Smokey01 Posted August 4, 2011 Report Share Posted August 4, 2011 Hi everyone, so far this forum is fantastic and I would like to ask for some more help please. My last tenant agreed via the Tenancy Agreement to leave behind a bed that was bought partially with my money and partially with their money. The agreement was that whilst the house was only rented part furnished I was not obliged to provide a bed in one of the rooms but to keep the tenancy moving forwards we agreed the above and this was written into the tenancy agreement. However the TDS and estate agent Thornley Groves have sided with the tenant stating that they deem a bed to be just a bed frame and including the mattress and the tenant has indeed taken the mattress at the end of the tenancy. The wording in the tenancy is very clear as it states the "bed" will be left at the end of the tenancy, and the CEO Michael Groves has even now stated in a complaint I made to the Property Ombudsman, that they agree they should have worded the tenancy agreement more clearly. Following complaints to the TDS the estate agent and the PO, all are effectively blaming the other party, with the TDS saying the agent should have worded the tenancy agreement to avoid ambiguity, the agent agreeing the wording is poor but accepting no liability to refund the cost of the mattress, and the PO stating that they agree I have every reason to be annoyed at the decision the TDS have come to, but have only awarded money due to the stress caused by this issue amongst many other aspects of this case that have gone wrong. Any advise please would be much appreciated. PS the Oxford English Dictionary clearly states a bed incorporates a mattress, so quite why the tenant thought she could take it is beyond me, and quite why issues over what a bed is are being brought into this for is once again beyond belief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mortitia Posted August 4, 2011 Report Share Posted August 4, 2011 I bet your tenant has not read the OED recently. In general parlance the word bed 9 times out of ten would be taken to mean mattress as well. Since at the outset of the tenancy it seems you 'were obliged to provide a bed in one of the rooms' - did you include the mattress??? Or did you provide just a bed base? Can you see where I am going with this........ For what a let- type mattress costs is it worth the grief? The mattress in question might have been stained or had bed bugs. I'd be inclined to move on. Mortitia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melboy Posted August 4, 2011 Report Share Posted August 4, 2011 Yep! write it off as a tax loss buy a new one and move on. Mel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smokey01 Posted August 4, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 4, 2011 All, yeah I take your point but in each of the rooms the inventory quite clearly states a bed frame and mattress, so the implication of the word "bed" which is both should have been enough to secure the complete item at the end of the tenancy. I know its not huge money, but it is the principle and there are many other points related to this dispute that amounts to £1000s and this is just one, so it all adds up. I guess my question is who should I take to small claims on this one, given that the deposit is supposed to protect landlords and hasn't, is it the TDS or now the tenant, as she has the money back which should have been given to me by the TDS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smokey01 Posted August 4, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 4, 2011 Another point in question is in relation to a retro fridge. The check in inventory states it as "in as new condition" which has been signed by the tenant myself and the lettings agent. The check out report and photos quite clearly show a smashed fridge plinth, broken freezer door and scratches to the front door of this fridge. The costs for replacing the plinth and freezer door amounts to in excess of £300. I can live with the scratches cos that would be fair wear and tear but the other damage is considerable and not wear and tear. The problem is the TDS Head of Adjudication a guy called Michael Groves, seems to be contradicting the check in/out process, as he states on one hand that the check in clerk could have missed the damage to the plinth (so my question here is why go to the effort of actually stating it was as new then...?), and then goes on to say that the "scratches on the door" are unlikely to have been missed by the check in clerk. The cracked plinth is far more obvious than the scratches so I don't get his logic, and regardless he has not awarded any money for any of the damage, not even the freezer door that was broken off. The tenant provided "a new one" but failed to check the make and model and it was not for this fridge so is completely useless. Again any help please...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melboy Posted August 4, 2011 Report Share Posted August 4, 2011 The problem for you is that you could take the Tenant to court and win your day and be awarded costs etc. and the tenant is told to pay you back at £5 a week for the next 30 years. Is it worth all the personal aggrevation your going to get? It is a fact that most court costs awarded to landlords are rarely paid off beyond a month. Work out roughly what you stand to lose put it down to experience and write-it off and be perhaps more aware of who is going to occupy your property next time around. Believe me...... we have all been there where you are now. If I had to take a tenant to court it would be to get a CCJ against him to bu$$er up his credit rating because I know I wouldn't be seeing any money back. Mel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smokey01 Posted August 4, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 4, 2011 Melboy, it amounts to Thousands not hundreds so i'ts no small amount here that is in dispute, and the ex tenant is very wealthy, no names being mentioned here but was in the paper recently.........and I don't think a bailiff would have too much trouble getting property to cover my costs etc if it comes to that, and I do have the tenants new address now (house worth over £1m). I do take your point but it's alot of money we are talking here and not so easy for me to write off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melboy Posted August 5, 2011 Report Share Posted August 5, 2011 In that case you should hire a specialist lawyer and proceed through the courts and just hope costs are awarded to you as well. This will be your only way but be prepared for a big outlay in legal fees. Mel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smokey01 Posted August 5, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 5, 2011 Melboy - Thanks for the warning. I intend to represent the case myself as I thought this was the point of small claims courts, and again thought costs were restricted re outcome either way....? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mortitia Posted August 5, 2011 Report Share Posted August 5, 2011 Better still Smokey - get on to the papers and sell your story - more money to be made at that I should think - now where did I put Max Clifford's number? Mortitia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rizzer Posted August 6, 2011 Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 You could spend so much time and money dealing with this, you should just forget about it and move on. Not easy I know but theres no point in spending good money after bad money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.