Need advice

BitterAndTwisted

Yes, you can raise a dispute on the DPS site if they try to claim a deduction which you don't agree with. Then it will go to the arbitrators.

The danger of not claiming your whole deposit back now is that they could have claimed it already and if you don't respond within a certain time-frame you could lose it altogether. That's my understanding anyway. Now, do you understand why I was urging you to claim it as a matter of urgency?

These people sound like masters at wringing money out of innocents, so you need to try and out-think them. Or at least try to anticipate their next slimy move.

Hoof_Hearted

My son had similar problems. Landlord wanted to redecorate the whole place at my son's expense -- in excess of the SD.

On my advice, he told the agent that he intended to claim back 80% (he accepted some damage to a carpet) of his deposit and, if necessary, go to arbitration. In this case the agent clearly told the landlord he was on a loser if we went to arbitration and my son settled for 75%, which he was happy with.

Some landlords are absolute scumbags.

Breast_Cancer_Survivor

The agency have replied to my letter where I asked them to provide a copy of the signed inventory.

They say that they are in possession of an inventory which they will provide to the dispute service/courts along with photographic evidence.

They also say that an inventory regardless of whether it's signed or not can be used for arbitration, as they clearly state that the condition of the property is assumed if the document is not returned within the deadline.

We need to show that we have exhausted all levels of agreement before a dispute can be submitted. We are trying to avoid the lengthy process of going through the courts & feel that £1300 would go along way to put an end to this.

Obviously they are just going to submit the original unsigned inventory as they lost the one I signed but I still have the copy. Will this be enough to get my deposit back?

ETA Should I write back with a copy of my signed inventory?

BitterAndTwisted

NO! DO NOT send them a copy of your signed, dated and annotated inventory!

Let them dig their own graves by insisting that the draft they have on file is the one you signed. It is not. They could dredge up any one of their copies, drawn up when the property was originally let several years ago. Unless those photographs are dated-stamped, and there are ways and means of manufacturing them, dispute that they were taken at the start of your tenancy. If they suppled the photos to you at the start of your tenancy you would have initialled them to signify your agreement that they were true and accurate. They are trying to intimidate you and beat you into submission with their lies.

It's going to look very poor indeed once they present their spurious and deceitful "evidence" to the arbitrators. Please make them do that. The arbitrators are unlikely to award the landlord anything if you deny causing any damage whatsoever and ensure you make mention of the redecorating they had you believe you need to do., so the arbitrators can get a real measure of them and their tenancy agreements with unenforceable clauses

I'd have half a mind to present them with a bill in my next correspondence with them for the seven grand's worth of redecorating you've done for them.

Please, PLEASE do not give in to them: I cannot see how they can possibly win as you're now holding all the aces.

Breast_Cancer_Survivor

They didn't take any photo's before I moved in as they would show the smashed kitchen window where the squater's broke in & all the dead flies in the bedrooms (there was a fly infestation in the loft).

They may have taken photo's after I moved out however.

I've filled out the online dispute form today anyway as we are never going to agree & I have nothing left to say on the matter.

As far as I can see they insisted on my redecorating because there were scuff marks from the furniture etc on the walls. Those marks are now gone so what in the hell have they taken photo's of anyway.

The house wasn't redecorated when I moved in as I knew the previous owner's of the property & the house still had they're decor.

Despite me requesting them & them agreeing they didn't clean up the broken glass in the kitchen or the dead flies in the bedroom's before I moved in either.

Yes the bath needs resealing & the panel is cracked but as i've already told them the panel was already cracked when I moved in.

The worktop does have a burn on it, it was an accident & I didn't even notice it until i'd moved out as my deepfat fryer was covering it (one of the legs must of burnt it without me realising). I haven't admitted this to them yet however & the extractor fan filter needs replacing and the hood cleaning.

Thanks for all your advise & i'll keep you updated. :A

RAS

glad you have disputed the charges.

We get some LLs on here whose tenants have caused real problems and because the LL failed to get a proper signed inventory they are unable to reclaim their costs.

You have not caused damage (except maybe the fryer), so with the signed inventory, they are stuffed.

BitterAndTwisted

What would I do? I'd write one last letter, bearing in mind that this particular one will be included in the correspondence forwarded to the arbitrators as part of your evidence when you file your dispute.

One: That they snuck in an unenforceable clause into the tenancy agreement compelling you to supply a free decorating service to their landlord. An unenforceable clause which you now discover to your utter dismay was the landlord's responsibility after you had innocently complied with it. You estimate that the cost to the landlord would have been X if redecoration had been strictly necessary due to normal wear and tear but in this particular instance it was not necessary as no damage had been caused by you to the paintwork during your tenancy. If they choose to pursue with their completely unfair and totally spurious claim for compensation you could be minded to reclaim an amount from them for the work you have done improving the landlord's property.

Two; That the agent had carried out periodic inspections of the property and no note or comment was ever made to you that the way you maintained the property was inadequate in any way. Therefore you are interested to know how you could have managed to do SEVEN GRAND'S WORTH OF DAMAGE between the last periodic inspection and your having vacated the property .

Three: IF they have accurate dated photographs of the property from the start of your tenancy you sincerely hope that they will clearly show the broken kitchen window and all the dead flies in the bedrooms. (Which presumably you had to deal with when you took on the property)

Four: You were reliably informed by one of the agency's employees some time ago (name him) that he had lost or mislaid their copy of the signed, dated and annotated inventory which you had returned to them, so you would be interested to know how they can claim now that the one they hold is truly the same one you returned.

Five: Eff 'em!

pimento

It sounds like Howkins and Harrison don't need any help from me.

Breast_Cancer_Survivor

I've received confirmation from TDS regarding my dispute, apparently the Agency now have 10 days to respond & submit they're evidence.

I feel quite confident as going through my paper work I found that all through the 3 year tenancy they have referred to my deposit as £1295 not £1170. It's stated on the original 12 month signed tenancy agreement as well the the 12 month signed extension & the signed change to periodic tenancy. There is even a signed document saying that they are paying £1295 into the TDS scheme.

Upon reading through the inventory they didn't even know how many bedrooms were on each floor or which rooms had en-suites or not so look pretty incompetent.

They had also noted that some of the walls were slightly marked so they're arguement that I had to repaint the whole house due to marks on the wall seem's pretty weak.

I'll keep you updated on how thing's progress & thanks again. :A

RAS

They really are on a hiding to nothing with this.