The practical differences
Who pays the rent?
Arimex company arrangement
ARIMEX LTD under the signed property agreement.
Conventional letting agent
Normally the tenant under the tenancy. The agent has a separate service relationship with you.
Gaps in occupancy
Arimex company arrangement
The company rent obligation and any payment exceptions govern what is payable.
Conventional letting agent
Income ordinarily depends on the tenancy. Any separate agency guarantee or insurance needs its own review.
Who uses the property?
Arimex company arrangement
Changing authorised occupants under the disclosed, permitted accommodation model.
Conventional letting agent
The tenant and other permitted occupants under the tenancy.
Routine work
Arimex company arrangement
Arimex coordinates the tasks allocated to it in the agreement.
Conventional letting agent
Depends on tenant-find, rent collection or full-management services purchased.
Costs and repairs
Arimex company arrangement
Compare the offered rent, retained costs, repair allocation and security actually agreed.
Conventional letting agent
Compare achievable rent, actual fees, retained costs, void exposure and optional products.
Ending the arrangement
Arimex company arrangement
Review term, break rights, breach provisions, termination and handback.
Conventional letting agent
Both tenancy law and the separate agency agreement matter.
These are general distinctions. An agent may also offer a separate company-let, guaranteed-rent or insurance product. Compare the actual proposal, not the label.
When an Arimex arrangement may suit you
It may be worth a review if you value an agreed contractual rent structure, prefer one accountable company relationship and want less routine involvement. Your property must support the proposed accommodation use, and the written terms must work for you.
The rent commitment begins only under a signed, property-specific agreement. It does not mean the arrangement is risk-free, automatically insurance-backed or the highest-rent option.
Read the guaranteed-rent explanation →When a conventional agent may be a better fit
An agent may be more suitable if you want a conventional tenancy with an individual or household, your building excludes the proposed company operation, or you prefer the agent's service and financial proposition.
Compare like-for-like services. Tenant-find and full management allocate very different amounts of routine work. Do not assume every conventional agent leaves the landlord handling daily issues.
Compare more than the monthly figure
Ask each provider to explain the contracting parties, intended use, payment terms, retained costs, repair authority, security, reporting, exit provisions and handback. Consider the company's ability to pay as well as the apparent predictability of its rent promise.
A useful comparison uses realistic income and costs for your property. We do not present hypothetical savings or competitor fee percentages as if they were your likely outcome.
Questions to resolve before deciding
- Does the payment obligation depend on occupancy, and what exceptions apply?
- Who will stay, and do all relevant permissions support that use?
- Who approves repairs and pays each retained cost?
- What evidence supports the provider's claims?
- What happens if payment is late or either party breaches the agreement?
- How can the relationship end, and how is the property handed back?
See the approach before submitting
The selected Brentford example makes the operating approach tangible. Our property criteria explain the initial review. Any proposed contract still needs to be assessed on its own terms.