Can I win a case if estate agent's claims are not supported by evidence?

srh1

Hi All,

My estate agent wants to make deductions from my deposit. The old inventory says that the carpet e.g. was professionally cleaned and I cleaned it myself which the agent is not happy with so I think I will lose money on that but they're also making a claim where they found dust or stains somewhere but in the previous inventory/check in report this was not reported. There were certain places in the flat that I never used or occupied so didn't even realise how dirty they were. I did sign the report and sent it back which means I only agreed to what was on the report.

Since the estate agent can't back up all the claims with historic photographs can their claim on some parts be rejected? Has anyone experienced this before?

Also if we go through court for the deductions from my deposit can I also combine this with my own claim asking for compensation for things they did not repair on time or at all or would I have to do that separately?

Thank you.

G_M

srh1 wrote: »

Hi All,

My [STRIKE]estate[/STRIKE]letting agent wants to make deductions from my deposit. The old inventory (old? what does this mean?)says that the carpet e.g. was professionally cleaned and I cleaned it myself (which does it say - it can't say both!) which the agent is not happy with (??? agent is not happy with what the old inventory says? Was the inventory agreed & signed by them and you when you moved in?) so I think I will lose money on that (I'm lost. Why?) but they're also making a claim where they found dust or stains somewhere but in the previous inventory/check in report this was not reported. (again, unclear. So the 'previous' (original?) inventory mentions no dust, but the check out inspection does report dust?) There were certain places in the flat that I never used or occupied (why is this relevant? You are responsible for the whole property whether you use it or not) so didn't even realise how dirty they were.(who do you blame for this) I did sign the report and sent it back which means I only agreed to what was on the report. (the original inventory? the check out report? And what WAS on the report that a) you agreed to but b) you now contest?)

Since the [STRIKE]estate[/STRIKE]letting agent can't back up all the claims (as you have not clearly identified what the original inventory says, what the check out report says, and what you contest, we cannot comment) with historic photographs photos are helpful for either side to suport their claims, but not essential can their claim on some parts be rejected? You can reject any claim you wish. Whether the claim is justified is another question. Has anyone experienced this before?
As it is so unclear what you are expeiencing it is impossible to answer this.

Also if we go through courtWhy not use the deposit arbitration process? for the deductions from my deposit can I also combine this with my own claim asking for compensation for things they did not repair on time or at all or would I have to do that separately?

Thank you.

Any claim you make for non-repairs is entirely seperate. And you would have to prove
a) that they knew (ie you reported it properly
b) that they acted unreasonably AND
c) that you suffered a verifiable financial loss as a result.

Note: I suggest you re-post with much clearer information.

saajan_12

Perhaps a bit harsh, if you substitute 'old' / 'previous' inventory with check in inventory, it does start to make sense.

srh1 wrote: »

Hi All,

My estate agent wants to make deductions from my deposit. The old inventory says that the carpet e.g. was professionally cleaned and I cleaned it myself which the agent is not happy with so I think I will lose money on that I assume you mean the check in inventory said it was professionally cleand and on move out you cleaned yourself. However what matters is the change in cleanliness, so if you cleaned to the same standard as when you moved in, the landlord has suffered no loss and cannot sue for being offended that you didn't pay someone. Ofcourse the can claim for the cost of cleaning areas that you left dirtier than before. but they're also making a claim where they found dust or stains somewhere but in the previous inventory/check in report this was not reported. There were certain places in the flat that I never used or occupied so didn't even realise how dirty they were. I did sign the report and sent it back which means I only agreed to what was on the report. The landlord needs to prove the condition has deteriorated, and an inventory when you moved in, signed by you is pretty good proof. You could counter this with your own photos or emails notifying them of stains from when you moved in for example

Since the estate agent can't back up all the claims with historic photographs can their claim on some parts be rejected? Has anyone experienced this before?

Also if we go through court for the deductions from my deposit Is your deposit registered? Far easier and initially cheaper to go through the deposit scheme. A court may query why you didn't try this first. can I also combine this with my own claim asking for compensation for things they did not repair on time or at all or would I have to do that separately?What kind of things did they not repair on time? Shelter outlines a process to deal with late / outstanding repairs, while you are living IN the property. At this stage, I doubt you'd get compensation for 'inconvenience' etc, at best you might be paid back actual monetary losses.

Thank you.

Guest101

srh1 wrote: »

Hi All,

My estate agent wants to make deductions from my deposit. - He or she is not your agent in any sense, they are a letting agent for the landlord. Your landlord wants to make a deduction. The old inventory says that the carpet e.g. was professionally cleaned and I cleaned it myself which the agent is not happy with so I think I will lose money on that - Is it cleaned to the same standard? but they're also making a claim where they found dust or stains somewhere but in the previous inventory/check in report this was not reported. - Did you take pictures? There were certain places in the flat that I never used or occupied so didn't even realise how dirty they were. - that's your problem. I did sign the report and sent it back which means I only agreed to what was on the report. - Correct.

Since the estate agent can't back up all the claims with historic photographs can their claim on some parts be rejected? Has anyone experienced this before? - It depends on the evidence both parties present.

Also if we go through court for the deductions from my deposit can I also combine this with my own claim asking for compensation for things they did not repair on time or at all or would I have to do that separately? - I doubt you are entitled to compensation, and im unclear why this is going to court.

Thank you.

Have you been through the ADR process?

G_M

saajan_12 wrote: »

Perhaps a bit harsh, if you substitute 'old' / 'previous' inventory with check in inventory, it does start to make sense.

Perhaps a bit harsh, but if we start guessing what posters mean and substituting our words for theirs, the advice we give becomes as unreliabe as our guesses.

For example OP might well be referring to the previous tenant's check-out report, or check-in inventory. We have certainly had cases here where this has happened and tenants (and landlords!) have tried to rely on 'old' evidence from a previous tenancy.

saajan_12

G_M wrote: »

Perhaps a bit harsh, but if we start guessing what posters mean and substituting our words for theirs, the advice we give becomes as unreliabe as our guesses.

For example OP might well be referring to the previous tenant's check-out report, or check-in inventory. We have certainly had cases here where this has happened and tenants (and landlords!) have tried to rely on 'old' evidence from a previous tenancy.

I do agree, maybe then clarify what assumptions you're making and then answer based on that.. In this case by the fact that OP seems to have agreed to the 'old' report as being representative of the condition, it's fairly likely to be (as effective as) a check-in. But I agree it's a slippery slope.

srh1

G_M wrote: »

Any claim you make for non-repairs is entirely seperate. And you would have to prove
a) that they knew (ie you reported it properly
b) that they acted unreasonably AND
c) that you suffered a verifiable financial loss as a result.

Note: I suggest you re-post with much clearer information.

Old = check in inventory/property condition report upon moving in.

To clarify, the check in report did not state the exact condition of the property i.e it missed out bits here and there and the check out report carried out by a different person considered these bits. These also include some of the areas within the property that I had to eventually clean myself after moving in since the letting agent refused to respond in reasonable time. In short common letting agent tactic to make profit off a tenant's deposit. By arguing that the check in inventory had missing information and being happy with going to court I was able to claim all my deposit back. Going to court was also the letting agent's idea.

Thanks for your input.

Guest101

srh1 wrote: »

Old = check in inventory/property condition report upon moving in.

To clarify, the check in report did not state the exact condition of the property i.e it missed out bits here and there and the check out report carried out by a different person considered these bits. These also include some of the areas within the property that I had to eventually clean myself after moving in since the letting agent refused to respond in reasonable time. In short common letting agent tactic to make profit off a tenant's deposit. By arguing that the check in inventory had missing information and being happy with going to court I was able to claim all my deposit back. Going to court was also the letting agent's idea.

Thanks for your input.

So you've been to court?


Letting agents don't keep the deposit, so they have no interest in screwing you out of it.


Who is it you're suing? or did sue?

srh1

Guest101 wrote: »

So you've been to court?


Letting agents don't keep the deposit, so they have no interest in screwing you out of it.


Who is it you're suing? or did sue?

no I don't think they wanted the headache of going to court or they didn't think they would win.

In my case a protection scheme held my deposit but deductions go back to the letting agent or the landlord. Quoting an excessive price to fix something that was broken/not cleaned from the start also seemed to be the case in my situation. So yes letting agents can screw you.

I'm not suing anybody at the moment since I have got all my deposit back.

FBaby

To clarify, the check in report did not state the exact condition of the property i.e it missed out bits here and there and the check out report carried out by a different person considered these bits.

Many check in inventory will specify somewhere that unless stated in the report, the condition of the house is deemed in good order, or something of the sort. Are you sure there is nothing in it to that effect?

Why going to court? Didn't you go through the deposit process? Or is it that you did but the landlord is now suing you because they believe they can get yet more?

FBaby

Posting before reading your last post, so understand there is not court battle yet.