nongrokal Posted August 2, 2009 Report Share Posted August 2, 2009 Hi all, new to this so please excuse fopars, I have just had an ajudication from the deposit protection people, and i am not amused, acording to them a door with a hole in is not ruined but has had its life shortend, i am not alowed to replace a carpet becuse i did not photo the smell, this sort of rubish whent od though all my claim. Where is the protection for the landlord? I am thinking of dropping deposits and having two mouthes rent instead, how do i word this so that i can return one mounths rent at the end of the tenatcy? a good will payment perhaps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mortitia Posted August 3, 2009 Report Share Posted August 3, 2009 Hi, I am sure we would all like to know who the offending deposit holder/adjudicator was - can you name/shame them? One of my tenants has given notice today and it will be my first refund under the scheme. I don't know anyone who has stopped taking deposits but it was widely mentioned that this would happen when the set-up first started. Anyone out there done this? Can't see a problem with the wording you suggest but tenants might not go for it. Mortitia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trenners Posted August 3, 2009 Report Share Posted August 3, 2009 There are many laws that are unfair in life .... but if everyone flouted them then there would be ANARCHY !! Rent is Rent ..... Deposit is Deposit ......... If you take rent as a deposit (ie: 2 months rent in advance) then it is a DEPOSIT and not RENT. If you take a cash deposit then you need to protect it in a Government approved scheme - end of discussion! You are running a professional business (renting property to tenants) and you must abide by the law or face the consequences. It is upto the landlord to PROVE that the tenant has damaged the property and that deductions to the deposit are fair. If you cannot prove the damage was done (which it seems you can't) then the ajudicator will find in favour of the tenant .... So ... what should you do .... improve YOUR PROCESSES so that you can prove damage in the future by getting your tenant to sign a comprehensive inventory / schedule of condition at the start of the tenancy ... and include as many photos as possible. If you can't abide by the law ..... you should sell up your investment properties and stop being a landlord. Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nongrokal Posted August 4, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 4, 2009 Thanks for the replies, mark seems a bit harsh, At the start of the tenatcey my property was brand new, so i know that all damige was caused by the tenants, They had done a lot of damige including repainting ( including lights and fittings) flooded the kichine, the puppy had bitten the door handles and the skirting, it was left all day in the bedroom and the carpet was stinking, ( the rspca was called by neighbers) and the place was dirty, there was more but you get the drift. the deposit was with the goverment sponserd deposit protection people, they took over 3 mounth,s to make a rulling. i do not expect the house to remain brand new, I allowed for fair ware and tear I presented 30 photos and recipets but to no avale Imo the ajudictor is on the side or the tenant from the start, i am getting a bit fed up of being the big bad landlord. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melboy Posted August 4, 2009 Report Share Posted August 4, 2009 He does have a strong case Mark........... I havn't had the use of the DPS for refunding as yet but given the circumstances above I think I would be pretty peeved off as well but there again I wouldn't allow a puppy into one of my properties....full stop. Mel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trenners Posted August 4, 2009 Report Share Posted August 4, 2009 Hi Melboy, The problem is that very few landlords have sufficient evidence to prove that their tenant has actually damaged the property ..... and the ajudicator then has no option other than to find in favour of the tenant. I think recent research showed that around 90% of the cases that were referred for judgement were found in favour of the tenant. I don't think this demonstrates a bias (towards the tenant) it simply shows that landlords need to improve their inventory processes so that they can provide sufficient evidence to ensure judgement is awarded in their favour. I was a little harsh in my response to the initial question because I don't believe the answer is to find ways to circumvent the deposit protection laws. These laws were put into place to protect tenants (because so many unscrupulous landlords had unfairly withheld tenants deposit money in the past). Best wishes Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nongrokal Posted August 4, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 4, 2009 yes i do agree you should not allow a dog in your property--------- witch is why i excludid them in the lease, you can only send photos and statements and this i did, after that it is up to the ajudicator. I think the prinsable the DPS is a good one, but it must be fair. this was not. I will have to come up with something else Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest trebor69trebor Posted August 4, 2009 Report Share Posted August 4, 2009 the thing that get me is all this deposit money ( going away from the point abit) goes into a goverment account millions of millions my question is who gets the interest the goverment thats who this country is a constant rip off i wish i could set up an account and have you all pay in your money you can all have it back in six months but i be in the south of france living off the interest good buisness ah just a thought Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mortitia Posted August 5, 2009 Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 Going back to the dog thing Nongrokal, how often did you inspect the property ?- so how long was puppy there doing damage? Must have been some while if RSPCA was called? Tenants will always try to 'forget' about conditions in AST's to do what they want that's why you have to inspect regularly. I suppose the DPS saw this as being largely your fault for not stopping the damage sooner. Going back to Mark's first response - you are running a business so get in there next time and show you are in charge. You can't just take the rent and expect all to be well. The neighbours seem to have responded by complaining so why not give your number to one and ask them to call you if any bad situation arises in future? This is not a 'get out of your duty checks free' scheme but it may mend some fences with those nearby. Trebor - yes the DPS is coining it in - including on the phone lines which are premium rate and they keep you hanging on ages if you should be so unfortunate to have to call them. ( I locked my pin.) I would say it is more than self financing and making a healthy profit. Mortitia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Dewsberry Posted August 9, 2009 Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 Hi Melboy, The problem is that very few landlords have sufficient evidence to prove that their tenant has actually damaged the property ..... and the ajudicator then has no option other than to find in favour of the tenant. I think recent research showed that around 90% of the cases that were referred for judgement were found in favour of the tenant. I don't think this demonstrates a bias (towards the tenant) it simply shows that landlords need to improve their inventory processes so that they can provide sufficient evidence to ensure judgement is awarded in their favour. Last data I saw stated 96% in favour of Tenant. ...and you don't think this demonstrates a bias !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! behave yourself Mark. I agree that LL need to record condition of prop accurately at beginning, and end of term. I have had no cause to get involved in any disputes of deposits at this level - any i have are sorted out direct with T. I do not do written inventories any more. On check in I walk around the prop with T identifying any "issues", then WE walk around together and i video the whole prop, with T in shot and verbally agreeing condition as we go, each room gets a running commentary on walls 1-4, ceiling, floor, light switches, sockets, windows, curtains etc... with the T actually switching lights on and off, opening and closing windows etc ....then we do all the furniture, lifting mattresses and opening/ closing wardrobe doors, drws etc. Any "issues" are zoomed up close, with a verbal description, ending with me saying "agreed" and T saying "yes". Vid is dated verbally in shot, with both T and I stating our names and identifying oursleves as T & LL and confirming prop address move in date as today etc. This vid should be used to protect your interests , include things like the gas safety cert ( which just happens to be on the kitchen table!) the dep cert (proof that they have had it!) any notices on walls re: HMO management (a legal requirement in HMOs), a wall notice saying "no pets"......and anything else that you consider that could be useful later on .... If you run into problems later your will have your arse well and truly covered .... The whole procees takes around 30 mins, is extremely detailed, with T in lead role - we do the same on checkout (if neccessary) T have been VERY receptive to the idea, I point out that a pic speaks a 1000 words and the whole thing is very transparent, leaving no room for either one of us to attempt to pull a fast one on the other! The keys to prop are then handed over. LL should use the new legislation as it was intended: to ensure the management of rented property is done professionally, the Guvmint has given us many new tools to use to our advantage ....if they are used "properly" Comments welcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.