Rental Agents ridiculous!

Nobbie1967

Carl31 wrote: »

This whole professional cleaning thing annoys me, LL can get their houses cleaned and deduct it from their income tax calculation as an allowable expenses, then try and take the cost from their tenant too

I think you've misunderstood the tax system. You can only claim tax relief on an expense that has not been covered by the tenant. Tax relief isn't free money, it's just not paying tax on income that's merely covering your costs.

dodger1

Pixie5740 wrote: »

If there wasn't a problem with tenants' deposits being returned, why was deposit protection legislation brought in?

Nobody is saying there wasn't a problem, just not on the scale you appear to think. If just 10% of landlords were rogues then it was correct to legislate against them.

Guest101

dodger1 wrote: »

Nobody is saying there wasn't a problem, just not on the scale you appear to think. If just 10% of landlords were rogues then it was correct to legislate against them.

Uh?? 10% is huge!

I think pixie wouldn't have even imagined such a high number. And I agreed with him proportion to any numbers

dodger1

Guest101 wrote: »

Uh?? 10% is huge!

I think pixie wouldn't have even imagined such a high number. And I agreed with him proportion to any numbers

As pixie stated " When I first started renting in 2000 it was generally accepted that as a tenant I was never going to see my deposit again."

I think never would be a lot higher than 10%.

Pixie5740

Where are you getting your 10% from? It's just a number you plucked from thin air.

My never is based on my personal experience of renting from 2001 to 2007. I never successfully got my deposits back as my landlords treated the deposit like their money. Many of my friends took to not paying the final month's rent because, based on their own personal experiences, the chances of getting their deposits back were slim to none.

Things have improved since then and I have found it easier to get my full deposit back when there is not a letting agent involved.

dodger1

Pixie5740 wrote: »

Where are you getting your 10% from? It's just a number you plucked from thin air.

My never is based on my personal experience of renting from 2001 to 2007. I never successfully got my deposits back as my landlords treated the deposit like their money. Many of my friends took to not paying the final month's rent because, based on their own personal experiences, the chances of getting their deposits back were slim to none.

Things have improved since then and I have found it easier to get my full deposit back when there is not a letting agent involved.

Yes of course it is, it was just to show why legislation was brought in. It could just as easily be 1% which also would be have been a good enough figure for legislation. I was simply answering your question as to why legislation was needed and pointing out that it didn't need let's say a majority of landlords falsely withholding deposits.

Yes your "never" was based on personal experience which is why "never" shouldn't have been used as a generalisation. My experience is totally opposite to yours but I realise that's just my experience and not necessarily a general thought. My only argument with you is that it was generally thought that a deposit wouldn't be returned, it wasn't. Some people would agree and some wouldn't.

jjlandlord

The courts have always existed, and in most cases it would have been simple enough to get the deposit back through courts.

The issue, I think, was that many people didn't know how to sue or were not willing to, and enforcement may be an additional issue. In addition the government was looking (and still is) at ways to lower the load on courts.

Edit:
1% is certainly not good enough for specific legislation...

mrginge

dodger1 wrote: »

What utter rubbish, that has never been generally accepted (unless you just mean by you). Most landlords as well as tenants are and have always been pretty decent. Of course there are the minority who are little more than crooks, perhaps you only rented from them.

On the previous page Pixie threw a wobbler at this comment.

Now it appears that Pixie and his/her 'friends' are the actual sample for this generally accepted non-returned deposit.

Of course, since these evil landlords were going to be short of a months rent its no wonder that they didn't return a deposit.
Also nice that they would then be out of pocket if the whiter-than-white Pixie had caused any damage that would warrant a deduction.

So using the Pixie logic, perhaps, since it seems to be 'generally accepted' that tenants should simply not pay their last months rent, we should have introduced legislation to allow LLs to boot people out with no notice if they failed to pay their final months rent?
Or is that not fair?

Pixie5740

I have never not paid or withheld my rent. However, as I said, some of my friends started doing. The reason they started doing it is because they weren't getting any, never mind some of their deposits back despite not causing damage and ensuring the properties were spotless when being handed back. How do I know they were spotless? I know this as my friends and I helped each other out when we were moving.

If I knew then what I know now I would have taken previous landlords to court in an attempt to get my money back. Now, thankfully there are the deposit schemes which go some way to protecting tenants and their money. Much in the same way that those landlords who didn't receive the full amount of rent could have taken my friends to court but to the best of my knowledge they never did.