Bad landlord - changing the property. Help/advice needed

Simon_wh1t

Hi - first time posting, hoping for some advice.

We have just signed just signed up to a 12 month tenancy for a flat. We had an agreement which was "let as viewed". However, since the viewing the landlord had made substantial changes to the property, with regards furniture/contents/painting etc which means that we are now not happy with the property and the amount we have to pay.

Are there any options available to us - I would expect 4 outcomes;
1) the landlord has to return the property to its previous state
2) we return the property to the previous states, taking costs from upcoming rent
3) renegotiate the level of rent to one which is fit for the current property
4) like it and lump it - there is nothing we can do

Any help is much appreciated
Simon

00ec25

1) why should he - was your "agreement" in writing
2) a recipe for disaster leading to ending up in court for non payment of contractually agreed rental amount and possible eviction
3) good luck
4) no, see 3) above

thegrind

Hi Simon could you please elaborate on what has been changed?

Simon_wh1t

Hi thanks for the replies.

We have an agreement in writing for the property as viewed (subject to removal of a bed in a second bedroom - to be used as a nursery).

The property was used as the landlords home previously, however when moving out has removed a substantial amount of furniture (lounge furniture, outdoor furniture, bedroom furniture) leaving us with a very sparse property.

Whilst I expect trinkets/decorations to be removed - I would expect the property to be left 'as viewed' in the main.

We believe we have paid more than the market rate to secure a 'home we can move straight in to' yet now feel we have been duped.

Thanks
Simon

G_M

I think we need a fuller understanding of what was said and written.

The LL was letting his home, and clearly, as you admit, was going to remove some items (trinkets, personal items). But that immediately throws into doubt the 'let as seen' promise, since you admit to accepting it will not be let as seen.

So what should have been left? The answer, of course, is to examine the inventory. This should list the furniture being left for you (as well as its condition). Was there an inventory?

More info needed.

jjlandlord

How is someone to guess what "as viewed" means?
Do you have the details in writing?

If you have moved in, your tenancy has been created so you are a bit in a bind.
If not, refuse to move in to avoid creating the tenancy.

Simon_wh1t

There is an inventory, which we received on moving in date (after paying first month rent and deposit). However, this only details the items which the landlord has left, not those which we have expected to have in the property.

Should also note, that we have obviously challenged the contents of the inventory and are awaiting a response

AdrianC

Simon_wh1t wrote: »

The property was used as the landlords home previously, however when moving out has removed a substantial amount of furniture (lounge furniture, outdoor furniture, bedroom furniture) leaving us with a very sparse property.

Was it advertised as furnished or unfurnished? Unfurnished is default for a let.

If somebody was in residence at the time, you'd _expect_ a lot more stuff (yes, furniture, not just "trinkets") to be present than once they'd vacated, whether they were landlord or another tenant.

Do you not have your own furniture? Is this the first time you've rented a property?

jjlandlord

Simon_wh1t wrote: »

There is an inventory, which we received on moving in date (after paying first month rent and deposit). However, this only details the items which the landlord has left, not those which we have expected to have in the property.

So you're saying that what "as seen" actually means is just based on your recollections, and those of the landlord, and that you have moved in.

If landlord won't budge, you're not going to achieve much I'm afraid.

Simon_wh1t

Not exactly - I have photographic evidence of what the property looked like when viewed - so the property I am paying for should fairly closely resemble the photos I have taken.

Not the first time I've rented, but have always had properties which were pretty much complete

jjlandlord

Simon_wh1t wrote: »

Not exactly - I have photographic evidence of what the property looked like when viewed

Well, you know the documents you have and you have been given the relevant advice.
It's for you to act now.