| Greedy landord keeps £2000 deposit [message #377868] |
Fr, 07 April 2006 10:38 |
|
Some friends of mine paid a landlord £3000 damage deposit on a house they
rented.
The landlord has subsequently billed my friends for approx £2000. Included
in the bill are items like £320 for 4 days work cleaning the house. Hes
replaced all the locks and chaged £250. Steam cleaned all the carpets and
charged £450 plus made all sort of other spurious charges.
My friends left the house in very good condition, clean and tidy etc and
have photographs to prove it. The property was also inspected every 3 months
by the agents and once by the landlord over a three year period. No problems
were ever raised.
Couple of questions.
1/ In the contract it says that diputes over deposit must be resolved by an
arbitrator appointed by the president of the chartered surveys body. Does
this stop my friends taking the landlord to the small claims court.
2/ Will the landlord need to prove damage with photographs etc or will a
bunch of made up invoices from his buddies hold enough weight in his favour.
Adrian Smith
|
|
|
| Re: Greedy landord keeps £2000 deposit [message #377871 ] |
Fr, 07 April 2006 11:48 |
|
On Fri, 07 Apr 2006 08:38:25 GMT, "Adrian Smith" <x [at] x.spam> wrote:
>Some friends of mine paid a landlord £3000 damage deposit on a house they
>rented.
>
>The landlord has subsequently billed my friends for approx £2000. Included
>in the bill are items like £320 for 4 days work cleaning the house. Hes
>replaced all the locks and chaged £250. Steam cleaned all the carpets and
>charged £450 plus made all sort of other spurious charges.
>
>My friends left the house in very good condition, clean and tidy etc and
>have photographs to prove it. The property was also inspected every 3 months
>by the agents and once by the landlord over a three year period. No problems
>were ever raised.
>
>Couple of questions.
>
>1/ In the contract it says that diputes over deposit must be resolved by an
>arbitrator appointed by the president of the chartered surveys body. Does
>this stop my friends taking the landlord to the small claims court.
>
>2/ Will the landlord need to prove damage with photographs etc or will a
>bunch of made up invoices from his buddies hold enough weight in his favour.
>
>Adrian Smith
>
I'm not a lawyer but I'd say your friends would have to use the
arbitrator.
The landlord would need some evidence but your friends could use their
photos and have a strong case. He could say things like they were
taken before the damage but it would be a matter of fact and who to
believe.
--
Peter Saxton from London
peter [at] petersaxton.co.uk
|
|
|
| Re: Greedy landord keeps £2000 deposit [message #377872 ] |
Fr, 07 April 2006 12:46 |
|
"Peter Saxton" wrote
> The landlord would need some evidence but your friends
> could use their photos and have a strong case. He could
> say things like they were taken before the damage
> but it would be a matter of fact and who to believe.
Didn't each photograph show a copy of a
newspaper from the last day of occupation? ;-)
|
|
|
| Re: Greedy landord keeps £2000 deposit [message #377876 ] |
Fr, 07 April 2006 14:04 |
|
"Adrian Smith" <x [at] x.spam> wrote:
>1/ In the contract it says that diputes over deposit must be resolved by an
>arbitrator appointed by the president of the chartered surveys body. Does
>this stop my friends taking the landlord to the small claims court.
>
>2/ Will the landlord need to prove damage with photographs etc or will a
>bunch of made up invoices from his buddies hold enough weight in his favour.
It's more a legal thing so post on uk.legal.moderated.
I don't know how enforcible the clause is. I would guess it's
referring to RICS arbitration which may not cover residential property
and could be costly. Contact them -
< URL:http://www.rics.org/RICSservices/RICSDisputeResolutionSe rvice/contacts.htm>
Nothing can remove a parties right for redress using the court system.
I don't know if the fact that they refused to use arbitration could be
held against them though, no doubt answers to this could be found by
searching on the Arbitration Act 1996
< URL:http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=%22Arbitratio n+Act+1996%22&meta=>.
The deposit (and thus any interest unless the contract says otherwise)
is there's, the landlord has to justify any deductions.
Deposit disputes are a FAQ and the procedures are straightforward -
see previous answers -
< URL:http://groups.google.co.uk/groups/search?q=landlord+depo sit+group%3Auk.legal.*&start=0&scoring=d&hl=en&a mp;>
In future, from 1/10/6 all landlords and agents will have to be
registered with, and abide by, the government sponsored tenancy
deposit scheme - <URL:http://www.odpm.gov.uk/index.asp?id=1163570> so
hopefully this will reduce the number of such disputes.
General links and info. on my webpage
< URL:http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/quickhelp/property.h tm>
Daytona
(Landlord & tenant, not a lawyer)
|
|
|
| Re: Greedy landord keeps £2000 deposit [message #377884 ] |
Fr, 07 April 2006 16:08 |
|
"Tim" <me [at] home.uk> wrote in message news:I6udnSaVlbeH3qvZRVny2g [at] bt.com...
> "Peter Saxton" wrote
>> The landlord would need some evidence but your friends
>> could use their photos and have a strong case. He could
>> say things like they were taken before the damage
>> but it would be a matter of fact and who to believe.
>
> Didn't each photograph show a copy of a
> newspaper from the last day of occupation? ;-)
>
>
>
No there are no newspapers in the photographs which is a shame, however the
photographs were taken when the house was completely empty and cleaned.
Adrian Smith
|
|
|
| Re: Greedy landord keeps £2000 deposit [message #377886 ] |
Fr, 07 April 2006 16:31 |
|
"Daytona" <me [at] privacy.net> wrote in message
news:qejc32l7aulvv4jir40fnmu1lm9jbm8jr7 [at] 4ax.com...
> "Adrian Smith" <x [at] x.spam> wrote:
>
>>1/ In the contract it says that diputes over deposit must be resolved by
>>an
>>arbitrator appointed by the president of the chartered surveys body. Does
>>this stop my friends taking the landlord to the small claims court.
>>
>>2/ Will the landlord need to prove damage with photographs etc or will a
>>bunch of made up invoices from his buddies hold enough weight in his
>>favour.
>
> It's more a legal thing so post on uk.legal.moderated.
>
> I don't know how enforcible the clause is. I would guess it's
> referring to RICS arbitration which may not cover residential property
> and could be costly. Contact them -
> < URL:http://www.rics.org/RICSservices/RICSDisputeResolutionSe rvice/contacts.htm>
> Nothing can remove a parties right for redress using the court system.
> I don't know if the fact that they refused to use arbitration could be
> held against them though, no doubt answers to this could be found by
> searching on the Arbitration Act 1996
> < URL:http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=%22Arbitratio n+Act+1996%22&meta=>.
>
> The deposit (and thus any interest unless the contract says otherwise)
> is there's, the landlord has to justify any deductions.
>
> Deposit disputes are a FAQ and the procedures are straightforward -
> see previous answers -
> < URL:http://groups.google.co.uk/groups/search?q=landlord+depo sit+group%3Auk.legal.*&start=0&scoring=d&hl=en&a mp;>
>
> In future, from 1/10/6 all landlords and agents will have to be
> registered with, and abide by, the government sponsored tenancy
> deposit scheme - <URL:http://www.odpm.gov.uk/index.asp?id=1163570> so
> hopefully this will reduce the number of such disputes.
>
> General links and info. on my webpage
> < URL:http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/quickhelp/property.h tm>
>
> Daytona
> (Landlord & tenant, not a lawyer)
Thanks, some useful links in there.
|
|
|
| Re: Greedy landord keeps £2000 deposit [message #377888 ] |
Fr, 07 April 2006 17:18 |
|
In future, they should take out Tenants Contents insurance - this
provides protection from landlords pulling stunts like this.
The landlord must make a claim through the tenants' insurance policy
and they're not going to be diddled. Even if they are, the tenant only
loses their excess.
|
|
|
| Re: Greedy landord keeps £2000 deposit [message #377896 ] |
Fr, 07 April 2006 19:02 |
|
Adrian Smith wrote:
> Some friends of mine paid a landlord £3000 damage deposit on a house they
> rented.
>
> The landlord has subsequently billed my friends for approx £2000. Included
> in the bill are items like £320 for 4 days work cleaning the house. Hes
> replaced all the locks and chaged £250. Steam cleaned all the carpets and
> charged £450 plus made all sort of other spurious charges.
>
> My friends left the house in very good condition, clean and tidy etc and
> have photographs to prove it. The property was also inspected every 3 months
> by the agents and once by the landlord over a three year period. No problems
> were ever raised.
>
> Couple of questions.
>
> 1/ In the contract it says that diputes over deposit must be resolved by an
> arbitrator appointed by the president of the chartered surveys body. Does
> this stop my friends taking the landlord to the small claims court.
>
> 2/ Will the landlord need to prove damage with photographs etc or will a
> bunch of made up invoices from his buddies hold enough weight in his favour.
>
> Adrian Smith
>
>
>
>
>
What a lot....
I think that you will find that most ( or even all ) of the above
charges can be challenged.
The best line of attck may be the Unfair Conditions as defined by the OFT.
See:
http://www.oft.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/DAAEFE58-1AAB-422A-AFED-B DE6C654A4EE/0/oft356.pdf
which includes:
"3.134 Section 91 of the Arbitration Act 1996 makes a compulsory
arbitration clause, ie: a term that requires that disputes between the
parties must be submitted to arbitration, automatically unfair under the
Regulations if it relates to claims of £5,000 or less, or £3,000 in
Northern Ireland.35 This is always unfair under the Regulations,
regardless of circumstances. A compulsory arbitration clause made unfair
in this way by the 1996 Act is legally ineffective and open to
regulatory action in all cases. We may also object to compulsory
arbitration clauses that are for amounts above the small claims
threshold or apply to non-financial issues."
To avoid misleading you, I would suggest going through this document
(and the examples) in detail and comparing the charges and conditions
imposed by the landlord with those defined in the Guidance Document.
Please let us know the end result.
Flop
|
|
|
| Re: Greedy landord keeps £2000 deposit [message #377901 ] |
Fr, 07 April 2006 19:38 |
|
"Tim" <me [at] home.uk> wrote in message news:I6udnSaVlbeH3qvZRVny2g [at] bt.com...
> "Peter Saxton" wrote
>> The landlord would need some evidence but your friends
>> could use their photos and have a strong case. He could
>> say things like they were taken before the damage
>> but it would be a matter of fact and who to believe.
>
> Didn't each photograph show a copy of a
> newspaper from the last day of occupation? ;-)
>
Thats a good idea I am at a 'checkout' in a couple of weeks time I will do
that.
--
Tumbleweed
email replies not necessary but to contact use;
tumbleweednews at hotmail dot com
|
|
|
| Re: Greedy landord keeps £2000 deposit [message #377914 ] |
Fr, 07 April 2006 21:39 |
|
>
> I think that you will find that most ( or even all ) of the above charges
> can be challenged.
>
> The best line of attck may be the Unfair Conditions as defined by the OFT.
>
> See:
>
> http://www.oft.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/DAAEFE58-1AAB-422A-AFED-B DE6C654A4EE/0/oft356.pdf
>
> which includes:
>
> "3.134 Section 91 of the Arbitration Act 1996 makes a compulsory
> arbitration clause, ie: a term that requires that disputes between the
> parties must be submitted to arbitration, automatically unfair under the
> Regulations if it relates to claims of £5,000 or less, or £3,000 in
> Northern Ireland.35 This is always unfair under the Regulations,
> regardless of circumstances. A compulsory arbitration clause made unfair
> in this way by the 1996 Act is legally ineffective and open to regulatory
> action in all cases. We may also object to compulsory arbitration clauses
> that are for amounts above the small claims threshold or apply to
> non-financial issues."
>
>
> To avoid misleading you, I would suggest going through this document (and
> the examples) in detail and comparing the charges and conditions imposed
> by the landlord with those defined in the Guidance Document.
>
>
> Please let us know the end result.
>
> Flop
Good idea, I did not think of the OFT. Thanks..
|
|
|
| Re: Greedy landord keeps £2000deposit [message #377918 ] |
Fr, 07 April 2006 19:48 |
|
Adrian Smith wrote:
> Couple of questions.
>
> 1/ In the contract it says that diputes over deposit must be resolved by
> an arbitrator appointed by the president of the chartered surveys body.
> Does this stop my friends taking the landlord to the small claims court.
Apparently not, according to another poster.
> 2/ Will the landlord need to prove damage with photographs etc or will a
> bunch of made up invoices from his buddies hold enough weight in his
> favour.
You sue for the return of your deposit. The landlord will have to
counterclaim for any damage caused, and it is up to him to prove it.
|
|
|
| Re: Greedy landord keeps £2000 deposit [message #377938 ] |
Sa, 08 April 2006 11:36 |
|
Simple answer.
Go to the small claims court, lawfull deductions are very well defined by
law. The LL has to prove loss and not the otherway around.
Good luck !!
"Adrian Smith" <x [at] x.spam> wrote in message
news:5ypZf.49274$wl.47747 [at] text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> Some friends of mine paid a landlord £3000 damage deposit on a house they
> rented.
>
> The landlord has subsequently billed my friends for approx £2000. Included
> in the bill are items like £320 for 4 days work cleaning the house. Hes
> replaced all the locks and chaged £250. Steam cleaned all the carpets and
> charged £450 plus made all sort of other spurious charges.
>
> My friends left the house in very good condition, clean and tidy etc and
> have photographs to prove it. The property was also inspected every 3
> months by the agents and once by the landlord over a three year period. No
> problems were ever raised.
>
> Couple of questions.
>
> 1/ In the contract it says that diputes over deposit must be resolved by
> an arbitrator appointed by the president of the chartered surveys body.
> Does this stop my friends taking the landlord to the small claims court.
>
> 2/ Will the landlord need to prove damage with photographs etc or will a
> bunch of made up invoices from his buddies hold enough weight in his
> favour.
>
> Adrian Smith
>
>
>
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Greedy landord keeps £2000 deposit [message #377940 ] |
Sa, 08 April 2006 12:34 |
|
Thanks for all the advice.
One further question:-
There was/ is an agent involved, when/ if the case goes to court, should I
make my claim against both the agent and landlord jointly?
|
|
|
| Re: Greedy landord keeps £2000 deposit [message #377950 ] |
Sa, 08 April 2006 14:01 |
|
"Adrian Smith" <x [at] x.spam> wrote in message
news:KkMZf.49838$wl.29326 [at] text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> Thanks for all the advice.
>
> One further question:-
>
> There was/ is an agent involved, when/ if the case goes to court, should I
> make my claim against both the agent and landlord jointly?
Just the LL, your contract is with the LL and the agent is simply working on
the LL behalf.
|
|
|
| Re: Greedy landord keeps £2000 deposit [message #377961 ] |
Sa, 08 April 2006 18:53 |
|
"Adrian Smith" <x [at] x.spam> wrote:
>There was/ is an agent involved, when/ if the case goes to court, should I
>make my claim against both the agent and landlord jointly?
Yes; it increases your chance of recovering any money due.
Daytona
|
|
|
| Re: Greedy landord keeps £2000 deposit [message #377962 ] |
Sa, 08 April 2006 18:54 |
|
"Adrian Smith" <x [at] x.spam> wrote:
>Good idea, I did not think of the OFT. Thanks..
You can email them the clause and get confirmation -
unfair.terms [at] oft.gov.uk
Daytona
|
|
|
