Dispute with landlord

Author
Discussion

GregMac

Original Poster:

21 posts

120 months

Friday 30th September 2016
quotequote all
I've recently moved out of my flat and am dealing the with landlord regarding the return of my deposit, which was protected with mydeposits. The landlord has listed a number of repairs be carried out and deductions made, which I disagree with. They include items which he states himself are fair wear and tear, such as deep cleaning carpets, as well as damaged caused by workmen that he instructed to replace an appliance, and which I notified him of immediately.

Do any of you have experience of how likely I would be to successfully contest these charges? Despite raising concerns when we moved in, no inventory was carried out. I understand the dispute process is evidence-based, and my worry is that he has current pictures of a flat that is in fairly poor condition (as it was when I moved in), but I have nothing beyond my word due to the lack of check-in.

He's being reasonable by suggesting carrying out work himself to keep costs down, but it sticks in my craw being charged to repair things that I've had to live with for the past two years, let alone damage caused by his workmen.


randlemarcus

13,507 posts

230 months

Friday 30th September 2016
quotequote all
He's a bit stuck then. From what I have read, a dispute without checkin photos will go the tenants way,pretty much every time. If you feel you owe him anything above wear and tear, offer that, then go to the deposit service dispute.

KevinCamaroSS

11,553 posts

279 months

Friday 30th September 2016
quotequote all
Just tell him you will raise it as a dispute with the deposit agency. He will probably fold at that point.

TooMany2cvs

29,008 posts

125 months

Friday 30th September 2016
quotequote all
GregMac said:
I've recently moved out of my flat and am dealing the with landlord regarding the return of my deposit, which was protected with mydeposits.
Do any of you have experience of how likely I would be to successfully contest these charges?
Just request repayment direct from the deposit scheme. Let him contest any deductions with them.

GregMac

Original Poster:

21 posts

120 months

Friday 30th September 2016
quotequote all
Thanks for the replies chaps, much appreciated.

superlightr

12,842 posts

262 months

Friday 30th September 2016
quotequote all
If landlord does not have an inventory then he does not stand much if any chance of claiming on your deposit.
He has no proof as to the condition when you moved in. The Independent case examiner will ask the LL to provide a copy of the inventory he cant - = you win.

Start a claim with the deposit holder.

JustinP1

13,330 posts

229 months

Friday 30th September 2016
quotequote all
GregMac said:
Despite raising concerns when we moved in, no inventory was carried out.
Game over for him.

Lopey

258 posts

97 months

Friday 30th September 2016
quotequote all
Landlord has to prove a financial loss to force you to pay for any damage. For example, if property has been relet to another tenant for the same rental fee as you have been paying, then there is no financial loss. If there is no tenant lined up to take over, then the landlord has to provide receipts/invoices to prove he has suffered a loss getting the repairs done. When it comes to wear and tear, you will only need to pay a % of the replacement cost.

I assume you have evidence in writing that you informed the landlord about the damage caused by workmen?

GregMac

Original Poster:

21 posts

120 months

Friday 30th September 2016
quotequote all
Lopey said:
Landlord has to prove a financial loss to force you to pay for any damage. For example, if property has been relet to another tenant for the same rental fee as you have been paying, then there is no financial loss. If there is no tenant lined up to take over, then the landlord has to provide receipts/invoices to prove he has suffered a loss getting the repairs done. When it comes to wear and tear, you will only need to pay a % of the replacement cost.

I assume you have evidence in writing that you informed the landlord about the damage caused by workmen?
I do.

Lopey

258 posts

97 months

Friday 30th September 2016
quotequote all
In which case, it could be argued that any damage however caused was there when you accepted the tenancy, and he can't prove otherwise as there is no signed inventory. Any damage caused by fair wear & tear which he admits to in writing cannot be charged for. Any damage caused by contractors working on his instruction (which you notified him of at the time in writing) is down to the landlord/contractor to rectify. Any damage that you have admitted to in writing should only be authorised to be paid from the deposit when the landlord proves financial loss.

Rangeroverover

1,522 posts

110 months

Friday 30th September 2016
quotequote all
JustinP1 said:
Game over for him.
+1

surveyor_101

5,069 posts

178 months

Friday 30th September 2016
quotequote all
A deep clean of carpets is often written in a tenants obligation in the tenancy have you checked its not in their? I have had some that say you must use a cleaner and provide vat invoice!

On the other items with a photographic record as said landlord will struggle to prove its your fault.

weeboot

1,063 posts

98 months

Friday 30th September 2016
quotequote all
Out of interest, how long were you resident and how well did you document the state of the property upon exit?

GregMac

Original Poster:

21 posts

120 months

Friday 30th September 2016
quotequote all
Nothing about deep cleaning in the agreement (and it certainly wasn't done before I moved in!)

Been there a couple of years and didn't document anything when I left, just made sure it was all clean and tidy and how I'd found it.

MrChips

3,263 posts

209 months

Friday 30th September 2016
quotequote all
Lopey said:
Landlord has to prove a financial loss to force you to pay for any damage. For example, if property has been relet to another tenant for the same rental fee as you have been paying, then there is no financial loss.
With respect, that's a very wide statement, and a wrong one at that. Whether the property has been re-let has absolutely no bearing on any deposit disputes. It will solely be down to the inventory (or evidence of condition if a proper inventory wasn't done).

I'd go with the other advice on here and just let the landlord know in writing exactly which bits (including £ amounts) that you're disputing, and any evidence you have. Wait for the landlord to respond (within whatever time period is in the contract), and if you're not happy then let the landlord know that you'll raise a dispute with the protection scheme.

I've been a tenant previously and am now a landlord (only 2 tenants into it though) but my understanding is that the protection scheme will indeed be very favoured towards the landlord needing to provide detailed proof of damage and costs rather than the tenant needing to prove condition. Anything less than a full inventory means it will be very hard for a landlord to get deductions agreed via the dispute service.

Lopey

258 posts

97 months

Friday 30th September 2016
quotequote all
MrChips said:
With respect, that's a very wide statement, and a wrong one at that. Whether the property has been re-let has absolutely no bearing on any deposit disputes. It will solely be down to the inventory (or evidence of condition if a proper inventory wasn't done).

I'd go with the other advice on here and just let the landlord know in writing exactly which bits (including £ amounts) that you're disputing, and any evidence you have. Wait for the landlord to respond (within whatever time period is in the contract), and if you're not happy then let the landlord know that you'll raise a dispute with the protection scheme.

I've been a tenant previously and am now a landlord (only 2 tenants into it though) but my understanding is that the protection scheme will indeed be very favoured towards the landlord needing to provide detailed proof of damage and costs rather than the tenant needing to prove condition. Anything less than a full inventory means it will be very hard for a landlord to get deductions agreed via the dispute service.
With equal respect, it's an argument I've used against 3 letting agents and succeeded with retaining full deposit.

Skyrat

1,185 posts

189 months

Friday 30th September 2016
quotequote all
GregMac said:
I do.
Yep, I agree. He's not got a leg to stand on. Chancing bd.

rgf100

86 posts

104 months

Friday 30th September 2016
quotequote all
surveyor_101 said:
I have had some that say you must use a cleaner and provide vat invoice!
I'm not 100% on this, but I don't think they'd get anywhere arguing that with the deposit protection agency. They're allowed to specify the *condition* the flat gets returned in ("cleaned to the original state" or something) but they aren't allowed to dictate the *method*.

GregMac

Original Poster:

21 posts

120 months

Saturday 1st October 2016
quotequote all
I've given him the good news, so we'll see what comes back. I've offered to contribute 25% of the cost for the sake of an easy life. Am I correct in thinking that he now has to return the deposit bar that which is being disputed? Eg he can't now decide to move the goalposts and say he wants the entire deposit?

768

13,601 posts

95 months

Saturday 1st October 2016
quotequote all
I'm not sure how far along the dispute resolution service you are, but until the landlord agrees to an amount not in dispute, it's all in dispute.

The last time we rented our landlady added new items every week after the final inspection for a while. Eventually (and it took many, many months) we got her down to two issues. The dispute resolution service found in her favour on one and ours on the other. Curiously, I expected them to do that, but to find the opposite way on each.

One of the issues was carpets - we had a photo of my wife with a hired carpet cleaning machine in the house and a receipt, there was nothing about them having been cleaned before the tenancy or needing to be cleaned in the agreement. At dispute time she claimed without providing evidence that she had the carpets cleaned before and that the previous agent who'd since left had verbally said she'd ask us to clean them (she didn't). That one we had to pay for.