Is the check out inventory the last word?

l.walton

I moved out of a flat about a month ago and am still arguing over the deposit with the landlord.

The checkout inventory says that all walls are in good condition but the landlord has said that he is deducting 200 off the deposit to fill and paint a wall that had a couple of holes in from nails. Is this acceptable? Or does he have no case as the check out inventory says that all walls are fine?

BitterAndTwisted

Were there holes in the wall which you left?

What did the check-in inventory have to say about them? If the landlord has proof that you left the property with holes in the walls which were not there when you moved in, you should pay up.

l.walton

Yes, I left the holes in the walls from hanging a picture but the checkout inventory said the walls were in good condition and has no mention of the holes. Surely this proves the fact that the holes are so small that they are practically unnoticeable? Anyway, 200 seems a bit steep to fill in a couple of holes.

The landlord was illegally subletting to me and so I had to leave the flat after 4 months (I had a 2 year contract). For this reason I am reluctant to give him any money without a fight.

BitterAndTwisted

The deposit-protection agency's arbitrators won't be concerned about whether the holes are "practically unnoticeable" or not, they will concerned about whether they exist at all and with what documentary evidence the landlord has that they were caused during your tenancy.

The cost is not just a matter of filling in the holes and painting over them. This rarely results in a good match: it would probably necessitate the whole wall being repainted. Few contractors will quote an hourly-rate for such a job, it will probably cost one whole day's fee, so £200 doesn't sound unreasonable.

angrypirate

If its not in the check in or check out report then go to the arbitration process.

G_M

angrypirate wrote: »

If its not in the check in or check out report then go to the arbitration process.

The OP has admitted making the holes.

Are you suggesting he lie to the scheme arbitrators and claim he did not make the holes?

Not sure I agree with with you bitter on this one. 2 small holes = £200? It does seem steep.

Depends on type/quality of property and decor of course, but personally I'd polyfill and use matching paint to touch up.

Yes, I agree, there will be a slight colour difference, but if the decor is already worn then it's no biggie.

Also, 'betterment' potential comes into the picture.

BitterAndTwisted

I daresay the OP could have filled and touched-up the paintwork before leaving but it's too late for that now.

I agree that £200 is steep but you try and engage a decorator to undertake such a small job for less than a day's fee. One could argue that the LL's teenage son could have done it for a fiver, but that's not the OP's call.

l.walton

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

I daresay the OP could have filled and touched-up the paintwork before leaving but it's too late for that now.

I agree that £200 is steep but you try and engage a decorator to undertake such a small job for less than a day's fee. One could argue that the LL's teenage son could have done it for a fiver, but that's not the OP's call.

I was asked to leave at short notice as it was discovered that the landlord was illegally subletting so I did not have time to deal with the holes.

Thanks for everyone's advice, it looks like I'll just have to give in on this one!

DRP

l.walton wrote: »

I was asked to leave at short notice as it was discovered that the landlord was illegally subletting so I did not have time to deal with the holes.

Thanks for everyone's advice, it looks like I'll just have to give in on this one!

too late know as the LL has possession, but how were you 'forced' to leave ?