Landlord Keeping Deposit Despite Having Sold Property

johnnyutahman

I have recently moved out of a property and the landlord has a few issues with the carpets which appear to have seen some damage from moths. I agree that this should normally be deducted from the deposit and normally wouldn't question it.

However, I have also learnt that the landlord exchanged and completed the sale of the property two days after my tenancy ended. He is not aware that i know this.

Since the sale he has got quotes for replacing all the carpets and any other tiny issue (e.g. a 2mm chip in the bath) that the inventory brought up and is attempting to deduct this from my deposit (a significant 4 figure sum). Given that it is impossible for him to carry out the work now the property is sold, it would appear I am just going to be lining his pockets.

Surely if he has sold the property for a price he agreed before i moved out, he has encountered no financial loss. Is he able to do this? Would he not need to prove that he completed the repair work before sale, or recieved a lower price because of the issues highlighted by the inventory, in order to deduct from the deposit?

In a normal situation i would just demand a receipt and be comfortable that at least the work was done and that he was not profiteering. This doesn't seem to be the case here.

Thanks for any advice.

Werdnal

Even if the LL was not selling, but had another tenant moving in, he is entitled to claim for the damage/repairs you caused, but does not have any obligation to do the work or prove to you that he has done so.

If the buyers are taking the property with carpets, LL may be planning to clean/replace them as part of the sale, and similarly repair the bath.

You can obviously contest the deductions if you wish - I assume your deposit was protected in a scheme? If so, lodge a dispute with them.

johnnyutahman

He has sold the flat as i left it (completion last thursday), with the carpets and bath included.

Werdnal

johnnyutahman wrote: »

He has sold the flat as i left it (completion last thursday), with the carpets and bath included.

Then do as I said above - contest the deduction through the deposit scheme he used to protect your deposit? There is no guarantee you would win, but the scheme will arbritrate the dispute between you.

Which scheme did he use?

jjlandlord

If flat has been sold as is, the question is whether whatever damages caused by OP reduced the value: If this cannot be shown then LL has suffered no loss and should not be entitled to any compensation from the deposit.

Werdnal

jjlandlord wrote: »

If flat has been sold as is, the question is whether whatever damages caused by OP reduced the value: If this cannot be shown then LL has suffered no loss and should not be entitled to any compensation from the deposit.

But as sale completed 2 days after the tenant vacated, there is no way to know whether the LL did do the work prior to the completion taking place. How do you suggest the T proves his case?

johnnyutahman

He is only sending me quotes now, and they are dated post the completion of the sale. (he is not aware that i know he's sold the place).

jjlandlord

OP said LL got quotes after completion...

As it is for the LL to prove his loss, as OP I would simply argue that property was sold immediately without any repair carried out and that LL suffered no loss and is therefore not entitled to compensation. (assuming deposit protected in scheme)
Obviously this also assumes that there is a schedule of conditions agreed on by both parties to prove damage.