Landlord carrying out work before giving quote?

Piggywig75

Hi there.
Can a landlord carry out repair/replacement before giving the tenant the quote?
There was a query regarding a hairline crack in the upstairs basin during the final inspection. We feel sure that it has always been there, however the landlord said she had proof in the form of a photo she took before we moved in. Fair enough.
I requested via letter and email that she send us this photo so that if proved to be our fault, we could arrange repair or replacement. My partner is a plumber, so it was no big deal.
We still did not receive this, and today I had an email telling me she had replaced the basin and pedestal and the cost including fitting was £165 which she is adding to our bill.
As there is a whole host of items under dispute potentially costing us our deposit, both party's agreed during the inspection that things would need to go down the dispute path. In that case, has the landlord followed the terms correctly? I appreciate that we can not formally open the dispute until 10 days have lapsed (we are on Day) so how does this all work?
I'm confused lol

jjlandlord

The landlord can obviously always carry out such repairs. The question is what are you liable for (if anything)?

Here you can dispute that your are liable.

Even if you are liable the landlord can only charge you for the residual value (ie. value new minus wear and tear) of the old basin/pedestal and not the full cost of the replacement (as that would be betterment).

Tr1pp

Firstly, was the crack or even condition of the sink mentioned on the inventory form when you moved in. If there is no mention of the sink condition then there is no evidence that it wasnt damaged before you moved in and potential to avoid payment.

Secondly if you did/have accepted liability for the damage then
depending on how long the basin has been installed in the property you will only have to pay a proportion of the cost of a new sink, not the full price.

You also have the right to a copy of the receipt of costs, if they cant provide this then they cant expect you to pay a made up amount, there may even be grounds for appeal if they have not got a spread of quotes.

Was this hairline crack repairable, would it have been cheaper? why did the landlord have to get a new pedestal? many things here that I would question as it seems the LL thought they could get a brand new sink at your cost.

jjlandlord

Indeed, key re. disputing deduction is the existence of inventories (what what they say).

Tr1pp wrote: »

You also have the right to a copy of the receipt of costs, if they cant provide this then they cant expect you to pay a made up amount

LL has no obligation to carry out repairs so cannot be expected to provide receipts. However LL may need to provide quotes to show that the amount he proposes to deduct from deposit is in fact reasonable (still cannot charge full cost as wear and tear must be taken into account).

G_M

Had you already moved out? If not, you should have been given the opportunity to fix it yourself (or get it fixed) before check out.

If you had moved out and the damage was there when you left, the the LL can fix/get it fixed - he does not need your 'permission'.

However if deducting from your deposit or claiming off you he has to show the cost is genuine (ie a quote/invoice) he cannot just 'pick a figure' from the air. He also has to allow for wear and tear and cannot claim 'betterment'.

He also has to show you were responsible.

Piggywig75

Am I right in thinking that both party's have to agree to the initiation of a dispute? I ask this as my landlady is persistent in her demands that the trees should of been cut and she is going to hire a gardener to prune them and include this in the cost. This is just one area that, even though I have informed the landlord that I sought legal advice and confirmed that is not our responsibility, also quoted various relevant acts as directed by the solicitor, she has not commented or responded. I reminded her that in our contract we have a time scale to get repairs or works done, and she has not given us the opportunity to do so, therefore in breach of the terms of the contract. My attempt at relaying this to you is poor, however I have had legal advice and am sure that we are right in all of the matters raised.
All of the points I have tried to bring to her attention in various letters and emails to her have been totally ignored.
I don't think she has any intention of agreeing to a dispute and therefore will keep as much of the deposit that she wants. We will have no choice than to take her to court to recover our money back. She may well be banking on (pardon the pun), us not having the money or the will to go down this route... however we are definitely prepared to do so.
It seems a shame that it has to come to this.

silvercar

was the crack or even condition of the sink mentioned on the inventory form when you moved in. If there is no mention of the sink condition then there is no evidence that it wasnt damaged before you moved in and potential to avoid payment.

Surely the crack would have been mentioned if it was there. The idea of having an inventory that stated "sink -no crack" is odd. If the crack was there initially it should have been mentioned or the tenant complained.

G_M

Piggywig75 wrote: »

Am I right in thinking that both party's have to agree to the initiation of a dispute?.

Have you looked up the dispute process for whichever deposit scheme is protecting your deposit?

this seems the place to find out how to initiate a dispute.

jjlandlord

Piggywig75 wrote: »

Am I right in thinking that both party's have to agree to the initiation of a dispute?

In principle either party can refuse adjudication by the scheme, in which case the other party's only choice is to sue.
You should be able to find details in the documentations of the scheme the deposit is protected with.

Piggywig75

Thank you. There were many items/areas within the property including paintwork, wallpaper and what I can only describe as "tatty" and aged rooms that we noticed but was not discussed during the contract signing. It may seem strange that we didn't immediately pick up on the crack, but it was a hairline crack inside the basin that could easily have been missed first time round. The fact that a back door couldn't be secured, an integrated fridge listed on the inventory that didn't work and froze and defrosted food items on the lowest setting, resulting in great amounts of money being wasted plus other things, may of felt more problematic than a small crack in the basin above waterline that did not allow water to leak, and did actually do it's job just fine. I admit that over the 12 months this is more noticeable, and if the landlord as she indicated had photo evidence which corresponded to our initial move in then of course I would of been happy to replace. Our argument which was ignored was that it may of been there all the time and has got slightly worse over time? I simply asked for her proof so that we could decide on the action needed by us
I have looked on the My Deposits site. I think both party's have to agree to a dispute. Seems odd I guess as you would think that a deposit protection scheme would definitely allow either party to pursue money whether the other side wanted to or not. If either side is convinced in their argument and has evidence to back it up, why not agree to it?
Thank you for the advice guys

chappers

A photo is no proof of when the crack was made , unless it made up part of the inventory and it is really up to her to prove that you caused the damage.

However I tend to agree with silvercar on this one, previous damage is usualy noted on the inventory and if it isn't then it is your responsibility to highlight this before signing the inventory.
It could also be said that a sink would have a very long servicable life and that , if you caused the damage you could be responsible for nearly all of the cost.

In answer to your original question, then yes if she agreed to allow you to repair or replace then she should have given you the oppertunity to do so.