Checkout fee not in original AST

dodger1

My rented flat is being repossessed and the receivers have agreed a leaving date of 11/07/12. Today I have received a letter from the receivers managing agents who I now pay the rent to that there will be a checkout fee of £95 exclusive of vat which will be deducted from my deposit.

My original AST which started on 12/01/08 and has been periodic for the past three years has no clause about any checkout fee, only that there would be a charge if I wasn't there and a second appointment was necessary.

I could be completely wrong but I think I've read on another thread sometime ago that when a new LL (the receivers managing agent?) takes over then the old AST terms and conditions stay the same if no new contract is signed. I've also just found a document sent to me by the receiver's managing agent titled "Tenant guidance notes (comprehensive)". Under "checkout appointments" it states "Please note a check out fee of £0.00 inclusive of vat will be charged to your deposit.

So what do I do, just ignore todays letter or tell them that I disagree with the £95 charge because of the above or simply wait and see what happens with the deposit. I'm also unclear as to what actually does happen after I leave, the deposit is with my deposits. Does the managing agent write to My Deposits asking for a deduction and then My Deposits write to me asking if I dispute any charges or is the procedure something different.

Just another thought if I dispute it now maybe they might be overly picky with the checkout although no check in inventory was ever done.

Thanks for any help.

tbs624

Tell them now , in wiriting , that you are surprised to hear that they would like to levy a fee on you for an exit inspection because for them to be able to do this there should have been mention of the fee in your initial tenancy paperwork, and there wasn't.

Each of the deposit schemes offers much useful information on how the schemes work - go on to the mydeposits website and get acquainted now. What should have happened is that the receivers managing agents should have notified mydeposits that they are now acting instead of the LL.

You ought to be checking that mydeposits have up to date contact information ( including a forwarding address) for you

When you do move out cover yourself by taking date evidenced and detailed photos of the inside and out of the property - including on tops of shelves, inside cupboards, inside and out of any white goods that the LL provided, down the lav, the lav seat, inside bath/basin, shower screen, areas round light switches/door handles etc. Also photograph the meter readings

Lack of a jointly signed inventory will make it harder for a LL to prove the starting condition of the property but good photos from either end of the tenancy can help bring any arguments to an abrupt end

theartfullodger

I hesitate to disagree with tbs but I'd suggest initial priority is to get an agreed, no-or-minor deductions checkout first. I'd then - having got that- raise the point about they can't charge.

In other words try not to put their backs up early - don't think you lose anything by delaying the argument over charging till later.

I could of course be Rong

dodger1

Thanks tbs, I have a new deposit protection certificate issued after the new managing agents got involved. Will photograph all things you mention and anything else that springs to mind.

Was I correct about all the clauses in my original AST automatically apply to the new managing agents. So you think it's best to dispute the checkout charge now, my only concern was they may try to find things wrong with the flat and get there pound of flesh that way, although the flat is in very good condition and everything will be spotless.

dodger1

theartfullodger wrote: »

I hesitate to disagree with tbs but I'd suggest initial priority is to get an agreed, no-or-minor deductions checkout first. I'd then - having got that- raise the point about they can't charge.

In other words try not to put their backs up early - don't think you lose anything by delaying the argument over charging till later.

I could of course be Rong

That was my thinking too.

jjlandlord

Ignoring the letter now with the intention of contesting possible deposit deductions proposals after check out sounds like a good strategy, imo.

tbs624

theartfullodger wrote: »

I hesitate to disagree with tbs ...

Feel free anytime Artful

theartfullodger wrote: »

I.....but I'd suggest initial priority is to get an agreed, no-or-minor deductions checkout first. I'd then - having got that- raise the point about they can't charge.

In other words try not to put their backs up early - don't think you lose anything by delaying the argument over charging till later.

Good point

tbs624

dodger1 wrote: »

T
Was I correct about all the clauses in my original AST automatically apply to the new managing agents. .

Yes, unless you agree to any variation or sign a new agreement