We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
No inventory - no deposit retention clarification please
merlinthehappypig
Posts: 1,106 Forumite
Any chance someone knowledgable could clarify the 'no inventory - no deposit retentions' theme that keeps cropping up on the forum.
We are shortly going to leave our rented cottage. There are a number of problems with damp, leaking roof, rat damage and so on which mean that the carpets and decoration are not at the same standard as when we moved in. I have a series of e-mails back and forth reporting all the problems when they occured, when the LA promised a builder would come and sort out the problems, but didn't ever turn up.
I've no doubt that the LA will try to retain most/all of the £1800 deposit, but I don't know how best to approach the inevitable dispute.
I have photos from when we moved in and as subsequent problems arose, so option one would be to point out that I have a photo record which, together with the e-mails, show that the problems were not of our making and were ignored by the LA.
As we have no inventory at all from when we moved in (the tenants' handbook refers to one and photos, but the contact at the LA was about to leave when we took on the tenancy so many things got overlooked by them, including the inventory) the simplest option would be to say that they cannot make any deductions from the deposit as they have no inventory. I'd prefer this approach but, other than from this forum, can't find any basis in law for this approach.
Can someone point me to any legislation or case law that supports this approach so I can quote it in any letter?
[threadbanner]box[/threadbanner]
We are shortly going to leave our rented cottage. There are a number of problems with damp, leaking roof, rat damage and so on which mean that the carpets and decoration are not at the same standard as when we moved in. I have a series of e-mails back and forth reporting all the problems when they occured, when the LA promised a builder would come and sort out the problems, but didn't ever turn up.
I've no doubt that the LA will try to retain most/all of the £1800 deposit, but I don't know how best to approach the inevitable dispute.
I have photos from when we moved in and as subsequent problems arose, so option one would be to point out that I have a photo record which, together with the e-mails, show that the problems were not of our making and were ignored by the LA.
As we have no inventory at all from when we moved in (the tenants' handbook refers to one and photos, but the contact at the LA was about to leave when we took on the tenancy so many things got overlooked by them, including the inventory) the simplest option would be to say that they cannot make any deductions from the deposit as they have no inventory. I'd prefer this approach but, other than from this forum, can't find any basis in law for this approach.
Can someone point me to any legislation or case law that supports this approach so I can quote it in any letter?
[threadbanner]box[/threadbanner]
0
Comments
-
There is no such law - it's just a few people posting hoping that is the case.
The reality is that an inventory/statement of condition is in the interest of both the LL and the tenant as it agress the condition at the start & end of the tenancy and so normally removes any arguement.
However, the lack of one does not prevent a LL from making deductions from the deposit for claimed delapidations. Ultimately, if a tenant wants their deposit back they would need to take a LL to court to get it back if the LL is unwilling to give it back. The court will decide on the balance of probablility whether the damage was caused by the tenant during the tenancy. (and it not being fair wear & tear). The lack of inventory/statement of condition does not automatically mean the tenant wins - that is why it is both parties interests.
In your case, you appear to accept the damage was caused during the tenancy (and it not being fair wear & tear). - so an inventory/statement of condition for that item when you moved in is unimportant. However you say it was damage caused not by your actions (or hopefully inactions). If the LL doesn't agree, it will be down to you to prove it was - the records you have will hopefully do that.
Good luck
"Now to trolling as a concept. .... Personally, I've always found it a little sad that people choose to spend such a large proportion of their lives in this way but they do, and we have to deal with it." - MSE Forum Manager 6th July 20100 -
There is no such law - it's just a few people posting hoping that is the case.
The court will decide on the balance of probablility whether the damage was caused by the tenant during the tenancy. (and it not being fair wear & tear). The lack of inventory/statement of condition does not automatically mean the tenant wins - that is why it is both parties interests.
I agree. There isn't anything in law such as no inventory = no retention of the deposit, as far as I'm aware.
It's a strong evidential point, though, that the LL can't demonstrate in most cases that there was damage as there's nothing to show what the place was like beforehand....much enquiry having been made concerning a gentleman, who had quitted a company where Johnson was, and no information being obtained; at last Johnson observed, that 'he did not care to speak ill of any man behind his back, but he believed the gentleman was an attorney'.0 -
Premier, your reply assumes the tenancy started prior to April 2007. Have you forgotten about TDS.
If your tenancy started after this date then landlords/LA are not allowed to use deposit without tenant's agreement. If disputed, then my understanding is that landlord’s position is weakened without an inventory as both parties will need to furnish the adjudicator with written evidence to support their arguments. Note the word "weakened". Photos might well provide sufficient evidence.
NotlobNotlob0 -
neverdespairgirl wrote: »I agree. There isn't anything in law such as no inventory = no retention of the deposit, as far as I'm aware.
It's a strong evidential point, though, that the LL can't demonstrate in most cases that there was damage as there's nothing to show what the place was like beforehand.
But surely it's for the claimant to prove there's a case to answer before a defendant needs to prove anything?
How can a claimant (tenant) prove the carpet was soiled from the outset without an agreed inventory/statement of condition?"Now to trolling as a concept. .... Personally, I've always found it a little sad that people choose to spend such a large proportion of their lives in this way but they do, and we have to deal with it." - MSE Forum Manager 6th July 20100 -
No, ultimately only the court can decide who is right & who is wrong, even if a deposit is secured under a TDS.Premier, your reply assumes the tenancy started prior to April 2007. Have you forgotten about TDS..."Now to trolling as a concept. .... Personally, I've always found it a little sad that people choose to spend such a large proportion of their lives in this way but they do, and we have to deal with it." - MSE Forum Manager 6th July 20100 -
But surely it's for the claimant to prove there's a case to answer before a defendant needs to prove anything?
How can a claimant (tenant) prove the carpet was soiled from the outset without an agreed inventory/statement of condition?
The Claimant does show there's a case to answer.
Cl turns up and says, "the LL has my money. Here is the receipt. I want it back".
There is the Claimant's case.
The LL may then put in a defence, saying, "Ah, I'm keeping it because the property was left in a worse state"
He then has to prove that....much enquiry having been made concerning a gentleman, who had quitted a company where Johnson was, and no information being obtained; at last Johnson observed, that 'he did not care to speak ill of any man behind his back, but he believed the gentleman was an attorney'.0 -
"Here's the receipt for the cleaning, m'lud"neverdespairgirl wrote: »The Claimant does show there's a case to answer.
Cl turns up and says, "the LL has my money. Here is the receipt. I want it back".
There is the Claimant's case.
The LL may then put in a defence, saying, "Ah, I'm keeping it because the property was left in a worse state"
He then has to prove that.
"Now to trolling as a concept. .... Personally, I've always found it a little sad that people choose to spend such a large proportion of their lives in this way but they do, and we have to deal with it." - MSE Forum Manager 6th July 20100 -
Ultimately, if a tenant wants their deposit back they would need to take a LL to court to get it back if the LL is unwilling to give it back.
My reply related to this part of your post. You cannot retain part/all of the deposit without tenant agreement. If you do, all the tenant has to do is raise a dispute, upon which, the disputed amount must be lodged with the relevant TDS, unless it is the DPS which already holds the money.
I hear what you are saying that "ultimately" a court will decide if neither party use the ADR service. However, a landlord risks expulsion from a TDS and in any event the landlord also has not got the disputed deposit until dispute resolved whether by court action or via the ADR procedures.
I also wonder how many people will use the court route now the TDS is running? I suspect very, very few!
NotlobNotlob0 -
My reply related to this part of your post. You cannot retain part/all of the deposit without tenant agreement. If you do, all the tenant has to do is raise a dispute, upon which, the disputed amount must be lodged with the relevant TDS, unless it is the DPS which already holds the money.
I hear what you are saying that "ultimately" a court will decide if neither party use the ADR service. However, a landlord risks expulsion from a TDS and in any event the landlord also has not got the disputed deposit until dispute resolved whether by court action or via the ADR procedures.
I also wonder how many people will use the court route now the TDS is running? I suspect very, very few!
Notlob
The point is the TDS cannot return any deposit to a tenant without the landlords agreement (of failure to raise a dispute within a specific time) other than by a court order.
A LL will not face expulsion from using a scheme in the future in the event of a dispute between LL & tenant. Where did you get that idea from?"Now to trolling as a concept. .... Personally, I've always found it a little sad that people choose to spend such a large proportion of their lives in this way but they do, and we have to deal with it." - MSE Forum Manager 6th July 20100 -
The point is the TDS cannot return any deposit to a tenant without the landlords agreement (of failure to raise a dispute within a specific time) other than by a court order.
This is point of fact, not a point of reality though! People will use the scheme as it was set up for.A LL will not face expulsion from using a scheme in the future in the event of a dispute between LL & tenant. Where did you get that idea from?
I did not say that but I should have expressed myself in more detail. What I mean is that the LL risks expulsion by not working to the spirit of the scheme. Oh crap! You now want me to find the relevant text don't you?
NotlobNotlob0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 349.8K Banking & Borrowing
- 252.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453K Spending & Discounts
- 242.8K Work, Benefits & Business
- 619.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.4K Life & Family
- 255.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards