Tenancy check out disagreement

M03

I have recently moved out and received the check out report.

There are a couple of items (I think minor) that I believe were there when I moved in, but that were not specifically mentioned on the check in report. The agent is using the clause that it is assumed that it's in good condition unless specifically noted. Also that I did not inform them t the start of the tenancy.

I do have many photos of other things, but not all. I have asked for photo evidence from the start of the tenancy to show the original condition of these details points, as I do not agree with the above assumption.

Is this 1) reasonable, and 2) if they cannot provide these photos, what are my chances in a TDS dispute?

I have not lost any deposit in the past so haven't had to go through this process.

Thanks

anselld

On what basis do you believe they were present when you moved in, and if so why did you not report them?

How minor is "minor", ie what is the value of the claim?  Is the claim otherwise reasonable, ie allowing for wear and tear, not new-for-old?  If the claim is reasonable and the items are listed as good at checkin and damaged at checkout, particularly if it is a independent inventory then you will probably lose.  ( but no harm trying if the amount is worth the hassle).

M03

The main items are the washing machine door seal has mould stains (all clean but stained), extractor "slightly dirty" and "dust on window frames".

The washing machine is not something I checked really but it's a very normal thing too I less you clean that seal regularly. I have no idea if it was like that already so I said that if they can prove it wasn't there upon move in, fair enough. However I doubt they have this proof and therefore since neither no I, I don't see how they can claim it from the deposit 

The other 2 are so trivial. I have a photo of the extractor upon move in but it's so minor I thought nothing of it. A bit of dust is ridiculous, I suspect it might be paper dust from the tissue I used with glass cleaner

I do not know amounts yet, just that they intend to out in a claim, so I shall have to wait for that

theartfullodger

Just dispute through the deposit scheme.  Put in place for exactly this.

saajan_12

M03 said:

I have recently moved out and received the check out report.

There are a couple of items (I think minor) that I believe were there when I moved in, but that were not specifically mentioned on the check in report. The agent is using the clause that it is assumed that it's in good condition unless specifically noted. Also that I did not inform them t the start of the tenancy.

I do have many photos of other things, but not all. I have asked for photo evidence from the start of the tenancy to show the original condition of these details points, as I do not agree with the above assumption.

Is this 1) reasonable, and 2) if they cannot provide these photos, what are my chances in a TDS dispute?

I have not lost any deposit in the past so haven't had to go through this process.

Thanks

In general, the LL / LA should provide a check in report to the deposit scheme showing the general condition of the property. However it wouldn't really be practical to show the lack of damage in every square inch of the walls, floors, fixtures, etc. So their starting photos are often supported by written comments that certain areas are free from damage. 
If there were indeed issues then ideally you should have commented or photographed. There would be a question as to why you did not if it was visible then. 

M03 said:

The main items are the washing machine door seal has mould stains (all clean but stained), extractor "slightly dirty" and "dust on window frames".

However these issues really are minor in my opinion (although I haven't seen a picture, maybe you can have extreme dust). I'd just dispute them as that.. charging for 3 specs of dust on a window frame even if it was dust free at the start is petty and would be within tolerance IMO. 

Bookworm105

the entire point of the check in process is for you to identify items that are not in the condition as described

having failed to do so you do not have a leg to stand on when arguing that something was missed at check in given you have accepted that check in as being accurate because you did not dispute it at the time

lack of personal diligence when moving in is not a basis for now getting diligent over the check out 

that said, you simply raise a dispute with the deposit protection body and let them decide. That is why deposit protection was set up in the first place - to create an impartial resolution mechanism (which is in most cases going to give benefit of doubt to tenants, not LL)

M03

Thanks all. I've yet to be told amounts or receive any messages from the TDS so I'll see how it goes

RAS

Just reclaim your entire deposit, as you should have done already. It is for your LL to prove that the damage is beyond fair wear and tear, not the other way round.

M03

The deposit was an insured one via TDS which I didn't realise at the time, not is it clear from the certificate. The only thing that differs is the structure of the deposit reference number...

Anyway due to this you cannot open a claim for the refund. You must open a dispute, which I did for the full amount. This overlapped Christmas and in general was very slow, but the agency did not respond so it fell in my favour. However, in this limbo state, the agency "decided" that they would email to state that they have refunded the full amount.

I'm not sure if they were prompted by being contacted by TDS, but my guess is that it looks better on them from the TDS perspective if they quickly refund it and close the dispute, rather than wait to be forced.