Getting my deposit back

JamesBeech

Hi All,

I was after some advice regarding getting back my deposit for a property that I rented.

I rented the property for a year and paid a deposit of £650. I recently moved out and a few weeks later I was told by my landlord that I would only get £100 of it back. There was a list of items that apparently needed to be replaced due to damage, plus labour costs to tidy things up - something I strongly disagree with hence this post now.

Basically I have disagreed with the majority of items he has claimed were damaged or no longer working. In one instance I had used an item the day before I moved out, yet they claim it no longer works and want almost £100 to replace it.

Just a few points to add -

• There was not an inspection the day I moved out, just a quick look around with a "Yeah looks OK"
• I also did not take any photos to show the condition I left it in, this is due to the fact that I had dealt with this person before, although not in a renting situation so didn't think I'd be in this situation now.
• I don't actually know where my deposit is as I was never given any info regarding any deposit scheme. Is it law that it has to be in a scheme?

Where do I stand in this situation? I have argued the points he has raised, but would it end up being my word against his? How can I avoid him from buying the most expensive items and getting me to pay for them?

Thanks for your help
James

BitterAndTwisted

The landlord can try and claim anything they like but what is pertinent is what PROOF they have that the things claimed for were actually in the property and working when your tenancy started.

Where is the dual-signed check-in inventory from the start of your tenancy?

Have you check all three tenancy-protection schemes to check whether your deposit has been protected? DPS, TBS and MyDeposits: that's if the tenancy started on or after April 2007.

The way forward will dictated by the answers to those two questions.

JamesBeech

Thanks for the reply.

I was sent an inventory in the post 2 weeks after moving into the property but was never given an address to send a signed copy to, so this never ended up being signed. The inventory lists the items he claims are damages/need replacing but does not state whether they are in working condition etc. - Does it need to state this?

I have just checked with DPS and MyDeposits and neither have a record of my deposit. Couldn't find the site for TBS.

Thanks again.

abramagic73

We are in a similar position. Our letting agents want over 50% of our deposit for various issues.

We are attempting to negotiate with them over it, but don't really know legally where we stand. There are no guidelines of what can be argued as fair wear and tear and do not know how to go about getting clarification.

For now we have said we are not accepting what they have proposed. It has been made very clear that going through the DPS's arbitration process will take a very long time. I have a feeling we will not be winning this one.

RAS

abramagic73 wrote: »

For now we have said we are not accepting what they have proposed. It has been made very clear that going through the DPS's arbitration process will take a very long time. I have a feeling we will not be winning this one.

Why? The landlord has to prove that the damage is in excess of normal wear and tear.

Was there a dual signed inventory? If not, he has no proof of any damage.

JamesBeech

What happens if you have no dual signed inventory and the deposit hasn't been paid into a scheme?

BitterAndTwisted

Sorry, I made a typo: the scheme is TDS.

Your position should be that as there was no dual-signed inventory they cannot prove that any damage they have found was caused during your tenancy.

A tenant's deposit is not a new-for-old insurance policy, so they can't charge you some fantasy made-up figure for a tired and worn-out something or other that originally cost twenty quid five years ago.

If your tenancy started on or after April 2007 it should by law have been lodged with one of the three deposit-protection schemes. You could warn them that if it wasn't protected you could choose to ask the court for a penalty to be imposed

BitterAndTwisted

abramagic73 wrote: »

There are no guidelines of what can be argued as fair wear and tear and do not know how to go about getting clarification.

There don't have to be any "guidelines": fair-wear-and-tear is a completely different thing from dirt and damage. What specifically are they trying to claim for?

For now we have said we are not accepting what they have proposed. It has been made very clear that going through the DPS's arbitration process will take a very long time. I have a feeling we will not be winning this one.

Who told you that? If it was my money I'd fight tooth-and-nail for however long it took IF I was certain that their proposed deductions were unfair or spurious.

JamesBeech

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

Sorry, I made a typo: the scheme is TDS.

Your position should be that as there was no dual-signed inventory they cannot prove that any damage they have found was caused during your tenancy.

A tenant's deposit is not a new-for-old insurance policy, so they can't charge you some fantasy made-up figure for a tired and worn-out something or other that originally cost twenty quid five years ago.

If your tenancy started on or after April 2007 it should by law have been lodged with one of the three deposit-protection schemes. You could warn them that if it wasn't protected you could choose to ask the court for a penalty to be imposed

I just checked on TDS and there was also no record of my deposit, so it's looking like he didn't register it with any of the three you mentioned.

BitterAndTwisted

In which case you should get on with writing a letter, the contents of which I indicated in my post on number 7

ccc111

Hi,

I have just received a letter from my deposits regarding a dispute I lodged with them.

They have come back in the land lords' favour and have paid all money to them. The reasons they have given are based on two separate details.

One of these details refers to a letter the landlord claims he sent - but we never received this letter. I feel this is very unfair especially because we do not even have access to the evidence the land lord submitted!! It sounds like you can submit anything and they won't even check it! Has anyone else had a similar problem?