No inventory, no deposit.

ceri123

I'm posting on behalf of a friend...

They rented a house and have recently moved out. They paid a deposit which was put in a proper protection scheme, had a tenancy agreement. But it was all still a weird arrangement and they weren't given an inventory.

I think they thought it was a good thing not having an inventory but now he's refusing the return of the deposit, although as yet he's not specified why. They have 4 rowdy children and a husband not too good at DIY but quick to attempt tv brackets with the wrong tools, so I'm sure some of it is justified but they were in the house less than 6 months so I'm sure the full £800 isn't justified.

I'm assuming the lack of inventory pretty much leaves them without a leg to stand on? I've suggested they obviously ask what he is claiming the money for but apart from that I'm not too sure how much success they're going to have. I don't think they were wise enough to take photos on departure as it was a rushed Xmas move.

Any advice gratefully received.
Thanks.

G_M

* the lack of inventory gives the landlord hardly a leg to stand on

* they should write (write, WRITE!) asking for a breakdown of any deductions he wishes to make

* they should put in a formal request for release of the deposit from the scheme

* if no agreement reached, they should raise a dispute with the deposit scheme

Manchee

The Landlord cannot claim on a deposit if he cant prove that the damage or whatever wasn't there when the tenant moved in. So basically if there was no inventory done when your friend moved in, they can't claim for damages on the deposit.

G_M

Manchee wrote: »

The Landlord cannot claim on a deposit if he cant prove that the damage or whatever wasn't there when the tenant moved in. So basically if there was no inventory done when your friend moved in, they can't claim for damages on the deposit.

(.... unless he has other evidence....)

wanting_an_easy_life

G_M wrote: »

(.... unless he has other evidence....)

I'm intrigued. What evidence do you think he could have?

dodger1

Manchee wrote: »

The Landlord cannot claim on a deposit if he cant prove that the damage or whatever wasn't there when the tenant moved in. So basically if there was no inventory done when your friend moved in, they can't claim for damages on the deposit.

A Landlord can surely claim even without evidence. As a tenant myself I'd feel morally obliged to cough up the correct amount of money if I knew that I'd caused damage even without the LL having any evidence. In this case I'd do as G_M suggests and write asking for a breakdown of any charges, then OP's friend can agree or dispute.

martinsurrey

dodger1 wrote: »

A Landlord can surely claim even without evidence.

He can claim that the ming vase he left in the loft is gone and they've painted over the Banksey that was on the living room wall, but the onus is on him to PROVE that they were there when the tenant moved in... Almost impossible without an inventory.

Even with photos, who's to say the damage didn’t happen 20 min’s after they were taken, before the tenants even moved in?

G_M

wanting_an_easy_life wrote: »

I'm intrigued. What evidence do you think he could have?

As anobvious example.

Landlord claims that the property is filthy and needs claning when tenant moves out.

There is no inventory describing the state of cleanliness at the start of the tenancy.

However the landlord has a receipt from a cleaning company, dated immediately prior to the start of the tenancy.

G_M

dodger1 wrote: »

A Landlord can surely claim even without evidence. As a tenant myself I'd feel morally obliged to cough up the correct amount of money if I knew that I'd caused damage even without the LL having any evidence. In this case I'd do as G_M suggests and write asking for a breakdown of any charges, then OP's friend can agree or dispute.

We're getting bogged down in terminology.

Yes, a LL can 'claim' anything he likes.

And if a tenant agrees with the claim, then there is a moral obligation to 'cough up' as you put it.

The issue is where a tenant does not agree with the claim. In those circumstances, a landlord needs proof/evidence to convince either tenant, or failing that the dispute arbitrator, or a court, on the validity of his claim.

wanting_an_easy_life

G_M wrote: »

As anobvious example.

Landlord claims that the property is filthy and needs claning when tenant moves out.

There is no inventory describing the state of cleanliness at the start of the tenancy.

However the landlord has a receipt from a cleaning company, dated immediately prior to the start of the tenancy.

And the LLs teenage son had a party in the property the evening before the tenants moved in?

Hence my question about any evidence. It can all be fudged with the exception of a signed inventory.

I also agree with G_M - it sounds more of a moral question than a legal one.

Bluebonnie

ceri123 wrote: »

I'm posting on behalf of a friend...

They rented a house and have recently moved out. They paid a deposit which was put in a proper protection scheme, had a tenancy agreement. But it was all still a weird arrangement and they weren't given an inventory.

but they were in the house less than 6 months so I'm sure the full £800 isn't justified.

.

It's unusual to be in a rented house for less than six months, since that is the usual minimum term for an AST.

If your friends did have a six month AST, they would normally be liable for all the rent due until the end of the fixed term.

Does the tenancy agreement say that the deposit may be used for unpaid rent?

We cannot give sensible advice until friends have more info from L.