Yet another Landlor & deposit

Lyhtem

propertyrental said:

EssexHebridean said:

Presumably even if she did expect a deep clean, and one had been done prior to move in (which appears unlikely from the photos) this expectation would still need to be stated somewhere to make it contractual? (Purely an interested party question here) 

No. It's an implicit term in all tenancy contracts that the T will leave the property as they found it (or better).
Any clause added to the contract (eg for a deep clean) is meaningless and adds nothing.
Any clause not included is equally meaningless and subtracts nothing.

Leave the property at the end of the tenancy as it was at the start, less fair wear and tear. That's it. 

think when it comes to "Better" condition that's when tenant actually decides to do it out of good heart, otherwise landlord cant expect it to be better or deduct from deposit to make it better, as it would cause betterment which is obviously prohibited 

anyway update, dispute is in process, though she went with strategy of "let's try and push as many issues as possible and see what sticks" by her calculations she needs over 1300 to cover the cleaning painting etc. 

EssexHebridean said:

Presumably even if she did expect a deep clean, and one had been done prior to move in (which appears unlikely from the photos) this expectation would still need to be stated somewhere to make it contractual? (Purely an interested party question here) 

Unless one was done at the start of the tenancy, Landlord cant expect one at the end even if put on contract, currently it's sort of like one of banned fees BobT36 said:

Always makes me laugh when these landlords try to charge for a "deep clean". That should only be necessary if all the carpets, walls and appliances are HEAVILY soiled (which some people do leave). 
Quite often all it needs is a hoover and a dust, something a landlord should be doing anyway to prepare the place for the next tenant. 

It's like a hotel charging you extra for the cleaner prepping the rooms. They'd only do that if you heavily damaged them, not left them in a decent state and only needed a spruce up from normal use. 

that is exactly our case house was cleaned apart from mopping up the floors but again it would be considered as clean otherwise everything hoovered and dusted, EVEN THOUGH after we mooved out they were still fixing one of the bedrooms and bathrooms due to leak that happened just at the end of our tenancy, Leak that happened due to them skimping on plumbers and one of fittings in bathroom failed, so yeah they were cutting out and replacing plasterboards sanding painting etc but still expected us to pay for cleaning and painting said bedroom and bathroom  

Lyhtem

Time for an update and honestly i cant believe what I'm reading, case went through education process and we just got a decision which just seem bonkers 

Quoting decision 
"14 From review of the evidence I find as follows.
• At the start of the tenancy, the check in report describes a few cleaning issues. These included but were not limited to, light further cleaning required to some kitchen appliances. The report photographs supported these descriptions and showed some additional issues, including a few black wall marks that appeared to be mildew related.
• At the end of the tenancy, photographic evidence shows additional cleaning issues to the ones evidenced at the start of the tenancy. These included but were not limited to, grubby 5 marks on the décor, patio doors, and most windows, carpet stains, and further cleaning required for most kitchen and bathroom appliances, fixtures, and units. • Based on the evidence provided, I find that the overall cleanliness of the property deteriorated during the tenancy and that the tenant is liable for the additional property cleaning required to return it to its evidenced check in condition.
• The landlord has not provided evidence, such as a copy of a cleaning quotation, to support their claimed sum. However, on balance, I cannot find it unreasonable compared to market averages for cleaning a property of this size, including carpets and appliances.
 • As some check in cleaning issues were noted, to avoid betterment, on balance, I find a 90% contribution to the claimed cleaning cost reasonable to address the tenant’s liability.
 • I award the landlord £432.90 for property cleaning."

No receipt's provided, Receipt we provided for cleaning the property at the start was ignored, pictures were never provided by landlord and again landlord did not allow us to take any pictures during checkout AND some rooms were under renovation due to leak caused by landlord shoddy plumbing fixes of which pictures were provided to DPS 

15 From review of the evidence I find as follows.
• At the start of the tenancy, the check in report describes that the patio area was overall neat. The report photographs supported this description but showed some cleaning issues. These included but were not limited to, discolouration to the exterior walkways, and some light discolouration to a few stones in the rear property patio area.
 • The tenant has provided photographic evidence supporting their submission that the patio was jet washed during the tenancy. • At the end of the tenancy, photographic evidence shows additional discolouration to most stones in the patio and walkway areas. • Based on the evidence provided, I find that the overall cleanliness of the patio and exterior walkway deteriorated during the tenancy and that the tenant is liable for the additional cleaning required to return these areas to their evidenced check in condition.
 • The landlord has not provided evidence to support their claimed sum for jet washing the patio and exterior walkways. However, on balance, I cannot find it unreasonable compared to market average costs.
 • As some check in cleaning issues were noted, to avoid betterment, on balance, I find that a 75% contribution to the claimed cost is reasonable to address the tenant’s liability.
 • I award the landlord £93.75 for this claim.

Again No receipts, no pictures provided, apart from the ones we sent of patio being jet washed 3 months prior to checkout 

22 Having considered the evidence I find as follows.
• At the start of the tenancy, the check in report does not describe or show any issues with the laminate flooring. On balance, I find that it was in very good condition.
 • However, the report does describe some issues with the wall and door décor. These included but were not limited to, some raw plugs, nails, smudge marks, and areas of visible repair. The report photographs support these descriptions.
• At the end of the tenancy, photographic evidence shows some small chip marks and a small gauge on the lounge floor. 
• The report also describes and shows additional issues with the wall and door décor. These include but were not limited to, gauge marks on door frames, areas of beige wall stains, and areas of visible patch painting throughout the property walls. • On balance, I find that the condition of the lounge floor, walls, and doors, did deteriorate beyond reasonably expected fair wear and tear during the tenancy. I find that the tenant is liable for returning these areas to their evidenced check in condition.
• The landlord has not provided evidence to support their total claimed sum for damage.
• I have considered the check in condition of the floor, walls, and doors, the average expected lifespan of the floor and décor, the tenancy length, and the market average labour and material costs required to return these areas to their check in condition.
 • On balance, I cannot find the remaining available deposit sum unreasonable to address the tenant’s liability for the evidenced damage to the floor, walls, and doors.
 • I award the landlord £367.35 for this claim.

This one is just icing on a cake 
Floors were damaged and poorly installed at the start of tenancy which was noted in check in report and is clearly visible, yet again no receipts, no pictures that we got or anything like that, even though educator mentions damages on check in report he still claims damages were done by us 

seriously lost for words at this point and more than likely suspecting some foul play by landlord at this point 

any suggestions would be appreciated, is there anything we can do at this point?  

BobT36

"areas of visible patch painting throughout the property walls" 
Eh, unless the colours are terribly different, are they complaining that repairs were made? Even a homeowner would likely just patch up a filled hole or something, not re-paint the entire bloody wall. 

Also discolouration to stones... Are you meant to control the weather now? How's that not wear and tear? 

Very very strange, I'd have thought quotations would be demanded at least, can't imagine why they'd just award money like that without proof? 

If suspecting foul play, is this a report the LANDLORD has given to you, or something you can see directly in the deposit scheme's portal? I've never been through this so wouldn't know, but heavily surprised. 
If the former, send a Data Access request to the deposit scheme, demand to see the pictures etc etc. 

Lyhtem

BobT36 said:

"areas of visible patch painting throughout the property walls" 
Eh, unless the colours are terribly different, are they complaining that repairs were made? Even a homeowner would likely just patch up a filled hole or something, not re-paint the entire bloody wall. 

Also discolouration to stones... Are you meant to control the weather now? How's that not wear and tear? 

Very very strange, I'd have thought quotations would be demanded at least, can't imagine why they'd just award money like that without proof? 

If suspecting foul play, is this a report the LANDLORD has given to you, or something you can see directly in the deposit scheme's portal? I've never been through this so wouldn't know, but heavily surprised. 
If the former, send a Data Access request to the deposit scheme, demand to see the pictures etc etc. 

Ill give you better one, This is dispute decision from DPS adjudicator based on as they said The landlord has not provided evidence to support their total claimed sum for damage. and undated unstamped and unsigned pictures that landlord taken god knows when and where 

Mr.Generous

TripleH said:

Think it's "move out condition + fair wear and tear = move in condition"

The dispute service is there to rule primarily on what counts as 'fair'.

The problem is always people running things with their heart not their head. Some landlords impose their standards on others, some still see the deposit as their money (wonder how many see it as income when doing their taxes?)

Yeah right. And tenants never do more damage than the value of the bond either.

Lyhtem

Mr.Generous said:

TripleH said:

Think it's "move out condition + fair wear and tear = move in condition"

The dispute service is there to rule primarily on what counts as 'fair'.

The problem is always people running things with their heart not their head. Some landlords impose their standards on others, some still see the deposit as their money (wonder how many see it as income when doing their taxes?)

Yeah right. And tenants never do more damage than the value of the bond either.

Oh OCF they do, on that occasion though those raw plugs holes etc were fixed by me, same as other minor repair which was acknowledged by landlord and provided as evidence to DPS 

ThisIsWeird

You showed some photos earlier on. These were presumably either from the LL's condition report from when you moved in, or taken by you at that time? And I presume there are a lot more? If only you had replicated these on leaving...

What do you you mean by "the LL wouldn't allow It"?

Lyhtem

ThisIsWeird said:

You showed some photos earlier on. These were presumably either from the LL's condition report from when you moved in, or taken by you at that time? And I presume there are a lot more? If only you had replicated these on leaving...

What do you you mean by "the LL wouldn't allow It"?

she said plain and simple along with her "Enforcer" husband  that she forbids us to take any pictures as shell be doing it herself, 
yes it's stupid of us to not take them anyway, but we havent slept that night at all getting our stuff out and cleaning 

yes we uploaded full check in report along with supplementary photos of what wasn't included in report, which was all signed by Letting agents 

Lyhtem

Data Access request sent to DPS and got reply 

Thank you for your email.

We are sorry but the DPS resolution procedure does not include sending the evidence provided by the other party to you.

The DPS is not able to change the decision of the Adjudicator as the process is completely independent of outside influence, and is conducted entirely on the basis of the evidence submitted by Landlord and/or Tenant.

You agreed to the dispute being referred to adjudication in accordance with The DPS Terms and Conditions under The DPS DR Rules. As such, the outcome cannot be altered.

The Decision is final, binding and non-appealable in accordance with section 23(f) & (g) of our Terms and Conditions of service which states:

“The DR Decision is binding and cannot be appealed via the DR Procedure.”

Should you wish to pursue this further we advise that you seek independent legal advice with a view to recovering the Deposit directly from the other party.
Yours sincerely,

BobT36

Absolutely terrible service there, then. Why can't they show you the evidence??? You'd get to see it in a court so why not DPS? 
If it's directly from the scheme's adjudicator though then unless they're friends with the person, it rules out foul play and I don't think there's much you can do. 

They of course could have submitted pictures of an entirely different house, or from a previous tenant for all you know, but there's nothing you can do if they won't show you as it's not "your" data. Annoying. 

I think the only thing that would have saved you here is having your own pictures. Bit dodgy they prevented you from taking them.. but you could have done it the day beforehand. Problem is the scheme will go only on the evidence provided. They have some, you do not. 


Still though, "discolouration" of outside elements which is clearly wear and tear from weather etc, and accepting costs without any sort of quote is ridiculous..
Hope someone else can help.