Claiming Part of Deposit

[MrShed]

I would now sue the agent for the money through small claims court.

 

The tenant has no right to make what is effectively a vexatious claim after this period of time.

[piglette]

O sounds good. I have a strong suspicion, although I may be wrong, that the agent will just send the deposit back to the tenant. I can't believe that we were their client and we were the ones who weere paying them. I suppose all the agent wants is to be rid of it, as they are not making any money out of it.

[MrShed]

If they just send it back to the tenant in some respects all the better - this will strengthen your case.

[piglette]

Will let you know what happens next!! Thank you so much for all your help, you have no idea how much it is appreciated.

[MrShed]

You are welcome. Please do let us know how it pans out - I think the agents actions are ridiculous here, and I very very strongly suspect that there is an ulterior motive (i.e. they are holding onto the deposit as long as possible).

[piglette]

The agent did email today to say she is holding onto the deposit until told to give it up by the courts. So I was wrong about her giving it to the tenant. It amazes me as it is not theirs to keep. I do suspect that she is actually not terribly competent. Will keep you updated, the letter went out to them today asking for the deposit by 15 November.

[piglette]

MrShed, after we sent the letter you suggested regarding going to court it seems to have woken the agents up a bit. We are now talking to a more senior person and he has contacted the ex tenant. We have just received the following from the husband. He fails to understand that they were in breach of contract by not cleaning the house on leaving and also by installing all the Sky boxes etc without permission. Goodness knows what he is talking about regarding the curtains. The last sentence is threatening!! I don't know where we go from here. This is what we got from the agent, I don't know what the agent said to the ex tenannt at the moment.

 

 

As I have mentioned to you previously, we are speaking of a quote and not a document evidencing real expenses incurred by the landlord. Furthermore, none in relation to this quote points to dilapidations we would have caused.

 

The only objective documents in this regard are the move in and move out reports

The move in report clearly establishes that none of the walls had been freshly painted or fitted with new wall paper and makes also clearly mention of existing marks, nails or pins.

 

I also understand that the landlord complains about removal of smal boxes and cables which were installed so that we could benefit from proper TV, internet and telephone access which is today a normal standard in a house. This was professionally installed and we are speaking of a box in the lounge, and a few connecting cables for the loft room and bed1/ensuite. The removal of such cables does not justify at all a complete repainting of a room.

 

Based on these two elements, I have reviewed the quote and have come to the following conclusions.

 

There is no justification that we should bear costs for repaintung for the hall stairs landing, dining room, kitchen/adjacent breakfast room,and bath. Some the walls were already significantly marked when we moved in (hall, stairs landing in particular) and need in any case to be replaced/repainted.

For the other rooms there has not been dilapidations noted requiring a repainting and this is then simply a redocoration decided by the landlord for which we do not see why we should have a financial liability for it.

 

For the remaing rooms there can be some discussions of a contribution to be made by us based on the move out report and for removing the cables but this can not justify more than contributing to a share of the costs for the repainting.

 

Regarding the curtain cleaning costs, the landlord claims is that they had not been professionally cleaned when moving out. We are not disputing this but the landlord has obviously omitted that the move in report showed the curtains not being professionally cleaned when we moved in while this was a requirement of the lease. Having looked at a sample of cases decided by the dispute service, I have come accross a similar case where the dispute service decided a contribution by the tenants of 25% of such costs.

 

Our view on the whole matter is that we should not recognize anything to the landlord considering that they should refund us some part of the perceived rent for the unacceptable importance of defects encountered during the lease period and the lack of diligent handling of the issues by the landlord (a file in this regard had been submiited during the proceedings with the dispute service). To this we would also add payment of interests for non refund of the undisputed part of the deposit (the landlord has never been able to submit claims that would have amounted to the full deposit).

 

This being said and for the sole sake of bringing the matter promptly to an end without this further dragging on by starting a procedure in court, we are willing to offer:

 

-to waive our claims for refund of part of the rent and for late payment interests

 

-to contribute 50% of the painting costs for the front lounge, bedrooms upstairs and loft room which amounted to a total of £760 as per the quote that is to say £380.

 

-to contribute for the curtain cleaning costs 25% of £140 which would correspond to 35£ but which we are willing to round up to £40.

 

Total contribution to be deducted from the deposit would amount to £420 meaning that the amount of deposit to be refunded to us would amount to £1810.

 

This offer is made without prejudice to our rights to claim for refund of rent and late payment interest in case of non acceptance which would result in us bringing the matter to court.

It is also not any form of recognition of liability from us towards the landlord.

 

If the landlord accepts the proposal we expect to receive a deposit release form first signed by the landlord because we do not want to experience what happened when the matter was brought to the dispute service service when the landlord just before a conclusion was reached decided to withheld its signature)

 

Dear Fraser, I hope you will be able to convince the landlord to accept this offer and your efforts in this regard are appreciated

 

If the landlord wished to persist in having unreasonable and unjustified expectations, the matter will end up in court. Having spoken to legal professionals, we have certainly a case for claiming a refund of the rent and the fact that the landlord has prevented the dispute service to decide on this matter a year ago is likely not to play at all in favor of the landlord. They are likely to end up with less than what we are offering.

 

It is unnecessary to come back with a request for higher contribution since in such case we would not considering having anything to lose in going to court. Quite to the contrary the landlord is likely to end up with something less favourable than our offer. >>

 

 

[MrShed]

Can you clarify what they are talking about re: refund of rent?

 

Also, was the agent performing a full management service or a find a tenant service only? I suspect the former.

[MrShed]

In addition, I notice they talk about you "preventing the use of a dispute scheme" - on what basis are they saying this, and have they given any explanation as to why they have only decided to try and pursue this some 2 years later?

[MrShed]

Sorry to multi-post....

 

The issue has changed somewhat here as well from initial posting.

 

We are now back to a "standard" dilapidation dispute.

 

As such, you now need to quantify the damages that were caused by the outbound tenant. Was the "quoted" work carried out?

[piglette]

1. We haven't a clue what they are talking about on the rent. When we asked the agent he didn't know either but is checking.

2. Also it seems that the quote for the redecorating for £1,400 was nothing to do with us it was for someone else. We never asked for total decoration.

3. The agent was supposed to be performing a full management service, taking a percentage of the rent.

4. Preventing the use of the dispute scheme is totally wrong as well. It is as I explained originally. I should say the person who wrote it (the ex tenant's husband) is French so it may be a misunderstanding.

5. We are not sure what the agent said to the ex tenant which does not help. They are supposed to be giving us the details.

6. The Sky box etc are still installed so we have not carried out that work, the house has not been rented out since though. As the house is wallpapered it will make a mess uninstalling the cabling etc. The re-decoration was only for making good.

7. Also the bit about the curtains is not in the lease either.

 

It did seem they were talking about a totally different house!! Thanks so much for your interest. I think I am more muddled now than when we started. I should say the agent has been very supportive, although he has added to the muddle I feel.

[MrShed]

I think that they have added to the muddle as well.

 

If you havent made good you cant claim from the deposit - the deposit is only there it cover ACTUAL financial losses incurred.

[piglette]

We have made good on other damage and cleaning, but had left the cabling until we could sort out the deposit. Perhaps we should just say yes to their offer, as this could carry on for ever, as it does seem that the agents are either telling the ex tenants rubbish who the ex tenants are misunderstanding things or both!! I suppose at least the ex tenant is admitting liability by making an offer.

[MrShed]

I think at this stage (without obviously being in possession of the check in/out paperwork, and without seeing the property myself) you may well be wise to simply accept the offer and move on.

 

Alternatively, you could invite them to sue - some of the things they are saying are ludicrous, such as rent being due (from re-reading on the basis of dilapidations, which would just be a no go at this stage for them) and blocking their attempts to retrieve/dispute the deposit, which is again plain silly.

 

It depends upon whether the agent will release the deposit though.

[mariner51]

I think I would be sitting down with LA and asking to see all correspondance he has sent/recieved from ex T regarding my property

[piglette]

As the ex tenant lives in France (she is an American lawyer and the husband is French) it should be interesting to see them sueing us. Particularly as they have done nothing for two years until the agent contacted them. On the other hand I may be old and grey by the time we ever sort it out otherwise, so it may be worth just getting on with our lives and taking the money offered.

[MrShed]

Thats it - I think at this stage it comes down to your personal choice.

 

Any judge is likely to frown upon the timescales that have resulted due to the tenant. However, it doesnt form a point of law so although frowned upon it SHOULDNT affect the judgement. You are likely, after the time delay and on the basis of some of the emails bandied about, to find it very difficult to prove damages and reductions - and the onus would be on you to prove.

 

As such, and as I am a fan of an easy life(!), I personally would be inclined to draw a line under the whole sorry saga and take the offered money.

[piglette]

Thanks for all your help, it is very much appreciated. I think you are right, life is too short to carry on Particularly as it seems to be becoming so surreal!!