No inventory - no deposit retention clarification please

cathodetube

I had a landlord who used an estate agent. The estate agent didn't do the inventory with me at the property but gave it to me to take to the property. She told me to go over everything myself and and amend or change anything I didn't agree with and post it back to their office. This I did and found various things wrong, like the shower not working at all (no bath) but even though they admitted they got the inventory they didn't do anything about the shower for 6 weeks so I couldn't stay there. I feel a rental refund is due, which I have to pursue, however is it usual, or dare I say legal, for an inventory to be just given to the tenant and not have an inventory clerk, landlord, or representative of landlord to go over the property both before moving in and after moving out?

guppy

Premier wrote: »

Where is this presumed please?

It's presumed by the use of the (almost) universally understood word, "deposit".

As opposed to it being a gift, payment, fee, etc.

Microstar_2

guppy wrote: »

It's presumed by the use of the (almost) universally understood word, "deposit".

As opposed to it being a gift, payment, fee, etc.

Correct!....

ChunkyAlan

It all depends on the level of service within the Terms of business the LL has with their agent as to what the agent does concerning the inventory and check-in/outs.

There is no law to state how an inventory /check-in out must be handled - sorry - thats down to the agent. Remember the agent works for the LL not the Tenant.

Regarding repairs - this has very little to do with the inventory check in - the inventory is to state what is there and its condition - not whether it works or not. most inventories will state-not tested - for anything elec/gas etc. Repairs are a totally different issue - and again it depends on the level of service the LL is paying for with the agent - remember again that agents are not able to carry out works unless a. the ll has given them direct instructions to do so and/or there are funds to pay for it.

Concerning the shower - did you have a bath to use? Legally then the LL has met his obligations within the law - believe it or not - just because it had a shower when you mvoed in doesnt mean he has to have it repaired unless its your only form of bathing. the law is a lovely thing - I find - communication is key and using an agent that has been recommended to you by friends and colleagues. remember once again - you are dealing with human beings - yes letting agents are human beings - and some of them are crap at their jobs! Not all but some! :rotfl:

cathodetube wrote: »

I had a landlord who used an estate agent. The estate agent didn't do the inventory with me at the property but gave it to me to take to the property. She told me to go over everything myself and and amend or change anything I didn't agree with and post it back to their office. This I did and found various things wrong, like the shower not working at all (no bath) but even though they admitted they got the inventory they didn't do anything about the shower for 6 weeks so I couldn't stay there. I feel a rental refund is due, which I have to pursue, however is it usual, or dare I say legal, for an inventory to be just given to the tenant and not have an inventory clerk, landlord, or representative of landlord to go over the property both before moving in and after moving out?

ChunkyAlan

Hi
I have been in lettings for 15 years and in my experience its all about communication. Before the event how about contacting your LL and asking them to come over and have a chat and carry out a pre-checkout - checkout. That way a. you will find out if he/she is up for that and happy to chat b. when they are there you can chat about what you both think is your responsibility and what is not c. you wll know before hand if you have a fight on your hand and advise the LL accordingly. You can contact the https://www.thedisputeservice.co.uk for advice and if you want to make a claim - they have been used even if the deposit was lodged before the April 07 date.

Most LL's think tenants will just walk away and take it on the chin - and many do - but I say to tenants rise up - and tell LL's be fair and reasonable and we'll talk if not then lets go to court. It costs very little and in my experience if a tenant turns up and can prove a LL could not be "ar..ed" - thats a lettings technical term :rotfl: - to prepare an inventory and scedule of condition before the tenancy commenced, carry out a formal and mutually agreed check in at the start of the tenancy which was signed and agreed and then a formal check out was carried out to verify the differences between the two documents then the LL has a very very very slim case to argue and in 8 out of ten cases I have been involved in the tenant wins - hands down.

Also get the tenancy agreement - what does it say in the body of the document concerning the deposit - because without an Inv/C-in/C-out - those clauses are not worth the paper its written on. People get so hung up with all the legalise - especially those on here who are practising legalbeagels - you know who you are :A but all you have to do is get your facts straight, write everything down, make file notes and conversation notes, get the documents together, lodge your dispute at the court sooner rather than later after check out - having written to the LL to at least get him to negotiate or discuss any deductions and present to the court. Its not as nerve racking as you would think -oh and another thing - remain absolutely calm and charming throughout - the court people like that - especially if the LL comes over angry or unreasonable!

I do hope that helps and you can move on to pastures new - running and screaming from this house.

merlinthehappypig wrote: »

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]

tbs624

ChunkyAlan wrote: »

..... I do hope that helps and you can move on to pastures new - running and screaming from this house.

PasturesNew does not sublet AFIAA .....

cathodetube

Thanks Chunky Alan. No I didn't have a bathtub; it was only a shower cubicle. It took them 7 weeks to fix the shower!!! I am trying to claim rent for that period. Thought it was odd for the agent to hand the inventory to me to do myself, after I had given them my deposit and rent and after they gave me the keys to 'check' myself in. I wrote several times (wanted everything in writing) to say shower was broken (electric - so no hot water) and they ignored me, until the third letter.

tbs624

Chunky Alan - good to see another new name on here and to hear about your experience as a LA

Some comments - different LL/LAs use different inventory methods: as you say, there is no one standard. However, you then go on to use what many Lettings Agencies do as a standard in its own right.

Given that an inventory should list * all defects* as part of a statement of condition, I’m not sure I agree with your assertion that “repairs” are an entirely separate issue.

A LL/LA may not simply mark down “not tested” against gas and electrical equipment and seek to use that to avoid compliance with their obligations to the tenant. The LL/LA has to provide electrical & gas items in good, safe working order and it would make sense to include that as part of any inventory.

LLs/LAs often seem to rely on the fact that many tenants do not feel at ease to switch things on & off and test water pressure/toilet flushing etc when viewing a property, especially if the previous tenants are still in residence.

If a tenant is presented with this type of sloppy inventory, then they should specifically add “The LL/LA confirms that these items are in good, safe working order” and then list them and get the LA/LL to sign. There could be an additional Heading of “ Working order has been clearly demonstrated in the Tenant’s presence by the LA/LL - yes/no” The tenant may even like to add that having a working shower is a key factor to their taking up the tenancy

If it was okay for a LL/LA to just scrawl “not tested” you could, in theory, have a situation where an electrical shower is not working and has a fault that could render an electric shock to a tenant if they try to use it: it has to be tested. If the shower is not working and the LA/LL knows this and has had it disconnected, so as to deal with the possibility of electric shock, then LA/LL should list it on any inventory as not working.

It is also entirely reasonable for a tenant to assume that all equipment/facilities provided by the LL are fit for purpose, unless notified otherwise so that agreement on any action to be taken can be reached prior to the start of the tenancy. In a similar vein, if you do have a working shower at the start of your tenancy, and it later ceases to work, then your LL should get it repaired or agree a reduction of the rent for loss of an amenity. (Most homes these days have a shower - it’s a standard expectation.)

Having anything in a rental property that does not work, and failing to mention to a tenant/potential tenant that that is the case, is IMO tantamount to false advertising.

It’s perhaps also worth mentioning that some tenants may have a disability that places even greater emphasis on the need for a working shower, or the property may be part of an HMO and needs to comply with specific bathing/showering provision.

On a personal level, if I were a tenant, I would have absolutely no qualms about challenging any LL/LA who was trying to pull a fast one over something like this. S/he would get 3 letters max as an attempt to get resolve and then I’d be looking at getting the shower fixed and deducting the cost from the rent. As a LL I would view it as my responsibility to get it sorted out.

You are entirely right that good communication is vital between a LL and T (many of us point this out on a regular basis), but that has to include LAs/LLs being open and honest about the state of their properties. Because some LLs/LAs try it on with issues like this, IMO eventually these sorts of issues will mean that as part of ever-increasing outside regulation all inventories will probably have to comply with a common standard.

olly300

OP the first thing to do now is get the landlord's actual address. Due to the fact that many LA are unhelpful particularly if you wish to take the landlord to court, you should try and get the landlord's actual address. Under the landlord and tenant act 1985 you can ask the letting agent for the actual landlord's address. You need to make the request in writing and should state that the letting agent has 21 days to reply to you. Send the item by recorded delivery, hand deliver and get the recipient to sign they took the letter off you. After that time you are allowed to take the LA to court to comply with your request.

If there is damage and things like no underlay on carpet laid immediately on wooden/stone floors then take lots of pictures with a digital camera which has the time and date set correctly to show these things.

If it comes to the situation that the landlord refuses to give your deposit back then take them to court.

However also be prepared for the landlord to be dishonest and claim that you left additional items/rooms dirty to indicate they are actually out of pocket which is why they can help themselves to all of your deposit. So take extra photos of things like close up of lampshades, mattresses, the condition of the garden, oven and cooker, garden, condition of bathroom after it is cleaned, condition of kitchen with draws open after it's cleaned.

I have had two landlords try and make up things to keep my deposit - even when I informed them of damage during the tenancy - once the landlords realised I had lots of evidence to show it was highly unlikely they were telling the truth I received my full deposit back without actually going to court.

Edited:
I've also had at least 3 landlords where there was no inventory. I had no deposit dispute with these landlords and with one of them I didn't even have a written agreement. Some people are honest and some people are just dishonest.

AdsG

Premier wrote: »

Of course the cleaning was necessary. Why would a LL pay good money to clean a clean carpet?


I don't think a Judge would be too happy if she was referred to as 'Sir' either :rotfl:

I'm in a situation very similar to the ones discussed here. All i can really read is that the comments from Premier seem to be very landlord orientated. How can the landlord prove the carpet was not as clean as it was when the tenant moved in! if neither party can prove anything about any of the issues then the money should be returned, its a simple as that!