lodger problem - landlord using deposit.

danshah316

Catti wrote: »

Is the Landlord perhaps insured??

Well I assume so, but I have been categorically told that I will have to pay for a new one and the cost will be £380.

At the time, I told them the mark is quite small so that figure is very steep, but he said he can see the mark so end of.

I would have hoped if he is willing to go through insurance, that he would have said it and asked me to pay the excess and a little more. (unless the excess is more than £380 obv).

19lottie82

dodger1 wrote: »

I actually think they would win.

Fair enough.

My theory however, is this.....

We are all in no disagreement that the OP damaged the hob.

Therefore the LL is entitled to use the OPs deposit to restore the hob to the condition it was in before the OP damaged it.

IF it cannot be fixed, then the only way to do this is to replace it, and if the price of a replacement is £380, so be it.

I don't understand people that are saying they would make an offer of £50, or whatever, if the LL can't get rid of the mark for that, then what use is the £50 pounds?

And again, I'm not against the OP, I too would feel hard done by if I were in their shoes BUT if a replacement hob is required to "make good" the mark, then I see the LL's point too.

martinsurrey

danshah316 wrote: »

I would have hoped if he is willing to go through insurance, that he would have said it and asked me to pay the excess and a little more. (unless the excess is more than £380 obv).

and I assume you will pay him the difference in his insurance premium for the next 5 years as well, as it will go up if he claims?

thought not...

danshah316

19lottie82 wrote: »

Fair enough.

My theory however, is this.....

We are all in no disagreement that the OP damaged the hob.

Therefore the LL is entitled to use the OPs deposit to restore the hob to the condition it was in before the OP damaged it.

IF it cannot be fixed, then the only way to do this is to replace it, and if the price of a replacement is £380, so be it.

I don't understand people that are saying they would make an offer of £50, or whatever, if the LL can't get rid of the mark for that, then what use is the £50 pounds?

And again, I'm not against the OP, I too would feel hard done by if I were in their shoes BUT if a replacement hob is required to "make good" the mark, then I see the LL's point too.

Thank you for the comments. I also do see the LL's point of view but feel like many others it's quite harsh, and feel everything would be a better place if this situation can be discussed rather than whatever the LL decides, goes.

I did cause the damage to the hob, but

1) The LL put pressure on me to go overboard with cleaning it, while not providing me the tools to get it to how clean they required it
2) I am not a professional cleaner, and if they wanted it as good as they wanted, they should have either done it themselves or hired a professional.
3) The LL does not have to have lodgers. They could have the house to the exact detail they want it by not having lodgers... but oh wait they still want extra money coming in. Win Win situation for the LL when they hold a damage deposit which they can almost do anything with and the lodger can't do much about it.

Based on my points and the LL's point of view, and the fact that I am willing to pay some costs towards 'repair', I think most people would agree that a fair resolution can be found if the situation can be discussed. However, the LL is not willing to budge on price.

Ideally, if I knew how to remove the hob, I would tell them I would be removing the hob and taking it with me and that they can use my deposit to buy themselves a new one. The £380 quoted price by the way I assume must include vat, delivery, fitting etc, as I have seen it online for less than £240 new.

danshah316

martinsurrey wrote: »

and I assume you will pay him the difference in his insurance premium for the next 5 years as well, as it will go up if he claims?

thought not...

You thought incorrectly then. I actually would be willing to consider those costs to see if claiming through insurance long term is best (hence why I said I'd pay a bit more than simply the premium).

silvercar

19lottie82 wrote: »

Fair enough.

My theory however, is this.....

We are all in no disagreement that the OP damaged the hob.

Therefore the LL is entitled to use the OPs deposit to restore the hob to the condition it was in before the OP damaged it.But he is not allowed betterment

IF it cannot be fixed, then the only way to do this is to replace it, and if the price of a replacement is £380, so be it.

I don't understand people that are saying they would make an offer of £50, or whatever, if the LL can't get rid of the mark for that, then what use is the £50 pounds? Lanldord chooses to take lodgers, so must accept increased wear and tear on his kitchen

And again, I'm not against the OP, I too would feel hard done by if I were in their shoes BUT if a replacement hob is required to "make good" the mark, then I see the LL's point too.

My analogy would be if a carpet is expected to last 10 years and a tenant damages it after 5 years needing its replacement. The landlord is only allowed to recover a proportion of the costs of the new carpet. He isn't allowed to claim the costs of a new carpet, even though he would not have intended replacement at this stage.

martinsurrey

danshah316 wrote: »

Thank you for the comments. I also do see the LL's point of view but feel like many others it's quite harsh, and feel everything would be a better place if this situation can be discussed rather than whatever the LL decides, goes.

harsh does not mean wrong in the eyes of the law

danshah316 wrote: »

I did cause the damage to the hob, but

1) The LL put pressure on me to go overboard with cleaning it, while not providing me the tools to get it to how clean they required it

the LL only asked you to clean the hob to the standard it was when you started using it. you siad the LL had cleaned it earlier that day.

danshah316 wrote: »

2) I am not a professional cleaner, and if they wanted it as good as they wanted, they should have either done it themselves or hired a professional.

It is you who should have hired a professional cleaner if you cannot clean things back to the standard you recieved them in

danshah316 wrote: »

3) The LL does not have to have lodgers. They could have the house to the exact detail they want it by not having lodgers... but oh wait they still want extra money coming in. Win Win situation for the LL when they hold a damage deposit which they can almost do anything with and the lodger can't do much about it.

1) fair wear and tear is not deductable, but you admit it is damage.
2) if I walk in to a pub and put my foot thorugh a TV, I would expect the bill.
3) you can do something about it, court, but you'll lose (IMO).

danshah316 wrote: »

Based on my points and the LL's point of view, and the fact that I am willing to pay some costs towards 'repair', I think most people would agree that a fair resolution can be found if the situation can be discussed. However, the LL is not willing to budge on price.

if you can repair it for less, do it, simple.

danshah316 wrote: »

Ideally, if I knew how to remove the hob, I would tell them I would be removing the hob and taking it with me and that they can use my deposit to buy themselves a new one. The £380 quoted price by the way I assume must include vat, delivery, fitting etc, as I have seen it online for less than £240 new.

that is theft.

if that £380 is inc delivery and fitting, why dont you order it now and get it fitted and take the old one to sell before you move out?

martinsurrey

silvercar wrote: »

My analogy would be if a carpet is expected to last 10 years and a tenant damages it after 5 years needing its replacement. The landlord is only allowed to recover a proportion of the costs of the new carpet. He isn't allowed to claim the costs of a new carpet, even though he would not have intended replacement at this stage.

kitchen is brand new. So fair wear and tear is minimal

tight_is_right

danshah316 wrote: »

I did cause the damage to the hob, but

1) The LL put pressure on me to go overboard with cleaning it, while not providing me the tools to get it to how clean they required it
2) I am not a professional cleaner, and if they wanted it as good as they wanted, they should have either done it themselves or hired a professional.

Following this thead with interest and I'm firmly on your side of the argument - however, please don't go down the route of blaming them for making you clean. If you're a lodger in somebodies house and you make a mess it's your responsibility to clean it up.

Hot water, a bit of washing up liquid and some elbow grease will easily clean any fresh marks off that hob without you having to use cleaning products.

I would actually love this to go to court just to see what would happen. In OPs shoes I'd probably fight it because (rightly or wrongly) I'm convinced the judge would laugh at them trying to get a replacement hob for a little stain, and landing them a court bill for being so greedy would give me immense pleasure.

Incidentally, what would be the result of this happening if the hob was 6 months old with a few little scratches already on it? In LLs eyes the hob would surely be pending replacement and ready for the tip already?

Wanderingpomm

You can ask for that hob as you have paid for a replacement. Take it and put it on ebay or gumtree. Don't just give them the money or they'll probably just live with the mark!!