Nail holes/ painting question

simonf1971

Hi,

I'm about to move out of my apartment shortly and wanted to see how much I need to do to be sure to get my deposit back - particularly as I have hung some pictures etc on the walls. There are quite a few holes and some of them are maybe 1/4 inch in size (at the most). I have filled them all out, but do I also need to paint the walls? I have been in the apartment for nearly 5 years and the apartment was not freshly painted when I moved in so I would only think it's fair that the landlord pays to have the place painted? Apart from the holes from nails/ screws the walls only have fair wear and tear.

Look forward to hearing what you think.

Thanks,
Simon

vuvuzela

simonf1971 wrote: »

Hi,

I'm about to move out of my apartment shortly and wanted to see how much I need to do to be sure to get my deposit back - particularly as I have hung some pictures etc on the walls. There are quite a few holes and some of them are maybe 1/4 inch in size (at the most). I have filled them all out, but do I also need to paint the walls? I have been in the apartment for nearly 5 years and the apartment was not freshly painted when I moved in so I would only think it's fair that the landlord pays to have the place painted? Apart from the holes from nails/ screws the walls only have fair wear and tear.

Look forward to hearing what you think.

Thanks,
Simon

What does your inventory say about the condition of the walls ?

hazyjo

And what does your contract say about what you're allowed to do? Most don't allow nails, screws, etc in walls.

Jx

simonf1971

I only have a very abbreviated version of a check-in report and it says: "Property: in a tidy condition", "Decoration: Generally good decorative order. Some scuffs, filler marks and chips as noted".

The "as noted" lead me to think that a more extensive document existed, but when I asked for one I was sent an "inventory and schedule of condition" report that noted on the front cover that it had been used on various check-ins but the date for my check-in is not listed. The report itself is typed up with handwritten (illegible) commenting added at later dates. Can make out a few comments, however, from the check-in 2 tenants before me where it says there are "a few scuff marks, drip marks and some repair marks".

There is no doubt that I have added holes in the walls though. However, I have filled them all so they could easily be painted over. And given there is no way the landlord could have rented it again without painting it (even if I hadn't made holes in the walls) it seems fair to me that I have done my part to fix those damages.

Put differently - would it typically be accepted that after 5 years of tenancy (and at least 2 years before I moved in) the paint on walls should be redone by landlord at his expense (as fair wear and tear)?

Thanks,
Simon

BitterAndTwisted

I wouldn't want to gamble that the landlord would accept the property would need complete redecoration after five years of a tenancy. That's your money at risk but I wouldn't want to gamble with mine. I'd be repainting if I didn't want to bear the cost of deductions.

simonf1971

hazyjo wrote: »

And what does your contract say about what you're allowed to do? Most don't allow nails, screws, etc in walls.

Jx

Says

a) that I am "to compensate the landlord for losses caused for any of all of the following reasons: any damage to the premises and fixture and fittings caused by the tenant or resulting from any breach of the terms of this agreement by the tenant"
b) To make good, or pay for, any failure by the tenant to comply with the obligations set out in this section of this part of the agreement
c) Not to decorate or make any alterations or additions to or in the premises without the prior consent of the landlord or agent.

Best,
Simon

simonf1971

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

I wouldn't want to gamble that the landlord would accept the property would need complete redecoration after five years of a tenancy. That's your money at risk but I wouldn't want to gamble with mine. I'd be repainting if I didn't want to bear the cost of deductions.

Thanks, appreciate the point of view, and can certainly see the landlord asking for deductions, but do you think it would hold up in adjudication? Can it really be right that after paying rent for 5 years I need to deliver the apartment in better condition than I took it over?

Also, shouldn't it be taken into account that the walls were not freshly painted when I moved in. In fact, as far as I can tell from condition report, the walls had not been painted either when a tenant moved in nearly two years ahead of me. So that's 7 years where the landlord hasn't painted.

LEJC

i guess its a gamble you take...to paint or not to paint...

I'm a new LL and we have newly skimmed and freshly painted walls in the property we rent out...so our policy of no nails is strict...however with no clear inventory in place for you, you are really at the mercy of the LL as to what state you are able to hand the property back in.

what I would say however is the cost of a trade pot of paint is no more than £25..and the time it takes you to paint the offending walls.
The cost that the LL is likely to pass on to you to rectify the walls would probably be in the region of a days tradesman work and the cost of materials...likely to be in the region of £150.

In your position I would consider which option is more palatable..

Tjrw1985

simonf1971 wrote: »

Says

a) that I am "to compensate the landlord for losses caused for any of all of the following reasons: any damage to the premises and fixture and fittings caused by the tenant or resulting from any breach of the terms of this agreement by the tenant"
b) To make good, or pay for, any failure by the tenant to comply with the obligations set out in this section of this part of the agreement
c) Not to decorate or make any alterations or additions to or in the premises without the prior consent of the landlord or agent.

Best,
Simon

As to point b. Yes you will have to paint over the holes you made as this clause is in your tenancy. Whether you agree with it or not.

Point C re-iterates this point, did you get permission to put up pictures?

princeofpounds

I take a different approach from many of the others.

Your inventory is not very detailed. If the wall contains filler marks already, and you have just added some new ones, who is to know what was your fault and that of previous tenants?

Given that the decorative finish is also highly depreciated, if you do get charged it may not be that much after arbitration.

I'd encourage you to be fair to the landlord but I think that's a realistic outcome.

As for the clause requiring permission to make holes, it's legally quite redundant except to show that permission wasn't given. There is no more penalty than what you might lose on your deposit. Plus maybe a bad reference, which may not even be an issue.

But if you have a good relationship with the landlord I would personally ask them how best to deal with the situation. You should really fill, sand and cover with a matching paint. The latter is actually hard if the paint is aged as it will look different anyway.

If the decoration needs doing then they might only care about you sanding. This will take you ten minutes and all is done.

Or they might be able to point you towards the matching paint. You can then cover your marks and leave the rest for them to use.

BitterAndTwisted

simonf1971 wrote: »

Can it really be right that after paying rent for 5 years I need to deliver the apartment in better condition than I took it over?


No, it isn't right, your obligation is to return the property in the same condition. Not better or worse.

Also, shouldn't it be taken into account that the walls were not freshly painted when I moved in. In fact, as far as I can tell from condition report, the walls had not been painted either when a tenant moved in nearly two years ahead of me. So that's 7 years where the landlord hasn't painted.

It will be taken into account, but only the scheme's arbitrators will be able to come up with a formula about how often it is reasonable to expect a rental-property to be redecorated. If, for argument's sake it's ten years, then you would expect to bear three-tenths of the cost.

Of course, no redecorating would be necessary if you hadn't made any holes in the walls without prior permission. I would warn you in the strongest terms possible not to expect to be able to over-paint in patches after this length of time because it's unlikely to match properly.