#148

If a landlord wants a tenant out, and already has a new tenant lined up, they’ll threaten to hike the rent above the market value, even if the future tenant has agree terms for less. It’s pretty common.

1 Like
#149

Then the tenant gets a surveyor and they fight it out, and if it is above the market rent then the tenant wins.

#151

Woooah, you’ve massively jumped to an assumption here. I am a landlord of a couple of commercial properties, and I have had horrendous tenants that have basically used us for the rent free periods and then fucked off leaving massive utility bills.

I am not coming at this from ‘all tenants are angels’ pov.

#152

Ah, didn’t realise they had so many bars.

#153

Well that is different again, and far too common.

But this is the bit that fucks me off, tenants do things like that, or don’t pay the rent, then go bust, or get kicked out, and then bleat to the press about their evil landlords stopping their business as it is the easiest way to falsely save face, and the local press bloody love it.

1 Like
#154

However, I will take issue with some of this.
‘if there’s a break clause then it’s the tenant’s fault for agreeing to it’.
you are assuming that every tenant has access to quality legal advice so as to understand what they are signing up to- the nuances of the commercial lease documentation don’t jump off the page to a layman. Lots of tenants don’t get good advice and the inequality of bargaining power means that tenants often don’t know what they’re signing up to and docu8ments are heavily skewed in favour of landlords.

Also, tenants can agree to things under duress, again because of the inequality of the bargaining position.

1 Like
#155

I think it’s safe to say that there is lots of fault, all too often, on both sides of the commercial letting relationship! :beer:

#156

Again, I agree with you in principle that the legal framework allows for rent to be challenged, but the problem is that lots of tenants are not well represented and don’t challenge the rent review in time, or at all.

#157

The problem with this company, apart from its business practises, are that its beer is just… subpar

2 Likes
#158

I firmly believe no person should take a lease without seeking decent legal and property advice. If you can afford to open a shop those fees are pretty minor in the comparison to the other costs to get open.

#159

The short answer is that it depends on their employment contracts, but I hadn’t realised that Brewdog is a PLC. So I’m coming down on ‘not enough employees’ as citing the gender pay gap is a BOLD move for a company that would have to declare its own, and it would be massive seeing as the founders are all dudes.

1 Like
#160

As I said to @xylo, you may well be right seeing as this is such a bold move from a company who absolutely would have a huge pay gap.

They have until 5 April this year to declare, so I guess we’ll find out then.

#161

Totally agree, however that’s not always what happens! Or all too often they send the lease to their ‘high street’ lawyer who did their house purchase, and they are not equipped to know what is market standard on the commercial side (with some notable exceptions for sure- but that is my experience of it anyway).

Meanwhile, does anybody want to buy/ rent a derelict nightclub in Greenock? :joy::persevere:

#162

Have you spoken to Brewdog?

12 Likes
#163

Yes and no. Think they operate in a slightly weird space now. More expensive than macro-brewed beer in the supermarket but usually the cheapest “craft” option.

#165

I mean it tastes kind of crap

#166

like, I’d pick a Holsten over it

2 Likes
#168

They’ll give @anon32406580 £5,000 if they do use it! (On top of the sale / rental price)

1 Like
#169

I’m not sure that the locals are exactly their target market :rofl:

1 Like
#170

still tastes like shite tho. dont think theres a single brewdog beer ive liked that much

1 Like