Anybody else been taken to court by ex landlord?

tacpot12

G_M wrote: »

The length of time, and rent payment history, are irrelevant.
...

I would suggest the length of time the tenant rented the property is somewhat relevant. If they was there for four years, and the carpets weren't new when they moved in, after four years, the carpets may have needed replacing, but only due to wear and tear.

Similarly, if there was a couple of bits of Blutack on one bedroom wall, surely a court would regard this as reasonable wear and tear - there is no need to redecorate a whole wall, even if the Blutack grease has stained the wall, you just dig out the stained plaster and refill with Polyfilla. Even a wallpapered wall can have a new bit of wallpaper installed easily enough. On the other hand, if there are many blobs of Blutack, the amount of work to individually patch each blob becomes excessive, and repapering the whole wall is necessary.

The worktops in one of my rented properties are 20 years old, and are in very good condition. They can last a long time if treated property. If you have used sharp knives on the worksurface, without a chopping board, the worksurface will have been damaged and probably did need replacing prematurely if the scoring was deep enough as no amount of cleaning would stop germs from breeding in the cuts.

Comms69

Byrdsian wrote: »

His home was left in a disgusting state apparently and he’s never known such a dirty person... - Without context that phrase is meaningless



The main carpet downstairs was ‘too far gone’ and had to be replaced
- I did hire carpet cleaner but couldn’t get it to work. - How old was the carpet?



Lino in kitchen was ripped
- I admit accidentally done when removing washing machine. - ok so you owe for that, presumably it was a fair few years old. Lino life is 5-6 years realistically.



Everything else is wear and tear cleaned the whole house and have photos to show more than acceptable condition. - So why didn't you dispute this with the deposit protection service??



‘Scratch’ on bottom of oven so he ‘had to buy whole new unit’ £100 + - Not your problem, betterment
‘Scratches’ on work tops so all had to be replaced. - what kind of scratches?
- don’t recall any of these but used kitchen hundreds of times so possible. - well presumably you used it everyday, multiple times.
Upstairs of house dirty - wasn’t as I can prove. - great
Blu tak on wall of one bedroom so had to redecorate- unfortunately couldn’t get it off, my daughters’ room.
£200 to clean carpets apparently.

Was your deposit protected?

Comms69

Byrdsian wrote: »

Yes deposit was protected properly but don’t see relevance..
I didn’t receive an inventory, he just claims property was in ‘an immaculate condition ‘ when I moved in. This is only partly true.

Because the deposit protection scheme have arbitrators to decide what's a fair deduction. Did you use this service?

Comms69

anselld wrote: »

"Accidental" damage is not an excuse, it is still your fault. So it sounds like most of the damage you will be liable for. The cleaning may be debated depending what the pictures show.

However, the main thing the L cannot claim is "new for old". So for example you may be liable for carpet and lino replacement but he cannot charge the full price; he must only charge a proportion based on the age and expected life of the item and the condition at checkin.

The L is not obliged to use the deposit arbitration process but it may not look good in Court if he has refused. Did you request this?

Actually the LL is obliged to use the service if the tenant requests it. - at least in the sense that the deposit may be returned by default to the tenant if he refuses to engage in the process.

tacpot12

I suspect the DPS agreed with the landlord and awarded the landlord the full £600 deposit, but perhaps did not expect the landlord to take further action to recover any more money.

anselld

Comms69 wrote: »

Actually the LL is obliged to use the service if the tenant requests it. - at least in the sense that the deposit may be returned by default to the tenant if he refuses to engage in the process.

https://www.tenancydepositscheme.com/resources/files/What%20happens%20when%20the%20Court%20is%20involved%20in%20a%20tenancy%20deposit%20dispute.pdf

Both parties need to consent to use ADR.
If the full amount is disputed and ADR declined the scheme will not return the deposit until the Court decides.
It would only be returned to T if L completely ignored the scheme. That is not the same as actively declining to use ADR.

Byrdsian

I had no idea how the DPS worked and suppose have been bullied out of contesting it thus far. More concerned about being taken to court for £1500 for some dirty carpet and ripped Lino.

pimento

No inventory, eh?

How's he going to prove the "immaculate" condition when you moved in?

G_M

Byrdsian wrote: »

I had no idea how the DPS worked and suppose have been bullied out of contesting it thus far. More concerned about being taken to court for £1500 for some dirty carpet and ripped Lino.

You should have been given the 'Prescribed Information' when your tenancy started, explaining how the scheme works.

Comms69

anselld wrote: »

https://www.tenancydepositscheme.com/resources/files/What%20happens%20when%20the%20Court%20is%20involved%20in%20a%20tenancy%20deposit%20dispute.pdf

Both parties need to consent to use ADR.
If the full amount is disputed and ADR declined the scheme will not return the deposit until the Court decides.
It would only be returned to T if L completely ignored the scheme. That is not the same as actively declining to use ADR.

Well indeed, but as you say the courts will more or less automatically refuse to allow costs in such circumstances, so the LL would be onto a loser straight away