Tenant left place dirty..deposit?

bumpoowee

Pretty sure you can't charge for your own labour so I'd drop that. Maybe charge for the cost of the materials, but if you are challenged and have no inventory I'd just write it off to experience as you will lose if taken to court and will be out of pocket and have wasted a lot of time and stress.

Wickedkitten

Aye, to echo everyone else, I don't think you have a chance of getting lost earnings and the cost of paint, the deposit isn't there to be used as a redecoration fund.

tbs624

WoldView83 wrote: »

.....Some of the things you mention (eg damage to sink-assume its the enamel? and worktops?) I'm very surprised the letting agent have not seen in their inspection - I'd be asking
a) why did they not tell you about this
b) did they tell the tenant and give them time to make the damage good?
c) why did they not do a final inspection?
There should have been a final inspection before she left the property to check inventory etc (you said you don't have one - agency should have had one at the very least - after all, what conditions were in the contract for the return of deposit/) ...

Cremegg said "the agents just find the tenant and then we manage the place from there. " so it looks like the LA isn't at fault.

WoldView83 wrote: »

Some of the other things...I'm sorry, but she's been there over a year (was it 2?) you should allow fair wear and tear. e.g. Marks on doors. Fair enough, its annoying, it can/may be cleaned, but...pull the other one! Depends on the other marks with the skirting - eg are we talking pulled right off or one tooth mark?


Sorry if this is wrong, but it sounds like you didn't intend this house to rent long term - espeically if you fitted it up to your own standards. Tenants may not have understood that you wanted it kept as pristine as the day you made it, and TBF its not reasonable to expect this.

The LL *can* expect the property to be returned in the same condition as when let, save for "fair wear and tear" as you mention above: unfortunately, LLs and Ts often each have a different view of what FW&T is, but it doesn't include higher levels of dirt than there were at the start or specific damage. It covers what would reasonably occur in the course of "normal" usage of a property, ie carpets showing signs of pile flattening, or sun damage to curtains etc. Experienced LLs don't get worked up about small chips to paint on woodwork or the occasional scuff mark on emulsioned walls if a tenant's been in for more than 6 months but newer LLs will do.

tbs624

kitschkitty wrote: »

Actually damp can be thetenants responsibility. It is in our contract that we must ensure rooms are aired to avaiod damp on windowsills andclean up any damp.

Now damp in the walls and possibly other areas may well be the landlords responsibility it depends on the cause and contract conditions etc.

No, it does not depend on the "contract conditions".

Statute clearly sets out what the LLs obligations are on maintaining the property, including the exterior and drainpipes, gutters etc - see S11 LL& T Act 1985. Ultimate responsibility for damp in a rented property can be a contentious issue but there are obligations under the Housing Act 2004, and the HHSRS (Housing Health & Safety Rating System) clearly recognises damp and mould growth as one of 29 “hazards” in housing.

Tenants do have to look after the property & behave in a “tenant-like manner” , so avoiding hanging wet washing indoors, cooking without lids on pans and failing to ever open a window or keep the property reasonably well heated would all come under that. However, it’s a foolish LL who doesn’t make sure that he himself has done all he can do as a LL to limit the likelihood of problems occurring, including giving the tenant proper advice.

The OP says: “bathroom was not allowed to air after shower as we asked her to (property is small flat by river and can get damp in bathroom as no windows there, just fan)” showing that (a) she knows there is a propensity towards damp in the property and (b) that perhaps she as a LL doesn't understand how extraction fans are supposed to work.

The best way to ensure a windowless bathroom doesn’t have ongoing damp problems is to have a fan that meets the appropriate requirements, which stays on for a set period after the bathroom has been used and to *shut* the door whilst it does its work. Leaving the bathroom door open whilst the bathroom is full of steam merely redistributes the damp air round the rest of the building as well as the bathroom and prevents the fan from adequately doing the job its designed to do. ( If your fan was installed post-1995 have a look at Doc F of the Building Regs to see if it complies, if prior to then you may want to look at upgrading)

Cremegg - it is infuriating when a tenant leaves a property in the state you describe (and the vast majority do not) but it sounds as though you are becoming too emotional - you need to deal with these sorts of issues in a professional manner.

You will need to be able to fully justify any deductions which you would like to make from the tenants deposit and you need to inform her of them *in writing*. She has the right to challenge those deductions if she thinks she has valid grounds to do so and the final decision, if the two of you cannot agree, will be made either by the deposit scheme adjudicators or by a court.

Inventories protect both parties and are equally valid whether the property is furnished or unfurnished.

Before you get a new tenant in join a national LL association and fully get to grips with the finer detail of what being a LL is all about. You’ll get discounts on your buildings insurance and the membership fee is tax deductable.

As for a tenant asking for their deposit to be returned in cash, many LLs have no issue with that once agreement has been reached - after all LLs often ask for the deposit/first month’s rent to be paid in cash (fully receipted) at the start of the tenancy.

Have a look at LandlordLaw , the NLA and the RLA websites.

jadex

kitschkitty wrote: »

Most agencies I've experience of employ a professional cleaning company and the bill total is taken from the deposit, as they have proof of the cost of cleaning then.

Questionable and could be quite unfair.
I'd for sure challenge it.
Cleaning company could do well and above the required standard and charge for it, which doesn't automatically mean the bill should be footed unilateraly by the previous occupier.

clutton_2

if she did not give you sufficient notice you can claim loss of rental for that period

which deposit scheme is the deposit protected by ?

meames_2

well, i've obviously been a really soft tenent. I had £200 taken out of my deposit because the inside of the teapot was tea stained and the bedding (which was never used) wasn't re-ironed!

Gingernutmeg

A genuine question - if so many LLs are charging for cleaning then how come I've never viewed or moved into a 'clean' rented property? I will admit that I'm a bit of a clean freak but every rented house I've ever looked at (and I've looked at a lot, in different areas of the country) has NOT been 'clean' - and many have been truly revolting (and I mean clean in the sense of things that you hear about on here - skirting boards, windows, carpets, bathrooms, kitchens etc). Maybe it's just me and where we've been looking but the proliferation of these threads does make me wonder.

We asked for our current property to be professionally cleaned before we moved in, as we're more than happy to return it in that condition, and of course it wasn't. The lavatory in particular was disgusting. I'm willing to get down and dirty with the cleaning but I draw the line at scraping someone elses' poo out of a toilet, especially when I've just paid £1500 to move in ... Fortunately the LA was there for the inventory so we handed him a brand new loo brush and a bottle of toilet cleaner and told him that the toilet needed his attention. To his credit he did clean it but he wasn't happy We also detailed it on the inventory although you'll be pleased to know that I'm not planning to return it in the same condition ...

kitschkitty

The last tenant here popped round just after we moved in (think he need to pick up a letter) and told us that the land lord had tried to charge him for a carpet - which we confirmed hadn't been replaced! (and it was one of the better carpets in the place - one of the others was so truly awful - a shag pile so old it actually had holes in it, you could catch your foot in!

chappers

Wickedkitten wrote: »

and the cost of paint, the deposit isn't there to be used as a redecoration fund.

It is if it has become necessary to paint the chewed skirting.

Your lack of inventory is worrying this is the only record you have of the contents and condition of your property.
It should be a very detailed document right down to light switches , socket and all fixxtures and fittings, including make model, colour and condition.

In the instance you mention how coiuld you prove the skirting wasn't chewed before she moved in.
Has she actually asked for her deposit back yet, when/if she does I would tell her you are going to dedeuct £x for the damage and see what she says, if she threatens the TDS abitration then maybe just back down but, you never know your luck.

Get an inventory done for your next tenants it is worth the money, your next tenants may smash the place up leaving you £1000s out of pocket, also whilst on the subject of damage make sure you have adequate insurance.