Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 3

Original poster

Would you have given back this deposit or expected it back?

71 replies

TheOtherSideOfNo · 04/12/2015 12:55

NC as this is quite outing.

If you were a landlord and you rented a studio flat (within a house that you own) to a tenant with a deposit of circa £700 I'd like to know if you'd have given it back.

The key parts of the contract state that 3 months notice must be given if the tenant intends to leave and the tenant is not to smoke or damage the appliances.

The tenant smoked throughout their 2 year residency and 3 months prior to the end of the contract (August 2014) requested an extension to January 2015. The landlord e-mailed the tenant in January to ask if they'd be extending their stay and the tenant said no, thus no notice such period was given.

The landlord then had to spend money on getting rid of the smell of smoke but there was no damage to the studio.

Would you under these circumstances have given back all or part of the deposit as a landlord or expected it back as a tenant?

OP posts:

var123 · 04/12/2015 15:41

ComposHatComesBack - that bit of the law about penalties fro not enrolling in the TDS are not worth the paper they are written on.

If the tenancy has ended before the LL is warned to put the money in a scheme, then the law does not apply.
If the tenancy is still ongoing, then as long as the LL responds to the warning, the penalty will not apply.

So tenants need to check on the TDS website at the start of the tenancy. Its too late after the tenancy is over.

Naoko · 04/12/2015 15:48

I'd expect it back minus reasonable costs for cleaning up the smell of smoke. The landlord cannot charge for the full cost of carpets/plaster etc even if they need fully replaced because it is assumed there would be x years of wear and tear in addition to the damage, and if they weren't new when the tenant moved in that's taken into account too. (ie if my landlord were to try and charge me the cost of a new carpet for a mark on the carpet when I move out he's shit out of luck because they were fifteen years old when I moved in six years ago and he can only charge me to put himself back in the position where he'd have been if I hadn't marked them, ie with unmarked but 21 year old carpets - not new ones).

NicoleWatterson · 04/12/2015 15:51

Id expect back deposit less deep cleaning cost due to smoking. Nothing due to notice period.

Theres a list somewhere of how long items are expected to last, ill see if i can find it.
if i remember rightly a carpet is 5 years, so you had 2 years worth of use so would be expected to pay for the remaining 3 years of its expected life if he had to be replaced due to smoking

var123 · 04/12/2015 15:58

It depends on how new the carpet was when the Op's tenancy started. If it is 5 years and it was already 3 years old, or more, then its had its 5th birthday and the LL can't claim anything even if it was in perfect condition when the tenant arrived.

I was told that manufacturers usually say how long their products are expected to last and that's the number that gets used to calculate.

It explains how to calculate it all here www.arla.co.uk/info-guides/info-for-landlords/deposit-protection-guide/betterment-and-apportionment.aspx

VegetablEsoup · 04/12/2015 15:59

as a tennant I would expect all (or nearly a) the depisit back.
I don't know if a no smoking rule can even be enforced in a private residence!

MovingOnUpMovingOnOut · 04/12/2015 16:02

Why has this come up now if it happened in January?

My answer remains the same as before even with the knowledge the op is the tenant. It makes no difference to the law.

MackerelOfFact · 04/12/2015 16:03

Wouldn't it cost very little to repaint and deep clean a studio flat, anyway? It's basically one room, right?

The LL is being unreasonable. A studio flat will need repainting at the end of a two-year tenancy anyway I would imagine, smoking or not. And end-of-tenancy cleaning should be carried out by the tenant, including airing if it smells of stale smoke. So there should be minimal, if any, deductions to the deposit IMO.

Junosmum · 04/12/2015 16:03

OP - so now we know you are the tenant, was your deposit protected? Did you share any space with the landlord (e.g. kitchen or bathroom)? As this affects the tenancy you had.

The short of it is - the landlord should have protected your deposit and you can sue him if he didn't and he hasn't given it you back.

The landlord cannot deduct anything from your deposit without lodging a dispute with the tenancy deposit scheme - if it wasn't protected he can't take anything out of it and you can sue (if he hasn't protected it and has kept some write him a 'letter before action' stating your intent to take him to small claims court if he doe snot return the full deposit due to him not correctly protecting the deposit).

specialsubject · 04/12/2015 16:13

still awaiting answers to the crucial questions...

skyeskyeskye · 04/12/2015 17:21

You should have had regular inspections, all agencies do this if a LL rents out through them, either 6 monthly or yearly inspections, so I don't know why you would find that odd, but anyway, if it wasn't inspected during that time, then they did not know that you were smoking.

The LL is very much within his rights to reclaim expenses for redecorating due to smoking, as you broke the terms of your agreement. Lots of LL put in no smoking clauses due to the smell and cost in redecorating. A non-smoker would definitely not want to rent a place that reeks of smoke, so it needs to be addressed.

A LL would not generally repaint the whole house in between tenants, but would have to if people have been smoking.

I don't know why people are saying the LL is dodgy, when the tenant has been smoking in a non smoking property. LL can stipulate no pets, no children, no smoking. A tenant takes on the property on those terms and signs an agreement to that effect.

harshbuttrue1980 · 04/12/2015 17:23

Naoko is right. The landlord can't charge you the full costs of cleaning and refurnishing the flat, as landlords aren't allowed to get "new for old". If, for example, the sofa is 10 years old, then the landlord can't buy a brand new one and take it out of your deposit. They could either take steam cleaning costs out of your deposit, or else the costs of buying a second hand one of a similar condition and age to the one they had. If they did the latter, then you would be entitled to keep the smokey one.

I've been both a landlord and a tenant, and I can see both sides - you will have to pay for cleaning costs for furniture and carpets as smoke reeks, but the landlord can't expect upgrade the flat at your expense! The legal principle is that the deposit can be used to restore the flat to the condition it was in when you moved in, minus reasonable wear and tear for the 2 years you were there.

MackerelOfFact · 04/12/2015 17:49

"A LL would not generally repaint the whole house in between tenants, but would have to if people have been smoking."

But it's a studio flat. One living room plus a bathroom and (maybe) a separate kitchen, max. Surely you'd need to decorate it every two years anyway, smoking or no smoking? I would if I ate, slept, cooked, relaxed and entertained all in one room. It's a small space, so it's going to see more wear and tear per square metre than a large house would. And that's assuming it was freshly painted when OP moved in, which it might not have been.

The smoking isn't great, it probably does smell pretty bad, but leaving the windows open doesn't cost anything.

skyeskyeskye · 04/12/2015 18:06

The smell sinks into everything though. We bought our house from an old couple who smoked incessantly, and we had to remove all carpets and paint throughout before we could move in. We had to throw away the blinds in the conservatory as they could not be cleaned. No amount of leaving windows open was ever going to clear the smell.

As a smoker you would not smell it like a non smoker would. (and I say that as somebody who has given up smoking and restarted).

The main point though is that they knew they shouldn't smoke and did anyway, so therefore why should they not have to meet the cost of cleaning? Only reasonable cleaning costs though, of cleaning carpets/furniture and painting.

LL's get such a bad press and I know that some of them deserve it, but where the tenant has flouted the rules that they agreed to, then they should have to pay for any repairs/cleaning.

var123 · 04/12/2015 18:37

Does the LL live in the rest of the house? I am surprised that whoever was in the rest of the house could not smell the smoke. It really is a horrible smell, so unless you smoke yourself, you couldn't help but notice.

MidniteScribbler · 04/12/2015 22:17

The tenant should pay for the costs of returning the house to the pre-stink level.

And the tenant should learn not to fucking smoke inside when they've signed a contract stating that they wouldn't. Dirty pricks.

LaLyra · 04/12/2015 23:01

Was the studio part of the house and was there shared facilities (bathroom, kitchen?) ?

That changes the answers completely.

As a LL I could see me potentially holding back (obviously depending on the severity of the smell - there's a difference between someone who smoked 2 a day with windows open and someone who smoked 60 a day without ventilating - and any other damage) would be for a clean of carpets and soft furnishings. Maybe painting if there was discoloration. LL's can't withhold deposits for betterment so the LL has to keep in mind that they can't just bill a tenant for brand new things when their things are at least 2 years old.

What is the LL actually billing you for? They can't just say "I'm keeping the deposit" - they have to tell you why and "you smoked" isn't a reason. It needs to be "Your smoking means X needs to be replaced" or "I'm keeping X amount due to the cigarette burns in the carpet".

StackladysMorphicResonator · 04/12/2015 23:18

Since you're a smoker you probably won't smell the underlying stench that lingers in a smoking household even after all smoking has ceased. The only way to get rid of it is re-furnishing and re-carpeting.

YABVU if you expect £700 to come even close to covering that cost!

Blondeshavemorefun · 05/12/2015 08:57

So you smoked for 2yrs in what was meant to be a no smoking studio?

Why would you do that?

To deliberate destroy someone's else's property - as the smell will soak into the painted walls - carpets etc and stink till cleaned replaced etc

Smoking inside a property is disgusting but even worse is not yours and you aren't meant to smoke in it

You don't deserve any deposit back !!!!

londonrach · 05/12/2015 09:32

Was the deposit protected. If not ll is in serious trouble as might have tp pay up to 3 times to deposit back to the tenant. Re the deposit ll takes off reasonable amount for cleaner to remove smoke but if contact was coming to end anyway you cant take money off for no notice can you?

londonrach · 05/12/2015 09:34

Although cost of getting the smoke out will probably be more than the deposit. Did you check the property in 2 years as you should have noticed the smell then. Tenant very unreasonable to smoke in a none smoking property.

Russellgroupserf · 05/12/2015 09:40

I have no idea about the legal side but you broke an agreed term so I think the LL should be able to keep the deposit.

Not all properties are redecorated between tenants, I can remember renting places that hadn't had a lick of paint for ages previously but they were just a bit grotty looking and not smok e damaged.

Flip

1 2 3