Tenancy Deposit Scheme - Fees

WiseOldBird_2

My son and girlfriend recently left a flat. They paid £800 bond and I went and helped them to clean before they left and it was immaculate.

Unfortunately a few weeks before they left the upstairs flat developed a leak which affected their kitchen ceiling and because they knew they were leaving in a few weeks, they just taped loose plaster up and didn't inform the letting agents. The flat was left without any cleaning to be done.

Now it appears that the agents (acting on the side of the owner) are withholding £275 from the deposit, for cleaning the oven (it had a few grease marks on inside and the owner cleaned it herself), and for a new ceiling in the kitchen. We don't mind, say, £10 being kept for an hour's work for cleaning the oven, but are in dispute about the ceiling, as it wasn't their fault. The owners are saying they broke the terms of their lease because they didn't inform them straight away about the ceiling (not that a few weeks made it any worse). They got their son to fix the ceiling. I am sure they could have claimed on insurance for this, but perhaps they didn't want to. I just think this is so unfair.

So I guess my questions are:
1. Is it worth going to the Tenancy Deposite Scheme about this?
2. Is there a fee to ask them to get involved?
3. Can they ask for the balance of the bond to be returned whilst the matter of the £275 is being resolved?

Any help really appreciated.
Thanks.
Ann.

Millburn_farm

ermmm £10 to clean the cooker; if it was that clean why didn't you; personally cooker cleaning £50; I'm a landlord £30 cleaning it and £20 organising

as for the ceiling; you need to inform the proper peeps "doh" it could have been the start of something

Withholding £275 from £800 I'd have more; sorry I'm landlord not ................

MarkyMarkD

How pathetic is it to ignore a leak from the flat above?

They were obviously in the wrong and you know it.

They are getting off reasonably lightly. By their negligence in ignoring this problem it could have got significantly worse and caused more damage to the property.

BlameTheGame

1. No
2. Not sure, but don't think there is.
3. No

WiseOldBird_2

.....well, I'm trying to be fair, and yes, they should have informed the letting agency of the leak - they have been pretty naive. So are we saying that because they didn't do this they are responsible for the repair? In the event, nothing got worse in the few weeks (yes, I know it could have but it didn't). Doesn't the landlord have insurance, or can't they claim on the insurance of the flat above? It just seems unfair to me that they are being charged for something that wasn't, after all their fault - they seemed to be being punished, not for a damaged ceiling, but for not informing agency straight away!

Any other views welcomed.

m_13

The 'punishment' is for not telling the agent straight away. If they had told the agents then it could have been repaired straight away and then be ready for somebody else to move in rather than them visiting and finding it taped up!

I'm afraid I have little sympathy with the attitude, oh we won't be living here so we'll leave it! It may be that the time delay means they can't get it paid for on insurance, many schemes are extremely strict about informing them as soon as damage occurs.

I've taken a look at the scheme rules for deposits that are held on account rather than insurance-based scheme (which scheme is the money is held in, the TDS is an insurance-based scheme?) and it says:

At the end of the tenancy:

• if an agreement is reached about how the deposit should be divided, the scheme will return the deposit, divided in the way agreed by both parties
• if there is a dispute, the scheme will hold the deposit until the dispute resolution service or courts decide what is fair

So the balance won't be paid until the dispute is resolved.

If it's in an insurance-based scheme (TDS or TDSL) then:

At the end of the tenancy:

• if an agreement is reached about how the deposit should be divided, the landlord or agent returns all or some of the deposit
• if there is a dispute, the landlord must hand over the disputed amount to the scheme for safekeeping until the dispute is resolved
• if for any reason the landlord fails to comply, the insurance arrangements will ensure the return of the deposit to the tenant if they are entitled to it

This means that the £800 is held by the landlord and he or she must handover the disputed £275 to the insurance-based scheme for safe keeping whilst the dispute is resolved. I don't think they have to handover the balance though as that's not clear.

If the deposit is held with TDS then your son and girlfriend need to visit the website, view the information on their deposit (by entering their unique number) and see if a dispute has been registered by their landlord.

https://www2.thedisputeservice.co.uk/index.php?p=207

Gorgeous_George

As a landlord myself, I would not make these deductions. They seem unfair and I would not be confident of winning in Court.

Negotiate first but if that fails, make a claim. They have nothing to lose.

GG

WiseOldBird_2

....well it's not looking good is it? One other point is that the rent was paid up until the end of the month, but they left a week early, and during that week the landlord came in with their spare set of keys and cleaned the cooker and repaired the ceiling. So they could have had a tenant in at the beginning of the next month.

tbs624

WiseOldBird wrote: »

........a few weeks before they left the upstairs flat developed a leak which affected their kitchen ceiling and because they knew they were leaving in a few weeks, they just taped loose plaster up and didn't inform the letting agents. The flat was left without any cleaning to be done.

(My emboldening.) Tenants have a duty to report any repairs issue, especially those which have the potential to lead to a deterioration of the property .

WiseOldBird wrote: »

Now it appears that the agents (acting on the side of the owner) are withholding £275 from the deposit, for cleaning the oven (it had a few grease marks on inside and the owner cleaned it herself), and for a new ceiling in the kitchen. We don't mind, say, £10 being kept for an hour's work for cleaning the oven, but are in dispute about the ceiling, as it wasn't their fault.

If your son & his GF are unhappy with the proposed deductions then, yes, they should use the tenancy deposit scheme to resolve it.. The whole purpose of the schemes was to prevent LLs making unilateral decisions about what could and couldn't be retained from a tenant's deposit. The LL cannot look to the T to cover the entire cost of sorting the ceiling out, only a proportion of it, but it has to be recognised that their failure to report, plus their action in using tape to affect a temporary repair ( which shows that they were aware of the damage) may well have worsened what could have been dealt with by a minor repair. However, a LL cannot use a T's deposit for "betterment", so if the ceiling was not in a brilliant state to start with and had just a small patch of damage it would probably be unfair to look to the T to fund a replacement of a whole ceiling. You make an interesting point about the "spare" week at the end of your son's tenancy, but you haven't mentioned that the LL was actually looking to make any deduction for loss of rent from a potential tenant, just for the work in replacing the ceiling itself.

They should contact the scheme's administrators and tell them that there is a dispute. Bear in mind that if it has to be pursued through to adjudication then the decision is binding on both parties, and there is always the possibility that the deduction is justified or increased, as well as the poss that it may be lowered in your son's favour.

Your son and his GF should note for the future that all repairs issues should be notified promptly to any LL/LA, in writing, with a copy (plus a photo of the problem) kept safely with their tenancy agreement.

WiseOldBird_2

Thanks everyone for your views. After all is said and done, and reading everyone's input (and trying to be unbiased) I'm still left with the feeling that the LL has taken unfair advantage, having them pay out for damage that wasn't their fault - they've taken the kids money for something that they normally would have the cost of repairing. Doesn't improve my view of LL's one little bit.

Gorgeous_George

Maybe they should seek compensation forputting up with the damaged ceiling.

The LL did not lose money because of their failure to report thr problem.

GG