Desperately need help with claiming deposit back

flaura

cc it to the actual landlord/ owner of the property whom should be listed on your tenanct agreement.

delirious

neas wrote: »

most of the points are ridculous but the dog one i tend to side with estate agent. and the coving one... i agree with too. If you make decorations in a property and leave it half finished it affects re-rentability.

speaking generally, when you have a fiancee... you've been A- dating a long time prior to getting engaged... say 6-12 months at least..... and with this knowledge assuming she had the dog for the same period of time... and you spent 50/50 time at her and your property ... then the dog most likely was there for at least 3 months of 'time'.

Regardless of dog... they do leave odours... might !!!! a little here and there... so if its obvious a dog was there (dog hair and smell) then morally you'd be obliged to get carpets cleaned methinks.

Now legally.. thats a different matter. Just wanted to point it out that even though you have bias i can tell that most likely the dog had some impact on the property... it would have if lived there for say 14-30 days... and if you got fiancee and a long contract chances are it did live there,fart there, malt there, lick itself etc etc for that time leaving smell and some hairs.

Regarding the dog, while I accept it may have farted there and licked itself or whatever, as it's a yorkshire terrior, it doesn't malt so there would be no dog hairs in the property at all (it's one of their characteristics). Also, as for the coving, it fell down and therefore is the LL's responsibility to fix, which they didn't.

It's not like the decoration was 'half finished'. The skirting boards need painting and coving in the room where a piece fell off needs painting. Now considering when I moved in to the property there was wallpaper hanging off the walls, I don't see how they can moan about a bit of painting needing to be done that will take all of an hour to complete.

flaura

:rotfl:

well said delirious........

1. can you just confirm if the dog just visited or if it was resident... in which case if it wasn't resident (what dog?)

2. if the skirtings were not decorated when you moved in why should you decorate them now.

3. Coving - do you have proof you contacted them to ask them to repair the coving? or at least remember when you contacted them i.e. date and who you spoke to if you phoned

ET1976

delirious wrote: »

Regarding the dog, while I accept it may have farted there and licked itself or whatever, as it's a yorkshire terrior, it doesn't malt so there would be no dog hairs in the property at all (it's one of their characteristics).

Just because a dog doesn't moult (or molt), doesn't mean it doesn't leave ANY hair behind. Hair just comes out (like human hair).

I had a yorkie to stay for 2 days once and it certainly left dog hairs behind.

delirious

flaura wrote: »

:rotfl:

well said delirious........

1. can you just confirm if the dog just visited or if it was resident... in which case if it wasn't resident (what dog?)

2. if the skirtings were not decorated when you moved in why should you decorate them now.

3. Coving - do you have proof you contacted them to ask them to repair the coving? or at least remember when you contacted them i.e. date and who you spoke to if you phoned

The dog was just visiting and not living there. I did ask for permission in writing for the dog to live there but didn't get a reply. In February, the letting agents sent someone out to do a report on numerous repairs that I'd requested (and took photos). It was the same guy that came out to do the final inspection and he still had his notes in his book about the visit in Feb.

ET1976 wrote: »

Just because a dog doesn't moult (or molt), doesn't mean it doesn't leave ANY hair behind. Hair just comes out (like human hair).

I had a yorkie to stay for 2 days once and it certainly left dog hairs behind.

Ok, point taken.

factor29

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

Completely agree with talulahbeige: stop communicating with the agents by email and start writing formal letters and send them by recorded Delivery keeping a copy for your own records.

No check-in inventory equals no deductions.

Unfortunately it doesnt - i recently moved out of house managed by the LA/LL from hell. No inventory, nothing we'd signed to say condition on moving in or anything (first time renting). They disputed things at the end of tenancy - completely made loads of things up such as broken gate and broken back door - all witnessed working ok at checkout. There wasnt anything wrong with the house when we left it.

sent it to TDS and they deducted £75 costs from us out of the £250 they were claiming - and said had LL provided invoices being provided for the costs they would have charged us the full amount. i wont be using a deposit scheme for disputes again...

N79 wrote: »

Not quite - if a LL has other means to prove the state of the property at check in and check out then these would do fine.

No check-in inventory equals probably no valid deductions unless the LL has some other proof of the property state at the tenancy's start which is acceptable to a court.

As above, the LL/LA had no proof except the inspection reports which were never signed by us and could easily have being altered afterwards..

delirious wrote: »

Thanks for your suggestion.

I replied to the letting agents email by requesting the inventory and have just had an interesting response from the manager stating they do not have record of my inventory for the start of my tenancy but she listed all the things they will be claiming for.

I am going to reply stating that I will be disputing ALL deductions via the TDS as they have nothing to compare the current condition to the original condition.

Anything else I should say?

And yes, I will also be sending this via recorded delivery.

to be honest they sound exactly like the agents i used - where abouts in UK are you?

and the best lesson i learnt from all of it:

If your going to dispute it - try and get the LL/LA to log the dispute first.

That way you can read what they say and put your point across for each point. I had none of this because i lodged the dispute, so they said whatever they wanted to say in response - i didnt know what theyd said and had no chance to dispute it!

delirious

factor29 wrote: »

to be honest they sound exactly like the agents i used.

and the best lesson i learnt from all of it:

If your going to dispute it - try and get the LL/LA to log the dispute first.

That way you can read what they say and put your point across for each point. I had none of this because i lodged the dispute, so they said whatever they wanted to say in response - i didnt know what theyd said and had no chance to dispute it!

Thanks. I was just looking at how to begin the dispute so glad you posted as I'll now recommend that the LA/LL begin the dispute.

factor29

delirious wrote: »

Thanks. I was just looking at how to begin the dispute so glad you posted as I'll now recommend that the LA/LL begin the dispute.

you dont live near south yorkshire do you?

delirious

factor29 wrote: »

you dont live near south yorkshire do you?

No lol is that where your previous LA are from?

factor29

delirious wrote: »

No lol is that where your previous LA are from?

yeah would have being creepy if it had being the same place...:eek:

good luck getting your money back anyway