Tenancy Agreement clauses not always valid?

Tori_Bellatrix

Hi

I read someone on a forum today that a clause within a Tenancy Agreement which may be deemed unfair is not enforcable. For example, most TA's (including mine) say that you MUST have the property professionally cleaned at end of tenancy. However I read this on landlord zone

1. You cannot make a tenant have the property "professionally cleaned" even if it says so in the tenancy agreement (potential unfair term)
2. The tenant only has a responsibility to leave the property in as clean a state as when he took it on less wear & tear, that means scuff marks on walls and paintwork and minor marks or stains on carpets should be ignored.

Anyone got any comments on this?

Mr_Bear_2

i would agree with those trouble is wear and tear is very subjective

beingjdc

Third time in two days for this link, but the more people it helps the better!

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=oft+unfair+rental+terms&meta=

Top hit. Specifying who has to do the cleaning: unlawful. Banning pets: unlawful. Telling you which electricity supplier to use: unlawful.

Wear and tear is another issue, but yes, they can't in theory keep any of your deposit if it's "normal wear and tear".

Tori_Bellatrix

beingjdc wrote: »

Third time in two days for this link, but the more people it helps the better!

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=oft+unfair+rental+terms&meta=

Top hit. Specifying who has to do the cleaning: unlawful. Banning pets: unlawful. Telling you which electricity supplier to use: unlawful.

Wear and tear is another issue, but yes, they can't in theory keep any of your deposit if it's "normal wear and tear".

Many Thanks, I've bookedmarked to have a read through later

liz545

beingjdc wrote: »

Third time in two days for this link, but the more people it helps the better!

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=oft+unfair+rental+terms&meta=

Top hit. Specifying who has to do the cleaning: unlawful. Banning pets: unlawful. Telling you which electricity supplier to use: unlawful.

Wear and tear is another issue, but yes, they can't in theory keep any of your deposit if it's "normal wear and tear".

The OFT guidelines are unfortunately only guidelines, and the above clauses may be considered unfair. They're not actually illegal, so in practice you'd need to argue the case in the small claims court if your deposit was withheld due to a clause which may be considered unfair. When I pursued a deposit claim, despite referencing the OFT guidelines in court, the magistrate wasn't familiar with them, or IMO particularly concerned by them, so I wouldn't necessarily expect them to be the last word in a deposit dispute...

JohnInDebt

The unfair contract terms is a grey area and I was in the same position as you and got different advice from different people. If the carpet was professionally cleaned prior to you moving in then I wouldn't deem this as an unfair term, but if it wasn't done prior to you moving in then that would be an unfair term. They cannot have 'betterment'.

Do you have pets?

If you do it would then be reasonable to expect the carpets to be professionaly cleaned after the tenancy ended.

Tori_Bellatrix

JohnInDebt wrote: »

The unfair contract terms is a grey area and I was in the same position as you and got different advice from different people. If the carpet was professionally cleaned prior to you moving in then I wouldn't deem this as an unfair term, but if it wasn't done prior to you moving in then that would be an unfair term. They cannot have 'betterment'.

Do you have pets?

If you do it would then be reasonable to expect the carpets to be professionaly cleaned after the tenancy ended.

Yes, I have 2 cats and am willingly arranging for the carpets to be cleaned professionally when I leave.

TBH, I'm worried about the curtains as I have phoned up a few places and it's rather expensive to have them dry cleaned ... especially the 8ft drop ones which cover the patio doors. I'm pretty sure they weren't dry cleaned when I moved in

clutton_2

do you have a signed inventory ?

""OFT guidelines are unfortunately only guidelines" - liz is spot on here - these are only guidelines, and each case would have to be argued on its merits in court.

Tori_Bellatrix

clutton wrote: »

do you have a signed inventory ?

""OFT guidelines are unfortunately only guidelines" - liz is spot on here - these are only guidelines, and each case would have to be argued on its merits in court.

No, no signed inventory. The only document attached to my AST is a 'First Schedule' which lists 3 items that were left in the property upon occupation.

liz545

You may benefit from the lack of an inventory - while it wouldn't prevent them withholding the deposit in the first place, if they're so minded, it would likely mean that if the case reached court that you'd be more likely to win, as they have no proof of the condition of the property when the tenancy commenced. Pointing this out to them in the case that there's a dispute may even be sufficient to scare them into resolving the dispute out of court...

poppy10_2

beingjdc wrote: »

Banning pets: unlawful.

Really? My GF really wants a cat, but the contract explicitly states no pets of any kind.