Deposit return at end of long tenancy

weeg

00ec25 wrote: »

damage in that context is a sum of money paid to the LL in compensation, it does not have to be spent on repairing the damage. therefore if you fail to clean the property to the same standard it was when you moved in the LL can claim the costs of a clean whether such cleaning takes place or not. So the fact you are too lazy to clean the oven will result in the LL being entitled to claim the costs of its clean, even if it does end up in a skip, he is entitled to compensation for your damage to his property

However, the dividing line between wear and tear and damage is obviously a matter of opinion, which is why the deposit schemes have arbitration. for example, a dirty oven is "damage" as it would not have got that way had you acted in a "tenant like manner" and cleaned it as part of your occupation. A 10 year old carpet with flattened pile on the traffic ways is wear and tear and so unclaimable. A 10 year old carpet with a dirty mark on it not listed on the inventory entitles the LL to claim for the carpet to be cleaned.

Thanks. I think I get it now. We are TOTALLY FINE with the LL deducting cleaning costs. The way I see it is that we don't have the time to clean it to 'move in' standard, so I'd be paying a cleaning co to do it. Rather than pay for a professional clean and have the possibility of the LL saying "not good enough" and charge for a second clean, I'd rather just let the landlord pay for the clean - that way it's his preferred contractor.

I'll ask a couple of my regular cleaning companies to price it for me when it's empty - that way we'll have a benchmark for what they claim.

I'm just reassured that no-one seems to think they'll be able to claim for the full cost of things that need replacing. I'm new to this stuff - last time I rented was a room in a shared flat 14 years ago!

martindow

00ec25 wrote: »

A 10 year old carpet with a dirty mark on it not listed on the inventory entitles the LL to claim for the carpet to be cleaned.

I think this is arguable if it is a cheap carpet beyond its reasonable life. Can a LL claim a cleaning charge to pocket towards the cost of a new carpet which is needed in any case?

tbs624

weeg wrote: »

I'm just reassured that no-one seems to think they'll be able to claim for the full cost of things that need replacing. I'm new to this stuff - last time I rented was a room in a shared flat 14 years ago!

LL cannot seek betterment, ie be put in a better position at the expense of a Ts deposit. Check the link in my post up above and read about apportionment. LL still has to be able to adequately demonstrate the agreed starting condition of the property

00ec25

martindow wrote: »

I think this is arguable if it is a cheap carpet beyond its reasonable life. Can a LL claim a cleaning charge to pocket towards the cost of a new carpet which is needed in any case?

the age of a carpet is not related to how dirty it is : compare condition recorded on opening inventory to condition on check out inventory and allow for fair wear and tear (footfall marks etc) to identify claim for cleaning other marks which are damage caused during tenancy. The cost of carpet cleaning would rarely be a significant % of even a cheap carpet's replacement cost

martindow

00ec25 wrote: »

the age of a carpet is not related to how dirty it is : compare condition recorded on opening inventory to condition on check out inventory and allow for fair wear and tear (footfall marks etc) to identify claim for cleaning other marks which are damage caused during tenancy. The cost of carpet cleaning would rarely be a significant % of even a cheap carpet's replacement cost

The OPs carpet is at least ten years old. If the carpet is stained the T would be better off disposing of it and refusing any claim by the LL on the grounds of betterment. After ten years I would think the carpet is unlikely to have any residual value.