Bond Dispute

[daz990]

hi guys,

 

Update.LL requested mediation via the courts which took place today. alas to no avail the landlord is convinced she can't lose the case. her case is basically built on th section in the tenancy agreement which states I have to return property exactly as it was taken over and that she will produce receipts to show work was undertaken.

 

can someone reeasure me that I still have a strong case as she doesn't have an inventory. also could someone explain what happens with regards court fees if say the judge awards a 50/50 split do I get any fees back???

 

Thanks again for all your help.

[daz990]

bump

[oddjobbob]

Indeed you DO have a first class case.

 

I am a landlord (a responsible one I hope!)

 

As part of filling in our tax return every year I can confirm to you that we are allowed by HMRC to deduct 10% of the gross rent in lieu of 'wear and tear; on the property.

 

So a property that costs £500 a mnoth to rent is allowed £600 per year in wear and tear.

 

Therefore you can calculate what your landord has been able to claim for W&T.

 

And you can successfully argue that he can't have it both ways... ie receiving £600 a year (or whatever) in W&T from HMRC AND execting yuo to pay for it too.. it's like being paid twice.

 

I've never witheld a deposit but sincerely believe that you will win.. .taken to its extreme could you live there for 15 years and be expected to return it as was? No of course not it would be EXPECTED to be showing signs of W&T, and to 'look' 15 years old.. eg still in good decorative order as it should be but with wear to flooring, furniture, appliances, scarapes on skirting boards etc... just like any 15yo old property.

 

You need to go to court as the 'impoverished tenant'.. ie NOT in yuor best clothes (not scruffy either) and say to the registrar that you've no experience and are very nervous, etc but this is what happened.

 

The LL is trying it on, the registrar wil lsympathise with you.

 

Also can yuo show that you always paid your rent on time etc? If you can, let the LL dig themselves a trap by asking them in court if yuo were a decent tenant.. when they say no (bound to!) you then produce your rent book / bank statement showing yuo always paid in full and on time. Catch them out with one lie, the regsitrar won't elieve anything they say.

 

Likewie if yuo are asked if they were a good landlord well yes, they were up to the time when byuo wanted your depo back, otheriwse if you ay no then they'll ask why you stayed there so long.

 

Dig them hole to fall into then let them fall in and sink.

 

I also suspect here that the LL has gone to a solicitor... and as we all know solicitors cannot thrive unless there is conflict... ie they never ever say 'leave it' as if they do that they don't get a fee!

[oddjobbob]

I also believe the section in the agreement that the LL refers to is unforceable.. you cannot give a property back after a number of years in EXACTLY the same conditoin as yuo found it!

[Steve__M]

As part of filling in our tax return every year I can confirm to you that we are allowed by HMRC to deduct 10% of the gross rent in lieu of 'wear and tear; on the property.

 

So a property that costs £500 a mnoth to rent is allowed £600 per year in wear and tear.

 

Therefore you can calculate what your landord has been able to claim for W&T.

 

The 10% deduction applies only to furniture in furnished properties. Sound like issues here relate to redecoration and carpets which are not included in this 10% thing.

 

There should of course be an allowance for "wear and tear" relating to redecoration though. After two years or so one might be liable for only half the cost. In my experience the decor in new properties is much more sensitive due to the use of thinned trade paint on newly plastered walls - probably not worth making that point unless you've wiped marks off the wall and all the paint has come off at the same time.

 

What has the LL said in defence?

 

I couldn't see anywhere where you said the LL had provided evidence of cost outlays. Has the LL provided a list of costs and reasons in the defence?

[daz990]

Hi thanks for your reply. The landlords defence consists of photos, quotes and receipts for the work.

 

She also has a letter from the firm who decorated the house for the builder prior to her getting the keys. It basically says that in June 09 the house was in pristine condition as all the houses that his firm had the contract to had to be to an expected standard. What she fails to mention is we were not the first tenants. She had a tennant from June until September, who by her and the neighbours own admission were to put it bluntly scruffy.

 

Her statement just basically lists each individual mark on the walls.

 

Thanks again for the help I guess I am just after any help advice I could use in the courtroom to my advantage.

[Steve__M]

Personally, I'd just play it straight and (hopefully) try and come across as the sane and rational one in the discussion. ie. There was no checkin inventory, the house *was* occupied prior to you moving in, any marks on the walls were not unusual for an occupation of 2 and a bit years (including two lots off people moving in and out), the LL expectations are far too high in expecting property to remain perfect and expect tenants to pay ongoing decoration. etc. etc.

 

Also, the evidence of the decorators is irrelevant not only because there was a tenant in between. The decorators would say that, wouldn't they. In reality they've followed standard practice and will have put on two coats of the cheapest trade paint, and the first coat would have been thinned with water.

 

Incidentally, you say your mediation with the courts was unsuccessful. But how did it go in general? Trying to be impartial, did the mediator suggest anything that may be to your advantage or disadvantage? Is your opponent a rational witness?

[daz990]

Personally, I'd just play it straight and (hopefully) try and come across as the sane and rational one in the discussion. ie. There was no checkin inventory, the house *was* occupied prior to you moving in, any marks on the walls were not unusual for an occupation of 2 and a bit years (including two lots off people moving in and out), the LL expectations are far too high in expecting property to remain perfect and expect tenants to pay ongoing decoration. etc. etc.

 

Also, the evidence of the decorators is irrelevant not only because there was a tenant in between. The decorators would say that, wouldn't they. In reality they've followed standard practice and will have put on two coats of the cheapest trade paint, and the first coat would have been thinned with water.

 

Incidentally, you say your mediation with the courts was unsuccessful. But how did it go in general? Trying to be impartial, did the mediator suggest anything that may be to your advantage or disadvantage? Is your opponent a rational witness?

 

Mediation went as I expected she requested £380 I offered 100 for the carpet cleaning she said no way. Then she came back at 250 each again I said no. I would rather drag her through the court and lose than give in now.

[Steve__M]

Mediation went as I expected she requested £380 I offered 100 for the carpet cleaning she said no way. Then she came back at 250 each again I said no. I would rather drag her through the court and lose than give in now.

 

Sounds like the mediator was about as useful as a chocolate teapot then.