end of tenancy and deductions from deposit

klakierro

Hello,

I have moved houses a couple of weeks ago and the landlord proposes deductions from the deposit which I am not sure about:

- I spilled some nail varnish remover on my sofa (which is dark brown) and the agency marked it as a red paint mark. They said it may need to be cleaned professionally and I would have to pay for it but they won't manage to clean it. Shall I tell them the truth? And propose that they use a leather dye or something?

- There was one cracked tile in the bathroom which is not in the inventory but there was a picture. The problem is that the new inventory has many detailed pictures (compared to the one we got when we moved in) and we are sure we have not cracked it. There were also engineering works going on in the house in the meantime so we think that maybe it happened then. The landlord wants to deduct £100 for one tile for labour and material which seems excessive.

- One of my flatmates bought an expensive pan (the other flatmate and I never used it, we avoided using her stuff altogether which is a different story). She used to always put it on the wooden counter and it left a black ring mark. The agency wants to deduct £180. Is it reasonable? And what happens if she doesn't own up to it? She already told me that she doesn't understand why it's her responsibility (she knows why, she just is short on money and doesn't want to pay that much money so she's gonna try to pull that off) so I worry that may happen.

Any advice would be much appreciated

moromir

klakierro wrote:

- I spilled some nail varnish remover on my sofa (which is dark brown) and the agency marked it as a red paint mark. They said it may need to be cleaned professionally and I would have to pay for it but they won't manage to clean it. Shall I tell them the truth? And propose that they use a leather dye or something?
I would be honest and tell them how it happened - whether it can be redyed or not is another question - it will probably never match properly.

- There was one cracked tile in the bathroom which is not in the inventory but there was a picture. The problem is that the new inventory has many detailed pictures (compared to the one we got when we moved in) and we are sure we have not cracked it. There were also engineering works going on in the house in the meantime so we think that maybe it happened then. The landlord wants to deduct £100 for one tile for labour and material which seems excessive.
Have you appreciated the amount of work required to sort this out? The contractor is going to have to try and either chisel out one tile, or work their way down to it from the top row of tiles, all the tiles that are to be reused will have to have the cement scraped off, then they need to source a matching tile (driving to B&Q, Wickes, Topps Tiles etc until one can be found), come back, cement in the new tile, put the others back on if applicable and hope the cement matches, if it doesn't then the whole tiled area might need regrouting.

- One of my flatmates bought an expensive pan (the other flatmate and I never used it, we avoided using her stuff altogether which is a different story). She used to always put it on the wooden counter and it left a black ring mark. The agency wants to deduct £180. Is it reasonable? And what happens if she doesn't own up to it? She already told me that she doesn't understand why it's her responsibility (she knows why, she just is short on money and doesn't want to pay that much money so she's gonna try to pull that off) so I worry that may happen.
It will likely make no difference if she 'owns up', the agency arn't going to be bothered about assigning costs to individuals, they'll just divide it amongst all the tenants.

Depends on the worktop, solid wood worktops can cost thousands... not the most sensible landlord to put them in a rental property though. Again remember a match has to be sourced, ordered, delivered, a contractor has to attend, remove the existing, dispose of it (another journey), fit the new one etc.

The thing to remember is that the LL can't charge for betterment.

I.e. they couldn't charge you for a brand new sofa. They could only charge a proportion of the cost based on the age of the item.

That being said... there seems to have been some incredibly careless damage done to this property...

klakierro

moromir wrote: »

The thing to remember is that the LL can't charge for betterment.

I.e. they couldn't charge you for a brand new sofa. They could only charge a proportion of the cost based on the age of the item.

That being said... there seems to have been some incredibly careless damage done to this property...

Thank you very much for your help. I'm looking for advice not judgement, we live and learn and there is nothing I can do about it now. I now know to be careful in my future tenancies.

I still don't know what to do about the cracked tile as I am pretty sure none of us did it.

Also how will I know they actually did the amendments in the house rather than just charging us and leaving things as they are? I know that's happened in the past to my friends...

anselld

klakierro wrote: »

Thank you very much for your help. I'm looking for advice not judgement, we live and learn and there is nothing I can do about it now. I now know to be careful in my future tenancies.

I still don't know what to do about the cracked tile as I am pretty sure none of us did it.

Also how will I know they actually did the amendments in the house rather than just charging us and leaving things as they are? I know that's happened in the past to my friends...

Deposit deductions are to compensate the LL for the damage you have caused. There is no requirement that the LL actually spends that money on replacing/ repairing the item.

Regarding the damage to the tile, you can challenge this via the deposit scheme either that you did not do it (onus is on LL to prove you did) and/or that the cost is excessive (onus on LL to prove otherwise via quotes etc).

dimbo61

How old was the kitchen,sofa, tiles when you moved in?
Was it a brand new property? Are the photos DATED ? to prove what condition the property was in when you moved in!
Unless the LL took pictures of all the tiled floor or VIDEO how can he prove you broke the tile

klakierro

dimbo61 wrote: »

How old was the kitchen,sofa, tiles when you moved in?
Was it a brand new property? Are the photos DATED ? to prove what condition the property was in when you moved in!
Unless the LL took pictures of all the tiled floor or VIDEO how can he prove you broke the tile

At least a couple of years old, but I cannot say precisely. No, the property wasn't brand new. Yes, the photos are dated. The problem is, when we moved in they only took a couple of photos and the new report has wayy more photos in which are much more detailed.

Well I'm guessing LL could argue that it was not in the inventory (initially) that it was broken and we didn't report it, but it is not in the final one (only on a picture) - does that help us?

anselld

klakierro wrote: »

At least a couple of years old, but I cannot say precisely. No, the property wasn't brand new. Yes, the photos are dated. The problem is, when we moved in they only took a couple of photos and the new report has wayy more photos in which are much more detailed.

Well I'm guessing LL could argue that it was not in the inventory (initially) that it was broken and we didn't report it, but it is not in the final one (only on a picture) - does that help us?

Is there any description of the floor on checkin? eg "floor good condition, no chips or cracks". It does not need to be a photo, a description will do. If there is no checkin description then the LL claim will probably fail.

klakierro

Check in description says:

Cream and grey mottled ceramic floor tiles- good order


Check out description says:


'As per inventory'


(i.e. inventory refers to the initial one).

anselld

klakierro wrote: »

Check in description says:

Cream and grey mottled ceramic floor tiles- good order

In which case if it was damaged at checkin you should have noted it before signing. If you thought it was done during the LL works you should have reported it at the time. Sounds like your best bet is to challenge the repair cost.

moneyspendexpert

I can't see how a tenant(s) could possibly know how much exisitng damage is lurking within a property being rented.

I've lived in alot of rented properties and have found ripped curtains, cracked tiles after 3 months of living in a rented property. I had a LL steal £80 from my deposit once for a sh..tty old carpet that looked like it had been previously used as builders door mat.

things get spilled on carpets and furniture, it's normal and not excessive damage IMO. I would challenge £100 for a cracked tile as excessive. Surely if the tiles were that expensive, why wasn't a very large deposit taken to insure them all.

Find out the situation of repairing the damage yourself if you feel you are at fault.
I think your flatmates should take some responsibility in this too.

anselld

moneyspendexpert wrote: »

things get spilled on carpets and furniture, it's normal and not excessive damage IMO.

That may be your opinion but it is not how the deposit schemes operate. Spillages are the responsibility of the Tenant to make good; they are not "fair wear and tear".