Deposit issue with landlord over locksmith costs

LMC79

DottieDam... Yes the WhatsApp was his mobile number but he used someone locally for maintenance and never said what to do if he couldn’t be reached.

I agree 40 minutes isn’t long but with a fractious tired, hungry 10 week old baby we just needed to get in. We have no family nearby. He called back just after we contacted the locksmith but he didn’t offer an alternative or tell us to cancel.

I think I’m just weary of going down TDS route for them to say 50:50 as it’s the easy option?

saajan_12

LMC79 wrote: »

Sorry for long post but trying to give details to help!

We have been in a rental property we found through a letting agency, but was managed by the landlord. The deposit is under TDS facilitated by the letting agent. The landlord has only ever provided his mobile number (preferring contact via WhatsApp) and work email address and no emergency contacts. - does the tenancy agreement state an 'address for serving notices'? Also is the whatsapp number not an emergency contact method (as opposed to snail mail which is the only legally required contact) He’s only ever dealt with emergency issues (bathroom leak) which was during working hours and has ignored any general maintenance items we’ve reported (leaking guttering, damaged fence etc).

About 2 months ago the lock failed. My husband and I had both our sets of keys with us and neither worked. Apart from needing to pull the door towards you to release the lock (it had been this way since moving in) there was no prior warning the lock was going to fail. - if there's no clear cause of the failure, it would depend on what the deposit scheme / judge believes on a balance of probabilities.. you could move that in your favour with an expert opinion, else its a toss up. We were locked out at 6.30pm with our 10 week old baby. We called him (directly, via WhatsApp and messaged). We also tried the letting agent. We tried our neighbours (same landlord) to see if they had any other contact numbers which they didn’t. After 40 mins (of no response) we contacted a locksmith. - okay, that was your choice but if you're reporting damage, you have to give the LL time to reasonable time to get it repaired before taking over. 40 minutes is not reasonable. You could have gone to a friends / neighbours / library to avoid the call, even a cheap B&B and contact someone a locksmith emergency basis.

We paid the locksmith £280 and forwarded the invoice to the landlord (via email) which he ignored. So after 7 days I WhatsApp’d to say we would be reducing next months rent by the appropriate amount. A further 5 days later he responded to say he did not accept liability for the emergency call out as ‘we should have told him it was faulty to avoid the emergency call out fee - if he means contact before that day, then ignore. If he means you should have waited for him to fix that day, I agree. or used the back door’, therefore his proposal was to split 50:50. We responded immediately to say we did not accept this outlining our reasons and also stating he had only ever provided one back door key so it wasn’t feasible for us to take it out as if one person was at home they might not have a key for exit. - If you did have a back door key and the lock was working, then you had the ability to gain access, thus negating the emergency aspect. Being given one key is irrelevant, the property is let to you both as a unit, so you could have made a copy or coordinated so the last to leave takes the key.

He did not respond so I presumed it was settled. - why? no answer does not mean you're right. 5 weeks after this message we moved out and had the check out (no issues found), we asked for full return of the deposit and 10 days after this he then messaged to say he would like £140 withheld from the deposit for 50% of the lock. - really its for rent arrears as you underpaid rent. If you believe you have a claim for the cost of your locksmith bill due a fault with the property, you shoudl have claimed that separately.

We responded to say we disagreed and would enter a dispute for £140 with TDS. He then responded immediately (the first time he ever has!!) to say he wanted to withhold the full £280 - which he has never mentioned in the whole 10 weeks since it happened. - You underpaid rent by £280 so he is entitled to claim that from the deposit. He may have offered to split the difference and only claim £140 to have it settled quickly, but if you disagree with that then you can't hold the LL to the offer.

Whilst on the grand scheme of things £140 is not the biggest amount I think it is a matter of principle. We don’t think this is a deposit issue, it was nothing to do with the state of the house on checkout. - Of course its a deposit issue, the deposit is there to cover any amounts owing if you do not fulfill the tenant obligations ofthe tenancy: including paying full rent and not damaging the property. You may have a counter claim for the locksmith bill, but that doesn't stop the LL resolving either the rent at least via the deposit scheme. The failure of the lock was nothing to do with us, as the keys were intact not lost etc. Therefore it is a general wear and tear/ maintenance issue. - I would be inclined to agree wiht you, but that's a matter for the deposit scheme / judge to decide. The question is whether the LL is liable for your massive £280 bill or should have been given the chance to repair at a more reasonable, non emergency cost. He also failed as a landlord to provide an emergency number/ solution leaving us with no alternative but to have an emergency call out. - He did provide a contact number, but a 40 minute deadline is unreasonable. I've never heard of a management service guaranteeing to respond within that timeframe.

I also feel it is unethical that he is holding us ‘over a barrel’ so to speak on the deposit. Also the fact he had no contact for 6 weeks, knowing he was planning to try it on with the deposit. - He did contact you, he stated he did not agree with the deduction from rent. If you chose to do it anyway, what would be the point in going back and forth.. Given the deposit would be dealt with just over a month later, that sounds like the best way to get a 3rd party to arbitrate.

Where do we stand? Should we fight it or let it go at 50%?

Re liability for the lock- in the absence of an expert opinion, its debatable who should be liable and a judge / deposit scheme would decide on a balance of probabilities. If BOTH keys didn't work and there was no debris etc inside the lock, I'd be inclined to agree it should be fixed / replaced at the LL's cost.

Re liability to reimburse your £280 If you're claiming a cost of the LL's failure to respond to fix the lock within 40 min, you had a responsibility to mitigate your costs. You could have
- kept and used the back door key (so you did not need to be locked out)
- waited longer than 40 min for the LL to respond (take the baby to a neighbours / friends / library / restaurant)
- shopped around for a less than £280 charge
-..

Re deposit deduction You underpaid rent which you don't have a right to, so the LL can certainly deduct the full £280 underpayment from the deposit for this. Just because the LL gave you an offer to settle it quickly does not bind only him and give you a free option. The TDS may entertain your counter response for your locksmith bill, or force you to claim in court.

silvercar

LMC79 wrote: »

G_M... Yes the door still bows and lock is tight. We can prove this.

Silvercar... We did ring around and the initial call out charge was only £70 to gain access. Which seemed reasonable it was the additional when he was there which escalated over which we had little control at the time. New baby just wanted to get it sorted and her to bed. The lock was the same since we moved in (tight and needed to be pulled to open) so there was no change to report?

So you had the option of just using this locksmith to gain access for £70. Sounds to me that the locksmith should have made clear there woukd be extra charges when you called. You certainly had the option of only paying the access for £70 and contacting the landlord for authority to spend more on lock replacement, possibly the next day.

I can understand that all you want to do is get it fixed, particularly when you have a new baby to look after. Then again I wonder whether you were less than careful in agreeing extra costs when you expected it to be reimbursed. Certainly it is easier to class the £70 as necessary for emergency access than the rest of the £280.

Thrugelmir

Given all the facts and your own reasoning. Your landlord agreed to pay 50% of the cost. Which in broad terms seemed a reasonable base for point for negotiation. However you disputed the whole amount. Which would appear to have upset them. An expectation of somebody being available on the end of the phone on an 24/7 basis because your baby was tired and fractious isn't really justification in my mind. As £280 is a lot of money for the job of changing a door lock.

lookstraightahead

If this had been me ... I would have found a cheaper locksmith. I would ask the landlord to pay but say it wasn't urgent. I would expect the money as it was a dodgy lock. I would never have taken it out of my rent. That's like not paying your mortgage because the bank messed up a credit card bill - two completely separate things.