I have a house that's been rented out for five years as I moved elsewhere and didn't want to sell it. Tenants have just moved out and I'm moving back. I've been to have a look at it, after the letting agents had said it was "fine" and have found a couple of things that I'm a bit, well, not ok with, and wonder what other opinions are.
There are a few areas of damage - I can live with this, it's normal wear and tear - and they've redecorated really badly, but again, I can live with this as I'm going to redecorate anyway. But what I'm really not ok with is my curtains - I had some beautiful floor-length made-to-measure silk curtains that I left in situ in the living room. One set are missing, the others are now a good four inches off the floor. (These curtains, incidentally, were mega expensive, and all the previous tenants looked after them.) Apparently, the missing set had got damp and were "minging" so they threw them in the bin. The other set they said were "too long" so they took it upon themselves to shorten them. They can't be let back down, so they're ruined. I have photographs from just before they moved in to show that the curtains just skimmed the carpet, as they were meant to - it's not as if they were those that are pubbled on the floor.
The letting agent tells me that I don't have any grounds for claiming part of their deposit back as the Deposit Protection Scheme will say this is wear and tear. I don't think it is. Quite apart from the fact that there's no damp at the house (I've had two damp surveys done this week to make sure), to deliberately take four inches off my curtains and ruin them surely isn't "reasonable wear and tear"...?
Do I just have to take this on the chin (and spend £2,000 replacing them)...?