Disputing rental deposit deductions?

ZCXXX

Hello, 

I've just bought a new flat and I'm currently trying to get the deposit back on my old rental. The landlady has come back with a few issues she wishes to deduct money for. Nothing major, and I'm happy to pay for a few of them outright, while there a few I can clearly dispute (damage already noted in check-in inventory). Before, I respond I'd like some advice on one issue round cleaning.

She's saying that there's is some mould on the bedroom window that the professional cleaner couldn't get rid off. As far as I understand it, the general consensus is that mould caused by structural issues is the landlord's responsibility and mould caused by a 'lifestyle' issue is the tenant's. I'm tempted to dispute paying for this because I think there were clear structural issues that may have caused it (a very deep tiled window casement that was always cold, and I didn't dry my clothes in it or do anything else I've heard exacerbate it), but I also didn't report it, as she was generally not very helpful on that stuff. My instinct is just to pay for it, but I wonder if I'd potentially be missing out if I didn't dispute it?

She is also saying that the flat is generally not clean enough. I did have it professionally cleaned when I moved out, but there is still some dust in cupboards that I emptied after the cleaner. 

I know he general advice is leave it as you found it, minus wear and tear, but that seems to always assume it was clean when you move in. But it wasn't. The inventory clearly states dust, debris, and an odour throughout, and there was also mould in the fridge/freezer and a full bin. 

I did ask the letting agent about it, who confirmed it wasn't professionally cleaned. It was in the inventory (apart from the bin), so I did know about it before I moved in, but I also feel she is asking for me to pay even for it to be cleaned to a higher standard than I found it.

I should add she's not deducting very much, and I don't want to get into anything protracted, especially as I should never have to deal with this again.  

I realise I may just be giving in to temptation to complain about a double standard when that may not be very helpful..But I also don't want to assume that it's not worth querying something. 

A sense check would be very helpful. Thanks

 

theartfullodger

Escalate to the deposit scheme dispute process.  Schemes brought in after years and years of landlords cheating tenants.

Which country? (Eg Wales, NI...)

Excellent guidance on Shelter (the experts) website 

MEM62

theartfullodger said:

Escalate to the deposit scheme dispute process.  

Absolutely this.  You will find the scheme favors the tennent.    

Countrysider

MEM62 said:

theartfullodger said:

Escalate to the deposit scheme dispute process.  

Absolutely this.  You will find the scheme favors the tennent.    

I wouldn't say the scheme(s) favour the tenant however the onus of proof is put on the landlord or agent, which they are often unable to do. 

The biggest issue will be when they don't engage with the process. The schemes are very generous in giving the landlord time to respond, and so there are numerous delays at each stage waiting for them to reply or acknowledge. Forget the '10 days' to reply rule as that's routinely ignored.

If the landlord cannot prove the deduction then you will get your money back however, it's a long game you'll need to play. It took me about 4 months to get my last deposit back from an uncommunicative agent. 

theartfullodger

MEM62 said:

theartfullodger said:

Escalate to the deposit scheme dispute process.  

Absolutely this.  You will find the scheme favors the tennent.    

Doubt it.  Probably be fair to tenant...

anselld

Not sure why everyone recommends immediate escallation.  The scheme is there to arbitrate if mutual agreement cannot be reached.  Plenty of Landlords are perfecty reasonable and will be prepared to listen to the points you have raised and perhaps modify their claim as a result.

Fine to escallate if agreement cannot be reached but discussion first.

The dispute process is fairly slow so another good reason to reach mutual agreement if possible.

MEM62

Countrysider said:

MEM62 said:

theartfullodger said:

Escalate to the deposit scheme dispute process.  

Absolutely this.  You will find the scheme favors the tennent.    

I wouldn't say the scheme(s) favour the tenant however the onus of proof is put on the landlord or agent, which they are often unable to do. 

The biggest issue will be when they don't engage with the process. The schemes are very generous in giving the landlord time to respond, and so there are numerous delays at each stage waiting for them to reply or acknowledge. Forget the '10 days' to reply rule as that's routinely ignored.

If the landlord cannot prove the deduction then you will get your money back however, it's a long game you'll need to play. It took me about 4 months to get my last deposit back from an uncommunicative agent. 

theartfullodger said:

MEM62 said:

theartfullodger said:

Escalate to the deposit scheme dispute process.  

Absolutely this.  You will find the scheme favors the tennent.    

Doubt it.  Probably be fair to tenant...

My experience is different.  My last tenant never ventilated the property property an dried laundry inside.  The moisture inside the flat was so extreme that the wallpaper was coming off the walls and the carpets were moldy.  When they eventually moved out (two days before the bailiff was due) the flat was so filthy it was not fit for human occupation.  (I could not even turn the boiler off as I could not bring myself the touch the heating controls) According the the pest control guy that I had to get in the cockroach infestation that they also left was at least six months old. 

I produced the check in report for this tenancy and check out reports for this and the two previous tenancies to show that there has been no previous history of damp / mold.  I provided invoices and estimates for all the renovations that were needed and even taking into account only part of the re-decoration costs because of wear and tear the total cost was around £4K.  The ruling of the dispute process was that I was allowed to keep £250 for 'cleaning' - a sum that did not even cover the cost of the exterminator. 

In short, the process shafted me.      

Choirgrl

In your shoes, @ZCXXX, I’d respond and say that I’m content to pay for x,y and z, but dispute a and b. I’d then lay out my case as succinctly as you have done in your post. If the landlady didn’t budge then I’d weigh up whether or not the financial amount involved was worth my time pursuing via the deposit scheme dispute process.

housebuyer143

My mum wanted a refund on eBay for an item that was incorrect, she emailed the seller and couldn't be bothered to wait for a reply so raised a PayPal case. Turns out the seller was happy to refund but because the case was raised to PayPal she could not. My mum had to wait 4 weeks for PayPal to adjudicate it and then she lost and got no money back.

My off tangent point is, take the time to dispute the charges directly with the landlord first. She might be very reasonable. If you go straight to arbitration you might end up waiting a long time and then you could lose more than you might have if you had just asked the landlord directly in the first instance.