit advised was incorrect & left them in a position to not be able to afford the property, the garden was full of boxes & crates & due to the fact they have a toddler Mark advised the landlord had agreed to clear. On meeting with their new potential landlords a catalogue of lies became clear & at this point the landlord pulled out. Fact !!

The potential new tenants contacted Trading standards & then on their advice Shelter who then rang your firm. They spoke to Mark who advised they were still moving in the next day even though he was told it had already fallen through..another lie!

It took several calls & a visit to the office before the admin fee was returned. The fee was supposedly in part for references which were never completed. The work reference contacted tried to email the pay info etc over but the email kept bouncing back & their former landlord was supposedly contacted by phone but she had no missed calls. Weeks later she visited her let property to find a reference letter there at her Bournemouth property, she lives in Northampton as advised! When the landlord asked for copies of the references you supposedly couldnt provide them because of 'data protection'. These were never completed. Another lie!

There was no accusation that Mark had been punched by a client. However having a member of staff sat in the office with a black eye does not give out professional impression. And of course seeing how clients have been treated it might be a fair assumption that he has upset someone along the way.

You state the Landlord has had a lucky escape, Yes they have & so have their potential new tenants who are now very relieved that they are no longer d/w you!

I am happy to respond to any of the comments above. Unfortunately the truth hurts & making incorrect & discriminatory comments is only making you look in a worse light, if that is possible.

I hope that the Official Receiver manages to obtain the monies from your assets to repay all the money that has been stolen from your clients.
In response to the comment above it is both ageist & discriminatory, I would suggest that a diversity course should be attended. Also what has been written is factually incorrect, please read the T & C's of posting on this site. The potential landlord sacked you as their agents due to the amount of incorrect information that was passed to the potential new tenants & decided to find their own tenants due to your incompetency. The amount of deposit advised was incorrect & left them in a position to not be able to afford the property, the garden was full of boxes & crates & due to the fact they have a toddler Mark advised the landlord had agreed to clear. On meeting with their new potential landlords a catalogue of lies became clear & at this point the landlord pulled out. Fact !! The potential new tenants contacted Trading standards & then on their advice Shelter who then rang your firm. They spoke to Mark who advised they were still moving in the next day even though he was told it had already fallen through..another lie! It took several calls & a visit to the office before the admin fee was returned. The fee was supposedly in part for references which were never completed. The work reference contacted tried to email the pay info etc over but the email kept bouncing back & their former landlord was supposedly contacted by phone but she had no missed calls. Weeks later she visited her let property to find a reference letter there at her Bournemouth property, she lives in Northampton as advised! When the landlord asked for copies of the references you supposedly couldnt provide them because of 'data protection'. These were never completed. Another lie! There was no accusation that Mark had been punched by a client. However having a member of staff sat in the office with a black eye does not give out professional impression. And of course seeing how clients have been treated it might be a fair assumption that he has upset someone along the way. You state the Landlord has had a lucky escape, Yes they have & so have their potential new tenants who are now very relieved that they are no longer d/w you! I am happy to respond to any of the comments above. Unfortunately the truth hurts & making incorrect & discriminatory comments is only making you look in a worse light, if that is possible. I hope that the Official Receiver manages to obtain the monies from your assets to repay all the money that has been stolen from your clients. objective2

5:07pm Tue 10 Dec 13

JustJones says...

Sad state of affairs, greedy breed of Bournemouth boys who see bankruptcy and a chink on their integrity as nothing more than another notch on their quest to become the next Big boy....... Doesn't take long to find mr wheat croft, and judging by his twitter account he has been living the high life off the back of the illegally spent deposits he has taken on.

Fast forward 12 months, he'll be back doing the same immoral activity, 1980's Bournemouth boys, most of you appear to have or are about to have kids, time to discover some values and a moral compass because sooner or later the victims to the next scam or ploy may be your little ones when they have grown up and enter the big wide world. Time to make the change!
Sad state of affairs, greedy breed of Bournemouth boys who see bankruptcy and a chink on their integrity as nothing more than another notch on their quest to become the next Big boy....... Doesn't take long to find mr wheat croft, and judging by his twitter account he has been living the high life off the back of the illegally spent deposits he has taken on. Fast forward 12 months, he'll be back doing the same immoral activity, 1980's Bournemouth boys, most of you appear to have or are about to have kids, time to discover some values and a moral compass because sooner or later the victims to the next scam or ploy may be your little ones when they have grown up and enter the big wide world. Time to make the change! JustJones

5:14pm Tue 10 Dec 13

Tea1sugar says...

I am an ex-tenant of a property that was rented through Real-Est8. I have not had my deposit returned to me and I have been informed by Mark Liddle that I am now in the position of being a creditor of Mr Wheatcroft. Does this mean I have lost my deposit or should I pursue the landlords?
I am an ex-tenant of a property that was rented through Real-Est8. I have not had my deposit returned to me and I have been informed by Mark Liddle that I am now in the position of being a creditor of Mr Wheatcroft. Does this mean I have lost my deposit or should I pursue the landlords? Tea1sugar

5:31pm Tue 10 Dec 13

stevobath says...

Sworyhy84 wrote:
HAY123 wrote:
This doesn't surprise me! We put a deposit down on a flat, were lied to by the men working in there, once we secured with our deposit we chased for a move in date and all communications stopped, the agents kept closing during opening hours making them not contactable. They denied all responsibility for making us homeless and we were left fighting for our money back! They made a series of excuses as to where our money went and why they couldn't give it back to us. We took it further seeking outside help and stood in the store refusing to leave until the money was handed over. Mark one of the agents had a black eye, probably from upsetting someone else, made excuses saying the manager cliff wasn't available to give us the money. We fought until the money was back to us. I hope everyone gets their money back. Looks like we were the lucky ones..
It is shame you feel this way as it sounds like you got your money back and it would off been the holding/administrati

on fee that you paid and not the deposit. Also in this instants the landlord did not want you as tenants due to your personal situation.
Also making up a fictional story that Mark received a black eye from upsetting someone is very unprofessional and shows potential signs of immaturity and a possible difficult tenant.
Looks like the landlord was the lucky one.
Sticking up for scumbags?


IF those running this company have broken the law, I sincerely hope that they get dealt with appropriately. Remember things have a habit of coming back round & biting nasty people on the bum & in many different ways. Wouldn't it be an irony that those involved who might have been acting illegally, ended up without a pot 2 p in & with 'No room at The Inn' over Christmas? I hope so.
[quote][p][bold]Sworyhy84[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HAY123[/bold] wrote: This doesn't surprise me! We put a deposit down on a flat, were lied to by the men working in there, once we secured with our deposit we chased for a move in date and all communications stopped, the agents kept closing during opening hours making them not contactable. They denied all responsibility for making us homeless and we were left fighting for our money back! They made a series of excuses as to where our money went and why they couldn't give it back to us. We took it further seeking outside help and stood in the store refusing to leave until the money was handed over. Mark one of the agents had a black eye, probably from upsetting someone else, made excuses saying the manager cliff wasn't available to give us the money. We fought until the money was back to us. I hope everyone gets their money back. Looks like we were the lucky ones..[/p][/quote]It is shame you feel this way as it sounds like you got your money back and it would off been the holding/administrati on fee that you paid and not the deposit. Also in this instants the landlord did not want you as tenants due to your personal situation. Also making up a fictional story that Mark received a black eye from upsetting someone is very unprofessional and shows potential signs of immaturity and a possible difficult tenant. Looks like the landlord was the lucky one.[/p][/quote]Sticking up for scumbags? IF those running this company have broken the law, I sincerely hope that they get dealt with appropriately. Remember things have a habit of coming back round & biting nasty people on the bum & in many different ways. Wouldn't it be an irony that those involved who might have been acting illegally, ended up without a pot 2 p in & with 'No room at The Inn' over Christmas? I hope so. stevobath

7:38pm Tue 10 Dec 13

Talkingheadera says...

Tea1sugar wrote:
I am an ex-tenant of a property that was rented through Real-Est8. I have not had my deposit returned to me and I have been informed by Mark Liddle that I am now in the position of being a creditor of Mr Wheatcroft. Does this mean I have lost my deposit or should I pursue the landlords?
You persue the landlord as it's his responsibility to return deposit.
It's also his responsibility to make sure you were given correct paperwork re deposit protection and if they havnt then you have a claim of more than just the deposit.
The deposit is yours until either you agree any deductions or an independant arbitrator for whichever scheme It was protected in determines any deductions if any.
The onus is on the landlord to prove why any deductions are made.
[quote][p][bold]Tea1sugar[/bold] wrote: I am an ex-tenant of a property that was rented through Real-Est8. I have not had my deposit returned to me and I have been informed by Mark Liddle that I am now in the position of being a creditor of Mr Wheatcroft. Does this mean I have lost my deposit or should I pursue the landlords?[/p][/quote]You persue the landlord as it's his responsibility to return deposit. It's also his responsibility to make sure you were given correct paperwork re deposit protection and if they havnt then you have a claim of more than just the deposit. The deposit is yours until either you agree any deductions or an independant arbitrator for whichever scheme It was protected in determines any deductions if any. The onus is on the landlord to prove why any deductions are made. Talkingheadera

10:06pm Tue 10 Dec 13

Yankee1 says...

In America, this in known as business fraud. It is dealt with efficiently.

I presume the Office of Fair Trading will be contacting Dorset Police to launch a criminal probe?

Who/what insurance underwrote this 'business"? If it was not insured, why was it allowed to handle third party monies?
In America, this in known as business fraud. It is dealt with efficiently. I presume the Office of Fair Trading will be contacting Dorset Police to launch a criminal probe? Who/what insurance underwrote this 'business"? If it was not insured, why was it allowed to handle third party monies? Yankee1

9:51am Wed 11 Dec 13

Thorbard says...

Tea1sugar wrote:
I am an ex-tenant of a property that was rented through Real-Est8. I have not had my deposit returned to me and I have been informed by Mark Liddle that I am now in the position of being a creditor of Mr Wheatcroft. Does this mean I have lost my deposit or should I pursue the landlords?
In this case, pursue the landlord.

My own problem as a current tenant through Real-Est8 is that the organisation listed as Landlord on my contract also seems to have ceased to exist. Does anyone have any thoughts on that one?
[quote][p][bold]Tea1sugar[/bold] wrote: I am an ex-tenant of a property that was rented through Real-Est8. I have not had my deposit returned to me and I have been informed by Mark Liddle that I am now in the position of being a creditor of Mr Wheatcroft. Does this mean I have lost my deposit or should I pursue the landlords?[/p][/quote]In this case, pursue the landlord. My own problem as a current tenant through Real-Est8 is that the organisation listed as Landlord on my contract also seems to have ceased to exist. Does anyone have any thoughts on that one? Thorbard

10:02am Wed 11 Dec 13

Tea1sugar says...

Thorbard wrote:
Tea1sugar wrote:
I am an ex-tenant of a property that was rented through Real-Est8. I have not had my deposit returned to me and I have been informed by Mark Liddle that I am now in the position of being a creditor of Mr Wheatcroft. Does this mean I have lost my deposit or should I pursue the landlords?
In this case, pursue the landlord.

My own problem as a current tenant through Real-Est8 is that the organisation listed as Landlord on my contract also seems to have ceased to exist. Does anyone have any thoughts on that one?
Personally I would stop rent payments until your landlord contacts you!
[quote][p][bold]Thorbard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tea1sugar[/bold] wrote: I am an ex-tenant of a property that was rented through Real-Est8. I have not had my deposit returned to me and I have been informed by Mark Liddle that I am now in the position of being a creditor of Mr Wheatcroft. Does this mean I have lost my deposit or should I pursue the landlords?[/p][/quote]In this case, pursue the landlord. My own problem as a current tenant through Real-Est8 is that the organisation listed as Landlord on my contract also seems to have ceased to exist. Does anyone have any thoughts on that one?[/p][/quote]Personally I would stop rent payments until your landlord contacts you! Tea1sugar

2:49pm Fri 13 Dec 13

enquirer001 says...

Thorbard wrote:
Tea1sugar wrote:
I am an ex-tenant of a property that was rented through Real-Est8. I have not had my deposit returned to me and I have been informed by Mark Liddle that I am now in the position of being a creditor of Mr Wheatcroft. Does this mean I have lost my deposit or should I pursue the landlords?
In this case, pursue the landlord.

My own problem as a current tenant through Real-Est8 is that the organisation listed as Landlord on my contract also seems to have ceased to exist. Does anyone have any thoughts on that one?
Is the organization listed as Landlord in any way connected with Real-Est8's ownership/ related parties?
[quote][p][bold]Thorbard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tea1sugar[/bold] wrote: I am an ex-tenant of a property that was rented through Real-Est8. I have not had my deposit returned to me and I have been informed by Mark Liddle that I am now in the position of being a creditor of Mr Wheatcroft. Does this mean I have lost my deposit or should I pursue the landlords?[/p][/quote]In this case, pursue the landlord. My own problem as a current tenant through Real-Est8 is that the organisation listed as Landlord on my contract also seems to have ceased to exist. Does anyone have any thoughts on that one?[/p][/quote]Is the organization listed as Landlord in any way connected with Real-Est8's ownership/ related parties? enquirer001

8:41pm Sun 15 Dec 13

Thorbard says...

enquirer001 wrote:
Thorbard wrote:
Tea1sugar wrote:
I am an ex-tenant of a property that was rented through Real-Est8. I have not had my deposit returned to me and I have been informed by Mark Liddle that I am now in the position of being a creditor of Mr Wheatcroft. Does this mean I have lost my deposit or should I pursue the landlords?
In this case, pursue the landlord.

My own problem as a current tenant through Real-Est8 is that the organisation listed as Landlord on my contract also seems to have ceased to exist. Does anyone have any thoughts on that one?
Is the organization listed as Landlord in any way connected with Real-Est8's ownership/ related parties?
Not that I am aware of.
[quote][p][bold]enquirer001[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Thorbard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tea1sugar[/bold] wrote: I am an ex-tenant of a property that was rented through Real-Est8. I have not had my deposit returned to me and I have been informed by Mark Liddle that I am now in the position of being a creditor of Mr Wheatcroft. Does this mean I have lost my deposit or should I pursue the landlords?[/p][/quote]In this case, pursue the landlord. My own problem as a current tenant through Real-Est8 is that the organisation listed as Landlord on my contract also seems to have ceased to exist. Does anyone have any thoughts on that one?[/p][/quote]Is the organization listed as Landlord in any way connected with Real-Est8's ownership/ related parties?[/p][/quote]Not that I am aware of. Thorbard

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree