Landlords witholding deposit and lying about condition of house pre-moving in.

[StarlightMcKenzie]

In particular most rooms have painted over rawl plugs that weren't on the check-in inventory.

We have been tenants before and no-one has tried this with us before. We should have noted the walls of course but such level of detail had never been necessary before, nor honesty.

These landlords let their house for the first time to us and had a managing agent. I wondered if the managing agent had put them up to it and wondered why. I have just found out that the managing agent is the 'independent' agency that is holding our deposit.

That doesn't seem very independent to me. They want £770 and they have waiting almost a month before even telling us. They haven't returned the rest either.

What do I do next?

They have to return the undisputed amount of the deposit within 10 days so start a dispute. They also have to show that the money deducted for the damage you "caused" - and I'm sorry, if it wasn't mentioned in the check-in, I think it's going to be difficult to prove that the holes were already there when you moved in - amounted to the sum withheld. It is quite normal for LLs and sometimes agencies to hold the deposits themselves (I do with my rental properties) so I'm not sure it is a conspiracy. Check your inventory report again for any mention of holes, see if there are any photos to accompany it that might show them and then start disputing both the damage and the amount deducted.

No. There's no evidence the holes were there before we moved in, though they were big and blatent. We were so careful with the property we didn't even put Christmas decorations up. We only had the property for a year.

The painted over rawl plugs - surely they would have to prove that we painted over them

They are also claiming that there is some pink ink on one of the walls, but no pic. This is a possibility that one of the kids did it and we didn't notice - however surely if we were going to paint over holes we'd have painted over the pink ink mark as well .

I think the problem with the agency holding the money, is that they make interest on the disputed amount whilst it is being argued over, so will advise the owners to keep the dispute going etc.?

Unless the deposit is many, many thousands of pounds, any interest will be negligible.

Who did the inventory - I would be asking for evidence of any pen marks, generally inventory companies take pictures of things like this. Was it a truly independent company or was it someone associated with the estate agency?

However, as noted above, the LL can't pull a number out of the air. Even if there were dozens of holes in the walls, it will have taken a competent handyman (about £150 a day in London), a few hours to fill them and paint over (c. £20 on paint and filler) so ask for a break down of costs, receipts etc.

Yes. I imagine the checkout company either did or can get a picture of the pink mark (or the LL can).

The interest isn't negligible if the company do this to multiple tenants, and it is quite a few thousands as it is London and 2.5 months rent.

I don't think the LL has done any work. They are accusing US of having put the holes in and painted over them .

I know they are accusing you of doing this but what is the £770 figure they have come up with? They have to show that that sum reflects the work that needs doing and I would suggest that it couldn't possibly cost that much to sort out this type of damage.

An estate agency is obliged to return the non-disputed sum within ten days. The interest on the disputed £770, if you are lucky enough to find a deposit account at 3%, would be £23.10 a year less tax... I believe that most tenancy deposit schemes try to settle cases within 6 weeks.

Agency just agreed to return the rest.

There is a whole bunch of nonsense, like a chrome door handle we have changed for a brass one, and we have apparently put a Donald duck hook on the back of one of the doors, and blu tac on the ceiling.

I think the charge is for complete redecoration of the whole house, but I don't know. There is a list of things that LL wants to deduct for, but there is no quote that relates to that or description of the work quoted for.

This is the UK?

Your deposit cannot be held by the agent or the landlord, it MUST BY LAW be in a deposit protection scheme www.gov.uk/tenancy-deposit-protection/overview

The condition of the walls previously must have been noted (clearly) in order for them to stand a chance of proving that you caused the damage, and the are only allowed to charge a reasonable amount - eg if you've ruined the living room carpet, but that carpet was 5 years old, they're only allowed to charge a proportion of the replacement cost based on the expected lifetime of the carpet.

If they don't have the deposit in one of the Government Tenancy protection schemes then they're in far bigger trouble, you should report them for that, then take them to small claims (only costs about 35 quid and is a web form!) for the deposit back.

I'm both a tenant and a landlord, so I know that the schemes are fair BTW - I've had experience from both sides.

In that case, you have to push to see where this £770 was magicked up from. Unless the decoration was described as "as new" in the check-in, it would be quite strange to expect it to be completely redecorated for minor damage at check-out. Go through the check-in and check-out reports very carefully to see what is marked as tenant's responsibility and see if these jobs suggest full redecoration.

The only way that I can think that you could "prove" you didn't make the holes was if you had taken lots of photos while at the house - birthday parties and so on - that consistently show that you didn't have anything hanging on the walls. But even then, it's a long shot .

But lala - Starlight doesn't need to prove that she didn't make the holes, the landlord has to prove that she did (subtle but important difference)

The agent I let through, and the agent I've rented through carefully note the exact condition of all walls for exactly this reason.

It was described as newly painted with minor scruffs. We never challenged this because neither dh nor I have any idea what a newly painted wall would look like, nor what minor scruffs means. We've rented before and the most we've ever had taken is £35, as we really do look after the property.

The agency said that they have the deposit, but that it is 'registered' with the TDS. Apparently this is allowed.???

We weren't in the property long enough to have many photos but even so the majority of the 'work' is for the landing and hall.

Isn't the fact that the rawl plugs were not mentioned in the first inventory but were in the second the 'proof' that we did it?

Take it to the TDS then - the agency should have provided you with a number for the registration.

They really are fair, and won't let anyone do anyone else over.

In my case, they only had the tenant pay half for a nearly new kitchen counter that they had completely ruined for example.

I'd say that if the tenancy check-in report didn't note them, then the onus is on her to prove that she didn't make them. That is the "evidence" the TDS adjudicators will be most interested in. Agreed, if the check-in was generally very sketchy then she is in a stronger position but if it was at all competent but just "overlooked" the holes, she is going to have a problem.

The money can be registered with a TDS but held by the LL or estate agency - there is no suggestion that the money has not been registered, only that the EA has been very slow to return it and the disputed amount is ridiculous.l

Frankly, that doesn't look good, no, but 770 quid to do it is ridiculous and I doubt that the TDS would make you pay that.

Don't suppose you have forwarding details of the previous tenants do you?

If you do, might be worth dropping them a line to see if the Rawls plugs were in the wall when they were there... Could be that they forget to mention it each time when they check people in and then use it to make people pay out from their deposit and thus they get the money to redecorate or just profit from each time.

Or maybe asking the agents if you can see the check out report from the previous tenants. If they are reluctant to show them, say it's because you believe it proves the holes were already there... Then see if they revise their estimate! Bet if that is the case they would get into quite big trouble.

The LL lived there before us.

Though good idea otherwise.

They'll live there again some time. Hope they are told we're just a few doors down and hobnobbing with their neighbours.