County Court Claim against unreasonable deposit charges

anyarella

i *think* from reading the post that the OP means the arm rest is a bit sunken, rather than dented, which would be fair wear and tear, as it arises from the intended use of the sofa arm (resting one's arm on).

That is correct, thank you for putting in a better way. I believe that even if the fair wear and tear argument is not accepted, the supposed 'damage' would not render the sofa beyond repair and use, and therefore replacement would not be a reasonable or appropriate remedy.

Does anyone think the court is likely to adopt this point of view?

BitterAndTwisted

Yes, I believe that they would. Naturally, this isn't guaranteed but if you put forward a convincing argument I suspect you are more likely to succeed than not. This, combined with the landlord's patently unreasonable charges with regard to the utility companies should sway things in your favour as you are the one who sounds like they are being reasonable.

anyarella

I wanted to write to the landlord first before sending a formal letter before action, to show and explain my disagreement about the deduction charges. Is it worth doing that, or should I include those reasons in the letter before action?

Can anyone help with regards to what reasons I cite for:

a) deducting admin charge for dealing with my utility companies at £100 per company x3
b) sunken armrest (fair wear and tear/the fact it is clearly repairable to replacement is not a reasonable or appropriate remedy. Should I include that the onus of proof of damage lies with LL and that the inventory which I signed does not state the condition of the sofa.
c) refund of the rent as to prior agreement+LL accepted early surrender by re-letting the property

Should I as a gesture of good will offer to pay for the sofa to be repaired, the sunken armrest to be filled with foam?

BitterAndTwisted

anyarella wrote: »

I wanted to write to the landlord first before sending a formal letter before action, to show and explain my disagreement about the deduction charges. Is it worth doing that, or should I include those reasons in the letter before action?

Can anyone help with regards to what reasons I cite for:

a) deducting admin charge for dealing with my utility companies at £100 per company x3
b) sunken armrest (fair wear and tear/the fact it is clearly repairable to replacement is not a reasonable or appropriate remedy. Should I include that the onus of proof of damage lies with LL and that the inventory which I signed does not state the condition of the sofa.
c) refund of the rent as to prior agreement+LL accepted early surrender by re-letting the property

Should I as a gesture of good will offer to pay for the sofa to be repaired, the sunken armrest to be filled with foam?

If you feel that you would like try to reach an agreement with the landlord while being able to display to any court in the future that you are a reasonable person, go ahead and write your letter. I certainly wouldn't as I believe that the landlord has already demonstrated that they are dishonest by their actions in compromising your ability to dispute their spurious charges with their intentional delaying tactics. I think a court would see through that in about five minutes.

I would suggest (again) that you use the exact word "unreasonable" with regard to the £100 charges for the utility companies. These cannot reflect whatever the landlord may have had to do in my opinion.

As to the repair of the sofa I would NOT make any gesture whatsoever. Let the ruddy landlord justify that deduction in court and also let the court decide whether their charge is fair or not. I don't think it is, and hope the court would agree with me.

The demand for the reimbursement of over-paid rent I would put into your application to the court. I would not discuss this with the landlord at all at this point.

princeofpounds

A dent in a sofa is not fair wear.

I think it may well be, but it depends on what the OP means. A big dent in a hard armrest (i.e. wood) is damage. But compression of a soft armrest foam due to the weight of errr... an arm resting (or head or legs I suppose)... is perfectly fair.

anyarella

I certainly wouldn't as I believe that the landlord has already demonstrated that they are dishonest by their actions in compromising your ability to dispute their spurious charges with their intentional delaying tactics. I think a court would see through that in about five minutes.

I think you are right in so far as that it is a long shot that LL would respond reasonably to me pointing out the error of their ways and purposing ADR measure. I would like to be able to demonstrate the court that I have behaved reasonably. I guess I felt that LL promising to account for the sofa and contact me by Jan and then not doing so demonstrates they might have deliberately done so to render ADR useless, but I am worried that myself not contacting LL until now could somehow seem detrimental to me. Or am I just being paranoid?

anyarella

princeofpounds wrote: »

I think it may well be, but it depends on what the OP means. A big dent in a hard armrest (i.e. wood) is damage. But compression of a soft armrest foam due to the weight of errr... an arm resting (or head or legs I suppose)... is perfectly fair.

It's a soft leather sofa,with one armrest sunken, due to compressed foam inside it. I certainly treated the sofa and the whole apartment with utmost care, and cannot accept allegations of damage. If LL bought a sofa which is below par quality, and it is 4 years old, after at least one tenant using it before me, and after my 14 months tenancy, I am inclined to argue it is fair wear and tear as the armrest was used in an appropriate manner- to rest arm, head and legs on it.

Should I submit such an argument to the court, is it reasonable?

BitterAndTwisted

You're just being paranoid. If you have documentary evidence of the landlord's cynical delaying tactics, refer to them in your evidence to the court.

BitterAndTwisted

anyarella wrote: »

It's a soft leather sofa,with one armrest sunken, due to compressed foam inside it. I certainly treated the sofa and the whole apartment with utmost care, and cannot accept allegations of damage. If LL bought a sofa which is below par quality, and it is 4 years old, after at least one tenant using it before me, and after my 14 months tenancy, I am inclined to argue it is fair wear and tear as the armrest was used in an appropriate manner- to rest arm, head and legs on it.

Should I submit such an argument to the court, is it reasonable?

It's a five year-old sofa. The landlord is claiming £450 for a replacement. Even if the original sofa did cost £450 the most that you could be asked to contribute is half of that IF one accepts that a sofa in a rental-property could be expected to have a useful life of ten years. Which I think is unlikely. The check-in inventory doesn't mention any damage which is unfortunate so all of the current damage could be attributed to you but that dos not justify you being charged for the whole cost of the replacement

PLEASE stop fretting, second-guessing and prevaricating! It won't get you any of your money back.

Just get on with writing your Letter before Action.

anyarella

PLEASE stop fretting, second-guessing and prevaricating! It won't get you any of your money back.

Just get on with writing your Letter before Action.

You are right, thanks. Just this whole things makes me nervous.
The tenancy was joint with my boyfriend, however I paid the deposit and LL only ever dealt with me, but I suppose the lba should come from both tenants, with both signatures?