Hi everyone, I'm new here!

[Digital81]

Just wanted to say hello and get on with my first query.

I moved out of a rented property on 08/12/07 folliwng a 12 month lease. My landlords were not able to do a full inspection on the day we moved out and performed the check when we were not around. From a deposit of £725 they have witheld £200 for redecorating and cleaning which we feel is excessive. they also blamed us for mould in the bathroom and bedroom and told us we should have bought a dehumidifier. We believe the minor marks on walls and carpets constitute reasonable wear and tear and they have no right to keep this money. what are our rights?

[ukaviator]

Hi Digital81

Welcome to CAG. I have moved your thread here to get more replies.

Uk

[MrShed]

Did you sign a detailed inventory upon commencement of the tenancy? Was the conditions of the walls/carpets listed on here? What are the nature of the marks on the walls/carpets? IE are there stains and scuff marks, or a general deterioation(spelling!!!) of the thickness of the carpet and the colour of the walls?

With regards the mould, difficult to say without seeing, but I would probably have to say I agree with the landlord on that one - there isnt really any reason why surface mould should take hold in a bathroom and/or bedroom unless there is either structural damp, or the property has not been ventilated properly.

[Digital81]

Originally Posted by MrShed

Did you sign a detailed inventory upon commencement of the tenancy? Was the conditions of the walls/carpets listed on here? What are the nature of the marks on the walls/carpets? IE are there stains and scuff marks, or a general deterioation(spelling!!!) of the thickness of the carpet and the colour of the walls?

With regards the mould, difficult to say without seeing, but I would probably have to say I agree with the landlord on that one - there isnt really any reason why surface mould should take hold in a bathroom and/or bedroom unless there is either structural damp, or the property has not been ventilated properly.

Inventory was signed. I think condition was ok. The marks on the walls are very minor scuffs. the main area was near the front door where most people who visited came in, including the landlord with equipment to fix the toilet and a plumber with tools to do an inspection. Never really noticed anything until they pointed them out. Light walls and carpet. Slight discolouration to a VERY light carpet.

I don't accept the mould as our fault. One of the landlords said there had been problems in the past with mould on the walls and said it wiped off and could be painted over. The other denied all knowledge and said WE should have bought a dehumidifier. Something which should have been outlined at the beginning?

[MrShed]

Well, fair wear and tear is a difficult one. It is defined as damage over and above what would be expected by day to day use. However, this definition varies wildly. My opinion, and it is only my opinion, is that general grubbiness of a wall/discolouration of a carpet is fair wear and tear, individual scuff marks etc are not. I base this on the fact that, again in my opinion, I see no reason why any marks on walls and carpets should occur if you are careful. I live in my own property, have been here for 8 years(6 years since carpets were replaced and 2 or 3 since redecoration), and there are no marks on any carpets or walls anywhere. Over time, paint fades, carpets get worn, and this clearly falls under fair wear and tear. Stains and scuff marks are not fair wear and tear, it is the result of someone putting something against a wall when the should not have or spilling something on a carpet when they shouldnt have. Again, my opinion!

We will have to agree to disagree on the mould. I dont accept the "my landlord didnt tell me" argument as a get-out clause for not keeping a property ventilated.

At the end of the day, these type of questions are very much the type of questions that would end up being at the discretion of a judge should it come to court.

Was the condition/existing marks listed on the inventory?

[MrShed]

Should have mentioned - keeping the property ventilated would come under your obligation as a tenant to treat the property in a "tenant-like manner".

[Digital81]

Originally Posted by MrShed

Well, fair wear and tear is a difficult one. It is defined as damage over and above what would be expected by day to day use. However, this definition varies wildly. My opinion, and it is only my opinion, is that general grubbiness of a wall/discolouration of a carpet is fair wear and tear, individual scuff marks etc are not. I base this on the fact that, again in my opinion, I see no reason why any marks on walls and carpets should occur if you are careful. I live in my own property, have been here for 8 years(6 years since carpets were replaced and 2 or 3 since redecoration), and there are no marks on any carpets or walls anywhere. Over time, paint fades, carpets get worn, and this clearly falls under fair wear and tear. Stains and scuff marks are not fair wear and tear, it is the result of someone putting something against a wall when the should not have or spilling something on a carpet when they shouldnt have. Again, my opinion!

We will have to agree to disagree on the mould. I dont accept the "my landlord didnt tell me" argument as a get-out clause for not keeping a property ventilated.

At the end of the day, these type of questions are very much the type of questions that would end up being at the discretion of a judge should it come to court.

Was the condition/existing marks listed on the inventory?

We did ventilate the property. We weren't aware of the underlying problems, but as a matter ventilation we made sure windows were left open regularly.

You must be an extremly accident-free individual who doesn't make any marks. Unfortunately I don't accept anyone saying that marks and scuffs aren't fair wear and tear. Unfortunately these things happen and no one can keep a property 100% mark free.

What would you say to a couple who were landlords, where one said they had seen mould before and would just paint it to hide the evidence and one who denied the problems and blamed it one then tenants?

[Digital81]

oh, and is 200 pounds a realistic amount for a bit of retouching and cleaning. maybe i'll start a buisness if i can charge that price!!!

[MrShed]

You are absolutely right, these things happen. But that does not make it fair wear and tear - for example, spilling coffee on a carpet is an accident, but is in its own way negligent, and as such is not FWT. It may be an accident, and one which happens to most people, but that does not make the landlord responsible to cover the financial loss due to such an accident. And yes I have been lucky, I accept that

£200 is not unrealistic, although I agree it is a bit steep.

What the landlords say is neither here nor there with regards the mould to be honest. If the mould has occurred before, and you can show that it is due to a structural issue, then it is the landlords responsibility. Otherwise, it would almost certainly be taken as a ventilation issue, which is your responsibility.