For disputing my ex landlords claim on our deposit?

[Magentaplasticglasses]

Sorry for the long post, I don't want to drip feed.

We moved out of a rental property last month. The landlords want to take our entire deposit. They are claiming they need our entire deposit because they apparently need to:

• re-carpet all rooms: There were no marks on the bedroom or living room carpets, it just looks like they've been walked on regularly which they obviously have. The spare room was just used as storage for toys, board games and memory boxes because the flat had limited cupboard space. The room was unused on a day to day basis so there isn't even general wear and tear in there. The end of tenancy inspection confirms there are no marks on any carpets, just dust on the skirting boards and in the corners of the rooms, and a bit of mildew on the window due to age of the property and the living room windows being closed for a week (we moved to the other end of the country, so the property was empty for a week)

• replace all the radiators: The landlord has decided the grills on the top of the radiators are loose, and has claimed we have damaged them. Other than turn the thermostat on and off, and adjust the radiator knob to change the temperature of the radiator, we haven't done anything to the radiators. We didn't dry laundry on them, as per our contract, and we've never noticed any issues with them. They've always worked normally and looked fine. The end of tenancy inspection was incredibly thorough to the point of downgrading one room because there was a single cobweb. They also didn't pick up any issues in their checks of the radiators, and only mentioned "a small amount of dust" on the tops of them.

• Repaint the entire flat, including the ceilings: The walls are magnolia, so show everything. DH also has a significant physical disability and needs to put his hands on the walls to balance when he walks, which also means things wear more quickly. The landlords previously denied permission to put rails on areas where DH is prone to losing his balance, so using the wall was unavoidable.

I checked the tenancy deposit scheme, and any reported marks or scuffs on the wall, meet their criteria of wear and tear. The end of tenancy report has also graded the paintwork as "normal wear and tear". We don't smoke or vape, and we've not altered the ceilings in any way. They were also graded as white and unmarked by the estate agent, so again, they haven't picked up any issues. The landlord has declined the estate agents request for clarification about why they need to deduct the cost of painting the ceilings from our deposit.

After all of this, I emailed the estate agent, and said we will be disputing the claims about needing the whole deposit to refit and redecorate the flat, as it's clear it is normal wear and tear, and the landlord cannot charge for this. I said that ultimately the burden of proof and any costs associated with that lies with the landlord, so if he feels it is more than wear and tear, he needs to prove it.

I was very clear that we will not be consenting to any of our deposit being released to the landlord until he has provided proof that any changes to the flat are more than normal wear and tear. I also said that we are willing to pay for an end of tenancy deep clean, because the inspection reported dust and minor mildew on the window due to the property being empty. However, I expressed that DH and I would like at least 3 quotes to show the cleaners charges are in line with local prices, and that we will require a receipt to confirm the final cost of the clean, because we do not feel the landlords are acting fairly or honestly regarding the deposit.

The landlord has responded to the estate agent saying he disagrees with our dispute, he will not be sending quotes, he will not compromise on the deposit, and that he is not willing to seek further evidence that the changes to the flat are beyond normal wear and tear because he feels we are being unreasonable in our requests.

AIBU?

P.s. I'm sorry for the length of this. It became a bit of a vent post and was incredibly cathartic to write out.

@Tomatina Sonetines having a deep clean is written into the lease. My friend’s lease specifically stated that the property was deep cleaned (she received a copy of the invoice) before she moved in and that she was expected to do the same at the end of her tenancy. . She did, and the landlord didn’t take a penny from her deposit.

@BruFord Yes, you're right, if it is in the original tenancy contract then the tenant would have to do it.

If it's been professionally cleaned for you, then you leave it professionally cleaned

Like the Spartans once (before being invaded, but pff, details) said: if.

@Tomatina Cleaning is different to damage. If a LL tried to claim for a tiny scratch on a skirting board, then this is of course ridiculous, unfair and will be dismissed by the deposit company.
It would be classed as wear and tear and something so minor should not even be raised by a LL. But my point still stands that it has nothing to do with cleaning.
Cleaning is a tenant's responsibility. As a tenant you should leave the flat in the same state of cleanliness as you found it. That works both ways so if you found it dirty, leave it dirty. Wear and tear has nothing to do with cleaning and LLs should of course expect wear and tear.

An no, I don't know that it's a minority of tenants that fail to treat a property, which is indeed their home while they are renting it, with respect. I know quite a different story to that.

You certainly don't sound like the worst kind of tenant but I still wouldn't want you. I don't want tenants to pay for minor repairs themselves rather than bother the landlord every time. It is my job to be 'bothered'.
And I would want a tenant to 'improve' the property, not at least without discussing it with me first. If it was truly an improvement, then I would be happy to pay but if it was personal taste, then I'd want to be asked in advance and I wouldn't want to pay.
And I wouldn't want a tenant who doesn't understand their cleaning responsibilities and just assumes that a LL is going to screw them over because, as you must know, some (a minority?) of LLs do.

We once had a landlord try to keep money back from the deposit because "the oven glass had streaks on it from cleaning fluid".
We had photos of the oven before we moved in. And other than some "streaks on the glass" it was much much cleaner! It was absolutely filthy when we moved in. We sent the official before photos and they didn't even bother replying. Just released the whole deposit.

Not this one, thank you.

and of course all landlords are bustards and all tenants are angelic. 🤔

I have several properties and I've only kept some £ twice. £100 once, when the tenants had damaged a curtain rail and taken down a shed, and another time I kept it all when the tenant had totally destroyed my house. It needed a new kitchen, they'd stolen the fireplace and left ALL their stuff in that I had to pay for removal of. They'd also not paid their rent for 5 months.

OP yanbu.

For all those “not all landlords” why do you think deposit protection scheme was invented and made a legal requirement? Because so many were dicks about the deposit!

'So many' doesn't mean all, does it?
The police were invented because so many people committed crimes.
Most of us still don't, though.

This👆

@aodirjjd
The deposit protection scheme was invented and made a legal requirement in part because some unscrupulous LLs viewed the deposit in effect as an extra months rent.
But that is not the whole story.
It was set up in part to create jobs. The scheme is entirely self funded.
But perhaps most importantly, it was set up, along with a host of other measures, as part of the government's war on landlords. The aim was to make life increasingly difficult for LLs so that they would exit the market. As has been mentioned in this thread, the deposit schemes are firmly on the side of the tenant.
If LLs selling up results in more property being made available for people to buy, then that could be viewed as a positive, but my flat for instance is in a city where much of the population looking for accommodation is fairly transient. The type of tenants I have are not looking to buy. They want decent accommodation for a couple of years and then they generally move on and away from the area, city and sometimes country. I don't see how me selling up to a non landlord is going to benefit people especially when you consider how many people apply to rent it when it goes on the market. But that is exactly what I am going to do in a couple of years.
I think the scheme is in principal a good idea but the way it's administered is often unfair and deliberately so.

Some landlords will try anything to keep your deposit. We had one who took it as an "administration charge to cover check out expenses". When we queried this, he said that he had charged us for the check out inspection and for the time that it was empty while they re let it, because they hadn't managed to re let it while we were living there.
A fortnight before we were due to move out, he rang us and said that he wanted us out immediately so that he could show people round the flat. We were away that weekend, and even if we weren't, asking us to pack up and move within a day, and find somewhere to store our stuff was utterly unreasonable. He later claimed that it was our fault that the house was empty for 6 weeks, and sent us a bill for the additional 2 weeks rent!
Small claims court agreed with us, and we got our deposit back, and ignored the bill for the extra time.This was before the days of deposit protection schemes ,- at least now landlords can't pull stunts like that.

My aunty rents out a number of properties and one tenant in particular is a total nightmare. She complains about issues, my aunt arranges someone to come and look at it at an agreed time - and invariably there is some reason why she won't let them in! In the end my aunt decided to sell up - this tenant even harassed her on the day of my uncle's funeral but now the tenant has put in a complaint about her. I'm not sure of the ins and outs but the house is in limbo until the dispute is sorted out.

A few years ago, I faced a similar situation. I attempted to compromise and agreed to give the landlord half of the deposit, even though I disagreed with it. Unknowingly, this action automatically released half the deposit to the landlord while the other half was still being disputed. Ultimately, the landlord's claim was unfounded, and I recovered my deposit. My advice is to avoid any compromises and dispute through the deposit scheme! Good luck!!

As an ex landlord myself, how does this ever make any business sense? I could always relet my properties within days. It was never worth getting into a deposit dispute if I could get in, clean and redecorate and miss out on minimal rent.

Well done for standing your ground and asserting your (legal, entirely reasonable) rights. In years of renting I've been stunned by what letting agents/landlords have tried to pull - and often they haven't tried very hard.

Mine wanted me to pay rent for two weeks without living in the flat while they refurbished the bathroom and didn't provide any accommodation, and asked for £200 off the deposit, literally all I did was dispute it and they gave up because they couldn't be bothered to make up a lie.

If you've been in the property a set number of years, them needing to touch up the paint and even recarpet is wear and tear. A lot of landlords forget that this kind of stuff is what rent has been paid for over the years - you've already paid for the wear and tear, they can't charge you again. Give 'em hell, OP.