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.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Getting deposit back
Options
Comments
-
OP - did the Ts two daughters and you pay rent to the T or direct to the LL?
If original T had not formally relinquished the tenancy , with the LLs consent, then he continued to be responsible for the property until the expiry of the Fixed Term.
I agree with Wings' first post above, except that Ts are obliged to clean mould and to report any problems with damp, silicon sealant etc to the LL.
However, LL cannot unilaterally decide what he will deduct. As Wings says, use the Deposit Reg Scheme if the tenancy deposit has been registered ( assuming property is in Eng/Wales) If deposit not registered post back here.
The LL will need to be able to show what the state of the property was at the start of the tenancy and that it is likely that the occupants have caused the current problems.0 -
-
As far as I know the daughters weren't paying either so don't see that being a problem.
Mould issue LL found out about prior to end of contract, it was removed prior to moving out
Sealant noone was aware of. It didn't cause any visible problems (no leaks or stains on ceiling below or anything) so it wasn't something that was even considered until the letter came through0 -
Noknowledge wrote: »Apologies
2. Yes there was although it didn't take into account the space under the bath so not sure how that would help.
I bet it said something like the bathroom is in good order.
It also probably didn't say there were issues like stains on the ceiling under the bathroom.I'm not cynical I'm realistic
(If a link I give opens pop ups I won't know I don't use windows)0 -
Noknowledge wrote: »
Sealant noone was aware of. It didn't cause any visible problems (no leaks or stains on ceiling below or anything) so it wasn't something that was even considered until the letter came through
Being aware doesn't mean that you don't have to clean it or check there isn't a problem with it.I'm not cynical I'm realistic
(If a link I give opens pop ups I won't know I don't use windows)0 -
Noknowledge wrote: »Apologies
1. I believe so, will need to check that.
2. Yes there was although it didn't take into account the space under the bath so not sure how that would help.
If inventory did not cover under the bath, then there is no "starting point", so LL cannot prove that there was no problem at the outset of the tenancy0 -
Thanks guys that's a big help and a big relief (quite worrying getting these kind of letters through). Fingers crossed can get things sorted0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.7K Spending & Discounts
- 244.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177K Life & Family
- 257.6K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards