Letting agent say I can't be present for final inspection......

FireWyrm

poppysarah wrote: »

Video it all.

(And what would happen if it was broken into inbetween you leaving and them going? I'd want them to see it when you give the keys back - but not sure how you get them there)

Thank god my previous letting agent didnt do this to me. I'm told that 4 days after we moved out of our previous let, the washing machine broke and flooded the kitchen which the LL tried to blame us for! The LA told him where to stick it, but it didnt stop them charging us £60 to remove the LL's rubbish from the cellar! My experience is that the LL and the LA are both in it together. The LL will use any means necessary to retain your deposit and there is apprently no such thing as 'fair wear and tear' because absolutely everything will be your fault even after 3 years of decent tenancy. I know that you can go through an arbitration process, but my LA told me not to even bother because no-one ever wins and it could end up costing me more. I just paid them the money and walked away even though I'd painted everywhere, had the carpets cleaned and did a thorough clean myself. Thank god we'd insisted on having the wooden floors varnished before moving in because the LL even tried to blame us for marks that were under the varnish!

My admittedly limited experience of LL's is that the good ones are few and far between. Most are greedy, negligent, offensive and lazy and you're doing well if you manage to hold onto 50% of your deposit.

My latest LA didnt even bother with an inspection, or if they did, they didnt bother to give it to me despite repeated requests over 3 years.

serious_saver

Go around the property yourself with the original inventory and check that everything adds up.

If you are genuinely concerned then it's helpful to really thoroughly check the wording.

Some LA's (not all) will try to charge you for everything they can and many are quite sneaky about it.

A friend manged to win their arbitration when a LA tried to charge them for repainting because of marks on a wall (that were already there at the beginning of the tenancy). The inventory had taken considerable pains to specify 'clean walls' in other parts of the propertly and the dps took that to mean that this particular wall must have been dirty.

***EDIT***

I should add that it's not always down to LA's being sneaky. If you've been in a property a long time then the odds are against you having the same person inspect at the start and end of the tenancy.

BitterAndTwisted

FireWyrm wrote: »

I know that you can go through an arbitration process, but my LA told me not to even bother because no-one ever wins and it could end up costing me more. I just paid them the money and walked away even though I'd painted everywhere, had the carpets cleaned and did a thorough clean myself.

You accepted what the agents told you at face-value? Well, more fool you because they were lying through their teeth.

BitterAndTwisted

serious_saver wrote: »

I should add that it's not always down to LA's being sneaky. If you've been in a property a long time then the odds are against you having the same person inspect at the start and end of the tenancy.

An accurate inventory obviates the need for the same person to carry out the checks. Some letting-agents contract independent inventory clerks to do this because they are a disinterested party and should only need proper documentation to do it properly.

All that is needed to avoid spurious charges is a close eye on the check-in inventory and bit of time and effort to get the property back to exactly the same state as it was at the beginning of the tenancy. And proof that you have done so, like taking dated photographs.

mynameisdave

If you decide to go down the filming route make sure you get a shot of the days paper in the video so they cant claim it was from months before. If you are going to do it as a precaution might as well be thorough about it.

chris_m

mynameisdave wrote: »

If you decide to go down the filming route make sure you get a shot of the days paper in the video so they cant claim it was from months before.

Definitely - dated photos are all well and good but the date imprinted rather depends on what date is set in the camera, in other words next to useless from an evidence point of view.

DVardysShadow

Eton_Rifle wrote: »

I imagine the agency is thinking of the personal safety of their staff.

If they find an issue to document, tenant reaction can range from acceptance ... though defiance .... all the way to threatening confrontation.

All this in a private home, with closed doors and no panic button to summon help.

All the money people are charged for referencing - you would think they could avoid taking on homicidal axe wielding maniacs as tenants.

chris_m

DVardysShadow wrote: »

All the money people are charged for referencing - you would think they could avoid taking on homicidal axe wielding maniacs as tenants.

You would - but who knows how people will change after six months or more of excessive inspection demands, threats of eviction unless they sign a new contract (thereby generating more fees for the agency), etc., etc.

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl: