Rental Houses - Painting

We're pretty flexible like that and will keep security deposits if people take the piss.

Not if your BTL is in England or Wales. You have a contract with another person and both parties have to keep to the Housing Acts and comply with the new proposed Act that is going through.

The law changed to stop some people helping themselves to a tenant’s money. From what I remember, that law change was campaigned for by charities like The CAB, Shelter etc

Before that addition to the Housing laws that ended this practice, we used to advise tenants to take out insurance (that only cost about £20 a year) that also provided a legal team of their choosing to take a landlord to court. The insurers then claimed their legal and court costs back from the landlord and the tenant got their money back. This system was clogging the courts and some tenants were worried about going to court, but the law change is much better for everyone, except the bad landlords. In some cases the landlord must pay compensation to a tenant if they haven't followed the law or kept up to date with the law changes.
 
Now, a landlord must pay the deposit back within 10 days. If the tenant and landlord are in dispute, the landlord can only keep this disputed amount and must give the rest of the deposit back to the tenant. The tenant then disputes this deducted amount with the deposit scheme that the landlord chose, but was required to use.

Once a dispute is raised with that deposit scheme, this usually focuses the mind of the landlord or letting agent, because if they have too may disputes ruled against them, then they are in all sorts of problems with the deposit schemes. The deposit scheme is the one who will decide if an amount is allowed to be deducted under the housing laws and if so, how much that can be.

Some councils' now employ staff just to tackle the bad landlords and letting agents in their area and will peruse these through the courts to clean up their area.

Not if your BTL is in England or Wales. You have a contract with another person and both parties have to keep to the Housing Acts and comply with the new proposed Act that is going through.

The law changed to stop some people helping themselves to a tenant’s money. From what I remember, that law change was campaigned for by charities like The CAB, Shelter etc

Before that addition to the Housing laws that ended this practice, we used to advise tenants to take out insurance (that only cost about £20 a year) that also provided a legal team of their choosing to take a landlord to court. The insurers then claimed their legal and court costs back from the landlord and the tenant got their money back. This system was clogging the courts and some tenants were worried about going to court, but the law change is much better for everyone, except the bad landlords. In some cases the landlord must pay compensation to a tenant if they haven't followed the law or kept up to date with the law changes.
 
Now, a landlord must pay the deposit back within 10 days. If the tenant and landlord are in dispute, the landlord can only keep this disputed amount and must give the rest of the deposit back to the tenant. The tenant then disputes this deducted amount with the deposit scheme that the landlord chose, but was required to use.

Once a dispute is raised with that deposit scheme, this usually focuses the mind of the landlord or letting agent, because if they have too may disputes ruled against them, then they are in all sorts of problems with the deposit schemes. The deposit scheme is the one who will decide if an amount is allowed to be deducted under the housing laws and if so, how much that can be.

Some councils' now employ staff just to tackle the bad landlords and letting agents in their area and will peruse these through the courts to clean up their area.

But how does this work when contracts state (with photos) what condition the property should be in upon end of rental? If they don't actually comply with the agreement to keep the property at a particular standard or they face a deduction from the security deposit, how does that work? What is even the point of a security deposit if it has to be returned regardless? (sorry, you might have answered this in your post, but I just skimmed it as I'm multi-tasking at the moment and didn't see anything that explained it so apologies if you're repeating yourself).

But how does this work when contracts state (with photos) what condition the property should be in upon end of rental? If they don't actually comply with the agreement to keep the property at a particular standard or they face a deduction from the security deposit, how does that work? What is even the point of a security deposit if it has to be returned regardless? (sorry, you might have answered this in your post, but I just skimmed it as I'm multi-tasking at the moment and didn't see anything that explained it so apologies if you're repeating yourself).

She is saying the landlord can keep the disputed amount only, the rest has to be returned while the dispute is ongoing.

I’ve painted and wallpapered (at our last house) and painted our current house. Neither landlord cared, but we do choose nice neutral colours. Our last place had two wall sh*t link and two walls black in our master bedroom. Our new place said absolutely no nails in the walls, and it was clear previous tenants didn’t listen to this as there are/we’re holes all over. This is naughty of me,  but because this house has been a bit of a pain for us with the landlord I’ve chosen to ignore this rule. But I’ve only used tiny nails, anything bigger uses command strips. And I will happily patch any holes and we move. We’ve had our first inspection where they told us the house looks better than it did when we moved in.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

She is saying the landlord can keep the disputed amount only, the rest has to be returned while the dispute is ongoing.

Oh well, yeah. I mean..We don't keep the WHOLE security deposit unless there's the entire security deposit worth of damage. We just keep what we need to get it back to the condition that was agreed upon in the contracts.

We just keep what we need to get it back to the condition that was agreed upon in the contracts.

Minus fair wear and tear?

Minus fair wear and tear?

I don't really think we'd take anything for fair wear and tear, if I'm honest. We kind of expect there to be some. It's more if there's more wear and tear than expected (for the amount of time the tenants are in there) or actual proper damage that we tend to start looking at keeping security deposit. Like we expect carpets to be more difficult to keep pristine and wouldn't charge for normal amounts of wear and tear in the hallway, for example, where people are likely to have shoes on. If there is a massive red wine stain or something in the middle of the room that we can't clean up so need new carpet (or can have cleaned so need to hire a cleaner), we would look at it then.

I don't really think we'd take anything for fair wear and tear, if I'm honest.

You can''t take anything for fair wear and tear under the housing laws in England and Wales. That cost should be built into your business plan.

Before the deposit schemes came in, the only recourse for tenants who had landlords who tried this, was to go to court. Now the deposit schemes handle these landlords and if the landlord gets too many diputes (not keeping deductions to the housing laws) against them, then are in trouble with these deposit schemes.

If there is a massive red wine stain or something in the middle of the room that we can't clean up so need new carpet (or can have cleaned so need to hire a cleaner), we would look at it then.

You don't get a new carpet from the tenant from that. From what I recall, the deposit scheme (and the courts before that) will ask for your receipt for that carpet when it was new and then work out how many years that has been down as that will reduce the tentants liability etc

You can''t take anything for fair wear and tear under the housing laws in England and Wales. That cost should be built into your business plan.

Before the deposit schemes came in, the only recourse for tenants who had landlords who tried this, was to go to court. Now the deposit schemes handle these landlords and if the landlord gets too many diputes (not keeping deductions to the housing laws) against them, then are in trouble with these deposit schemes.


You don't get a new carpet from the tenant from that. From what I recall, the deposit scheme (and the courts before that) will ask for your receipt for that carpet when it was new and then work out how many years that has been down as that will reduce the tentants liability etc

When I said I "don't think" we do I was saying we *don't* but I don't deal with the negotiations so didn't want to say 100% for a fact and I'm also at work so I'm just typing what I can remember before I've had any coffee and am catching up on work emails.

Mmmmm i don't know if I agree that if they *ruin* a carpet or it requires additional cleaning that they don't do which we've built into the contract, that we can't deduct that from their security deposit, but again, I don't deal with the negotiations so perhaps I'm just not well read enough on the subject. All I can say for sure is that we have a certain standard in our legal document signed by both parties stating what condition the property  should be in when they move out. For example, our tenants of the last two years are now moving out and they moved in to BRAND NEW carpets. We don't expect to need to rip them out and replace them after 2 years of use. Obviously wear and tear is expected and "factored in" but we don't expect that they will be in a state where we will need to physically rip them out.

Mmmmm i don't know if I agree that if they *ruin* a carpet or it requires additional cleaning that they don't do which we've built into the contract, that we can't deduct that from their security deposit, but again, I don't deal with the negotiations so perhaps I'm just not well read enough on the subject.

As I said you might be able to but it will be based on the quaility of carpet and the years it has been down - with a receipt required for the original carpet as your proof. There aren't any negotiations as it is based on formulas.

It used to be that a good quality carpet is expected to last 10 years, carpet ruined in year 6, means 4/10s of the cost towards a new carpet. A cheap carpet, less than that. I'm not sure what the formula is now.

The housing laws do not allow betterment.

Regardless of what is in your contract, you can't take away a persons legal rights in a contract. If you have a contract that does that, then I would worry about what the letting agent has missed as most of the laws to stamp out bad landords, are aimed at the landlord.

Letting agents don't need to have any qualifications and anybody can set themselves up as a letting agent.

Then there are the "professional" tenants, who can make money from a landlord who either doesn't know the laws or tries to get around them. What has made it easier for these is the rise in what is called the "me too buy to let" landlords.

One of the funniest ones I saw was from a landlord who, to avoid getting into trouble with Health and Safety because the fire safety tag had come off the newish leather sofa, didn't list the sofa in the contents when the tenants moved it. When the tenants moved out, they took that leather sofa with them.

Sirius, I think you'd be shocked at what REALLY happens with landlords and deposits. 

If the tenant doesn't do their due diligence with photos after they move out - it can be BAD.  Loads of people with shocking experiences on the Expat groups.

Landlords get away with a lot.  The UK laws are NOT written in the tenants favor no matter what the government may try to tell you.

Sirius, I think you'd be shocked at what REALLY happens with landlords and deposits. 

If the tenant doesn't do their due diligence with photos after they move out - it can be BAD.  Loads of people with shocking experiences on the Expat groups.

Landlords get away with a lot.  The UK laws are NOT written in the tenants favor no matter what the government may try to tell you.

I must agree. Im not an expert in law nor will I pretend to be, but I’m shocked at the quality of standard my current landlord/Lettings agents have. We rent through a well known agent as well.

Met my neighbor yesterday who’s lived here as long as our houses have been around and said the landlords always been a bit crap. She’s put in complaints against our broken fence herself ( unknowingly to us) which is the same fence I’ve been trying to get fixed.

Ignore my now weed ridden Back garden. But there’s my fence. It’s horrible and the worst thing is the wind purely blew it off that show badly it was assembled I hate how much our landlord gets away with things and the bare minimal he does to fix things that are wrong..


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I'm sorry Eh! That is absolutely rubbish!

I've seen things happen on both sides of the coin - one where it felt like the landlords were screwed 8 ways to Christmas with no recourse and also times where landlords seemed to have too much power and they took advantage. We just try to be fair. I'm not a solicitor. I have no legal experience. I will just say that we just try to do what is right for our tenants without getting screwed over in the process as best as we can.

Sirius, I think you'd be shocked at what REALLY happens with landlords and deposits. 

If the tenant doesn't do their due diligence with photos after they move out - it can be BAD.  Loads of people with shocking experiences on the Expat groups.

Landlords get away with a lot.  The UK laws are NOT written in the tenants favor no matter what the government may try to tell you.

Randomly, and only because I was rather proud of the state we left it in, I asked my husband to record a final walkthrough of our old rented house.  Maybe this should be a thing that everybody does.

(We didn't have to use the video for anything, as the landlady was beside herself with how nice we left the place, and happily returned our full deposit.  I only wanted the video to look back on where we lived for the first 4 years of our relationship.)