Is stained Vinyl wear and tear?

Chris_121

Hello
I recently moved out of my flat after living there for 3 years and did not receive my full deposit back. One of the situations I feel I have ground to dispute but the other I´m not so sure.

The first is repainting the hallway they are charging me 20% of £190 so £38, I have pictures of the hallway I sent to them when I first moved in with scratches over the walls, black marks, and cracks, plus even if they did paint over anything it would be wear and tear?

And the second is 20% of £240 so £48, to replace a vinyl floor which was stained by bathmats. When i moved in on the inventory it said the Vinyl and hallway were in good condition, I have proof the hallway was not however, the Vinyl in the bathroom i have no pictures of and after leaving a bathmat there for 3 years it has stained by me, is there any way I could get away with wear and tear? or is it right I pay the £48 to help replace the flooring?

Also what is the best approach with this kind of thing? I could understand the Vinyl being stained but definitely do not feel I should pay for them to paint walls with the state they were in when I first moved in.

Thanks

AdrianC

You didn't move the bathmat once in three years? Not even to wash it...?

Just let the deposit arbitration sort it out.

Chris_121

Yeah, but it was already stained the first time, the mat was damp most of the time. So just got on with it, did not think too much of it until now.

yksi

Wear and tear does not cover damage caused by you. Regardless of whether there were marks on the walls, if you have made things worse and added damage, you are responsible for putting things back to how they were when you commenced the tenancy. If you don't, the landlord is entitled to withold part of the deposit, to do this. It sounds as if this landlord is actually being very fair and acknowledging that only some of the wall damage was by you, and is only charging you your share of the repainting cost.

There is no question that floor stains caused by you are not wear and tear.

It's quite simple and clear, wear and tear only covers things wearing out by normal, careful use. As in, if you wore out the vinyl flooring, because your feet actually wore it out by the ordinary act of walking on the floor, then you are not responsible for repair. But unfortunately, your action caused the stain, so you caused the damage and you are responsible.

There is no logical way for paint to "wear out" unless it's so old that it's flaking off by itself, or the sunlight changed the colour. Any marks you've personally added to that hallway, by carelessness or wilfully, are damage.

It's unfortunate that the stains happened and you didn't notice, but sadly that's life. You didn't do too badly from this landlord all up.

SmashedAvacado

If you put an additional mark on an already marked wall, i cannot see how you can be liable - as there is no loss to the landlord. The landlord is not redecorating because of anything you have done. The property was in need of redecoration when you moved in, and it still is now.

Chris_121

Thanks, I assumed the Vinyl would be my fault but just wanted to make sure i was being charged correctly and was in the wrong before accepting it and it turns out to be counted as wear and tear.

As for the hallway I feel we left it in the same condition and anything we may have added is very minor and nothing compared to what was there before, even so why would they only charge us for the hallway and not the rest of the flat? as if whatever they found in the hallway would have also been the same for all rooms? £190 to paint a small hallway seems like a lot too, they have their own maintenance and decorator teams so how do they even work these charges out?

yksi

SmashedAvacado wrote: »

If you put an additional mark on an already marked wall, i cannot see how you can be liable - as there is no loss to the landlord. The landlord is not redecorating because of anything you have done. The property was in need of redecoration when you moved in, and it still is now.

This isn't quite right - there is a point where a lightly scuffed or marked wall is still "good" and doesn't require redecorating, and there is a point where it requires repainting because there are too many marks. Now whether it has really reached that point is arguable (and the tenant doesn't agree) but just because something wasn't perfect to begin with doesn't mean that it's ok to add to the damage or that there's no financial hit from that. A wall covered in marks will not attract the same rental price as one with only a few.

The agent might have charged part of the cost to the previous tenant for the few marks that were already there, so that each tenant paid their fair share. We don't know, and there isn't really a way to find out.

OP you might be right that the price is over the top though! Hopefully a painter and decorator can give you some info on what it should cost.

Lesson learned... pick up your bathmat (I really wish my housemates would do the same, they get nasty when they never dry) and when you move into a new place, take a thousand photos.

sal_III

SmashedAvacado wrote: »

If you put an additional mark on an already marked wall, i cannot see how you can be liable - as there is no loss to the landlord. The landlord is not redecorating because of anything you have done. The property was in need of redecoration when you moved in, and it still is now.

You are liable for any differences between the check in and checkout condition that is considered damage. Scuff marks on walls are widely accepted as damage to the wall.

The fact that the wall was not in perfect condition to begin with doesn't remove liability, just limits it - Seeing that OP is only charged 20% this has been taken into account.

Ditto the stained floor, wear marks on heavy traffic areas or from placing furniture long term are fine. Stains caused by the bathmat, not so much. Again the LL is only apportioning 20%

Your best bet is to use the TDS arbitration and hope for the best. But IMHO based on the limited information provided the LL demands are fair both in terms of quoted cost for the repairs and only apportioning 20% to you.

ACG

They are charging you a percentage of the cost for the damage you caused... I cant help but think that sounds fair. I understand you not wanting to pay but at the same time why should someone else cover the cost of damage you caused?

I am surprised they are not trying to charge you more for the vinyl personally.

DigForVictory

If they're only asking 20% I'd grit my teeth, smile, accept it & move on. Planning to photo document the new place carefully lest the next landlord isn't as reasonable...