End of tenancy charges

jake_jones99

Van_Girl said:

I think replacing the toilet seat after 4 years should absolutely be paid for by the landlord, it is normal wear and tear, and I think the deposit scheme would agree

I'd challenge on both counts as I think they're both ridiculous

(former letting agent who wouldn't have dreamed of being such a d**k)

Edit to say, I just remembered one property where I replaced the toilet seat 3 times in a year. God knows what they were doing, but it was a HMO where every tenant was lovely and paid the rent on time, so I just replaced them. Taught me to buy better quality!

Update: 

The landlord replied and asks again for the same charges. About the toilet seat they said "Toilet seat removed and fixings missing. Required purchase of new toilet seat and fitting". So yes, I didn't keep the broken plastic screws. However I don't see how it's my fault that plastic screws broke after 4 years.

Same for the limescale situation. When can I start raising a dispute? I will probably do it already.

jake_jones99

If I raise a dispute, can the landlord increase charges and bring up different reasons for the charges?

Nearlyold

jake_jones99 said:

Robbo66 said:

So in the four years you lived there you never put any descaler/toilet cleaner or bleach in the toilet

I put bleach regularly when cleaning.

Bleach does not remove limescale to any great effect, it just makes it whiter.

This is the stuff to use HG toilet cleaner gel super powerful | Toilet bowl cleaner it costs about £6 a bottle and is very effective.

It's our go to toilet cleaning product for our rental properties

jake_jones99

Nearlyold said:

jake_jones99 said:

Robbo66 said:

So in the four years you lived there you never put any descaler/toilet cleaner or bleach in the toilet

I put bleach regularly when cleaning.

Bleach does not remove limescale to any great effect, it just makes it whiter.

This is the stuff to use HG toilet cleaner gel super powerful | Toilet bowl cleaner it costs about £6 a bottle and is very effective.

It's our go to toilet cleaning product for our rental properties

Which makes me think that you don't expect the tenant to do it.

elsien

Robbo66 said:

chanz4 said:

lime scale is caused by the water, and not yourself

Nothing to stop a tenant putting a descaling agent in the toilet during the normal cleaning process

tenants do need to take some responsibility in how they return properties. A broken toilet seat is a justifiable deduction and £20 is not an unreasonable amount. The cost is not to just cover the purchase price but also someone having to go and buy the toilet seat and the time it takes to fit

Charging to replace a four year old very cheap toilet seat is a reasonable deduction? 

saajan_12

jake_jones99 said:

Robbo66 said:

chanz4 said:

lime scale is caused by the water, and not yourself

Nothing to stop a tenant putting a descaling agent in the toilet during the normal cleaning process

tenants do need to take some responsibility in how they return properties. A broken toilet seat is a justifiable deduction and £20 is not an unreasonable amount. The cost is not to just cover the purchase price but also someone having to go and buy the toilet seat and the time it takes to fit

I did and couldn't do it within reasonable time. The landlord said they used white vinegar. Anyway, the check in photo does not show the condition of the bottom of the bowl, the water surface is covered in foam.

You're responsible for normal cleaning, including using vinegar, etc to remove the limescale. If you ran out of time, that's on you, should have started earlier or maintained it better through the tenancy. Your only saving grace is potentially that its hidden in the check in photo.. not a slam dunk, as the foam is probably from cleaning, suggesting it was cleaned at the start. 

chanz4 said:

lime scale is caused by the water, and not yourself

 
Nice try, and dust is caused by the air. Either way, its up to the tenant to clean.  

jake_jones99 said:

Van_Girl said:

I think replacing the toilet seat after 4 years should absolutely be paid for by the landlord, it is normal wear and tear, and I think the deposit scheme would agree

I'd challenge on both counts as I think they're both ridiculous

(former letting agent who wouldn't have dreamed of being such a d**k)

Edit to say, I just remembered one property where I replaced the toilet seat 3 times in a year. God knows what they were doing, but it was a HMO where every tenant was lovely and paid the rent on time, so I just replaced them. Taught me to buy better quality!

Update: 

The landlord replied and asks again for the same charges. About the toilet seat they said "Toilet seat removed and fixings missing. Required purchase of new toilet seat and fitting". So yes, I didn't keep the broken plastic screws. However I don't see how it's my fault that plastic screws broke after 4 years.

Same for the limescale situation. When can I start raising a dispute? I will probably do it already.

Missing is different to broken.
- If the LL can show it was there at the start and gone at the end of the tenancy, they have fulfilled their burden of proof. If there's a particular defence eg it broke through W&T, then that would be for you to demonstrate. Did you even report it during the tenancy? Picture of it broken? Did it coincidentally break on the last day?
Toilet seats usually last longer than 4 years, so if its missing then a charge for the depreciated cost for replacement + fitting seems valid. 

jake_jones99

saajan_12 said:

jake_jones99 said:

Robbo66 said:

chanz4 said:

lime scale is caused by the water, and not yourself

Nothing to stop a tenant putting a descaling agent in the toilet during the normal cleaning process

tenants do need to take some responsibility in how they return properties. A broken toilet seat is a justifiable deduction and £20 is not an unreasonable amount. The cost is not to just cover the purchase price but also someone having to go and buy the toilet seat and the time it takes to fit

I did and couldn't do it within reasonable time. The landlord said they used white vinegar. Anyway, the check in photo does not show the condition of the bottom of the bowl, the water surface is covered in foam.

You're responsible for normal cleaning, including using vinegar, etc to remove the limescale. If you ran out of time, that's on you, should have started earlier or maintained it better through the tenancy. Your only saving grace is potentially that its hidden in the check in photo.. not a slam dunk, as the foam is probably from cleaning, suggesting it was cleaned at the start. 

chanz4 said:

lime scale is caused by the water, and not yourself

 
Nice try, and dust is caused by the air. Either way, its up to the tenant to clean.  

jake_jones99 said:

Van_Girl said:

I think replacing the toilet seat after 4 years should absolutely be paid for by the landlord, it is normal wear and tear, and I think the deposit scheme would agree

I'd challenge on both counts as I think they're both ridiculous

(former letting agent who wouldn't have dreamed of being such a d**k)

Edit to say, I just remembered one property where I replaced the toilet seat 3 times in a year. God knows what they were doing, but it was a HMO where every tenant was lovely and paid the rent on time, so I just replaced them. Taught me to buy better quality!

Update: 

The landlord replied and asks again for the same charges. About the toilet seat they said "Toilet seat removed and fixings missing. Required purchase of new toilet seat and fitting". So yes, I didn't keep the broken plastic screws. However I don't see how it's my fault that plastic screws broke after 4 years.

Same for the limescale situation. When can I start raising a dispute? I will probably do it already.

Missing is different to broken.
- If the LL can show it was there at the start and gone at the end of the tenancy, they have fulfilled their burden of proof. If there's a particular defence eg it broke through W&T, then that would be for you to demonstrate. Did you even report it during the tenancy? Picture of it broken? Did it coincidentally break on the last day?
Toilet seats usually last longer than 4 years, so if its missing then a charge for the depreciated cost for replacement + fitting seems valid. 

The broken plastic screws are missing, which would have been useless anyway. 

Yes it was reported during the tenancy. It was reported during one of the last days, but that has nothing to do with whether I'm liable for it or not.

You say it's for me to demonstrate wear and tear. How would one prove that a plastic screw broke through wear and tear in 4 years, and that I didn't wake up one day full of rage and ripped off the toilet seat? I guess it's normal common sense, and if necessary the dispute team can use their common sense to work it out.

In 4 years, the landlord only had to come once to fix the heaters, the second time he sent me a YouTube link and I dismantled and fixed them myself. He changed once the washing machine that stopped working. And that's it. In 4 years. And now we're arguing over a plastic toilet seat. As I said, the dispute team will use their common sense.

jake_jones99

It's over. Upon repeatedly asking the landlord to explain point by point why the charges are justifiable, and not just negotiate as during a house sale, they finally dropped their charges from £50 to £20, essentially not charging for the toilet seat and some other thing. I think tenants should stop paying a penny more than they are liable for. The last message from the landlord was "the landlord is fed up discussing such petty amounts". If it's so petty I wonder why he tried to charge it in the first place. There is this general idea floating in the air that the landlords are always "owed" something at the end, and if the tenant doesn't pay then they are being stingy.