"Extremely expensive solvent"

My son recently graduated and the landlord is refusing to return the £1000
deposit from the student house. One of the reasons he's giving is that there
was Christmas "spray-on snow" left on one window and he needed "extremely
expensive solvent" to remove it. He won't produce receipts.
Now I would have used a Stanley-blade holder to scrape it off, or try white
spirit, acetone, cellulose thinners or Nitromors; none of which are THAT
expensive. I'm sure he's trying it on, or are there solvents as precious as
printer ink? The landlord is a builder by the way...
Reply to
LSR
A pity you didn't. Landlords are always on the look out for excuses not to give money back at the end of a tenancy. Blue tack on the woodchip is a favourite IIRC :-)
, or try white
AFAIK there are no expensive solvents, and 500ml of own brand paint stripper will take anything off glass. I can't believe spray snow is that tenacious or they wouldn't be selling it in Woolworths from August onwards.
Reply to
Stuart Noble
So am I. If he can't produce receipts, and TBh even if he could, he has no right to keep all the money, just sufficient to cover the cost of repairs.
I suffered from this attitude of landlords that the money is "theirs' as soon as they get it while I was a student. Although small claims court is an option, I found that following the landlord around asking for my money back always worked... eventually.
One tried to withold £1000ish from me on the grounds that there was a cup ring on an item of furniture. I pointed out that (a) the cup ring had been there when I moved in, and (b) the item of furniture wasn's worth £1000. She refused to give me the money back, but since she owned an off-licence I stood in the shop asking for my money back, over and over again in the presence of other customers. Eventually she threw it at me to get rid of me.
Students should be good at it, they're not *that* far from the age of "are we there yet?"
Reply to
Steve Firth
================================== What are the other reasons for non-return? They might be relevant to the matter. In any case unless the house has been totally wrecked there should be some part of the deposit refundable.
Cic.
Reply to
Cicero
I did something similar to an old landlord of mine after some post went missing. The final resolution was they she gave me more money back to make me go away, since the missing post was of a difficult to determine value, I went for the highest possible value for the items :-)
Reply to
Simon Finnigan
I don't want to drift into uk.legal territory, but it's pretty minor stuff like, as suggested, Blu-tack marks on the walls plus cooker and fridge not left spotless. All things I'd consider fair wear and tear for a student house, which should be covered by the rent, not loss of deposit.
In fact the estate agents are still holding the deposit and the landlord is threatening to sue them for it. The lease was signed last summer so before this year's new rules came into effect. It does say that arbitration will be used to settle disputes but doesn't detail the actual process.
Reply to
LSR
Demand full deposit back minus (Is that just his deposit or did everyone have a same size deposit?) £30 for an hour labour and abottle of cleaning fluid.
Reply to
mogga
Most probably because the deposit has already been spent and Landlord hasn't got your dosh now!
Steve
Reply to
Steve
there
fridge not
student
landlord is
Well there are two sides to all stories. I treat tenants as they treat me. If they have paid on time, observed the terms of the lease, and returned the property in a clean and tidy state then I am very happy for them to have the deposit back in full. Even minor damage is acceptable if they've played fair especially if they've been there some time. If however there are cigarette burns in carpets and on surfaces, the oven is flithy, the bath has a tide mark that you can step out on, and walls have been blu-tacked contrary to the lease, then yes they get to pay for the repairs, and if they cost more than the deposit I'll firstly go after them, and then their guarantor. It makes no difference if they are students or in work, the terms are clearly laid out.
When I first meet them to make out an inventory I tell them of the problems I had with my first landlord, who insisted there was no need for an inventory, then tried it on on termination. SO we walk the property, and make sure that every blemish is noted. Usually the place will have had a once over with a magnolia roller before they move in so all walls should be vgc. However if previous tenant has used blu-tac it bleads through even if apparently entirely 'rolled off', and needs a stain blocker.
AWEM
Reply to
Andrew Mawson
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
(I used to be a senior finance person with a large firm of estate agents). If the agents are still holding the deposit, you're in fairly good shape.
Check if the estate agent is a member of ARLA (association of residential lettings agents); a letter copied to the branch and to ARLA is likely to produce some sensible approach in terms of bringing arbitration. Remember the agents are just that; agents for the landlord, and whilst generally they do have to do what they are told, they shouldn't be releasing deposits back to the landlord without going through a proper process first.
Another route is the RICS. If the estate agent (either one man band or part of a larger outfit) has any person working for them who is a member of RICS (chartered surveyors) and who also has the word "director" in their job title then they are bound by RICS regulations regarding the handling of client monies. RICS inspections are a complete pain in the rear for residential lettings estate agents, so again a letter copied to them and the branch should at least get the process moving properly.
Which agents are you with? Are they part of a larger group?
Hope some of that helps!
Matt
Reply to
matthew.larkin
I used to buy one that cost £12,000 (ex VAT) per 210 litre drum. I thought that was quite expensive.
Colin Bignell
Reply to
nightjar
In message , Stuart Noble writes
Wouldn't have made a blind bit of difference, there'd have just been a different ludicrous justification.
Reply to
bof
In message , Steve Firth writes
Good.
I still owe one thieving bastard ex-landlord a turd in a box, and that's a grudge going back over 20 years, must check if they're still at the address I have, I've not forgotten.
Reply to
bof
My hatred of landlords is mostly reserved nowadays for Peter Fahey of Manchester, who rented out a flat with a faulty carbon-monoxide leaking gas fire. It was mounted on a carpet which blocked the flow of air into the fire and the flue was partially obstructed.
He had the cheek to attempt to withold my deposit to pay for the repairs for the faulty installation. And also bawled me out in the street for daring to call British Gas to inspect the fire which had ben making me feel ill for several days. The possibility that it could, indeed probably would have resulted in a death didn't bother him, he was simply pissed off at having to pay £120 for the fire to be properly fitted.
Reply to
Steve Firth
I've seen this sort of thing happen enough times not to take one side without hearing the other. That would indeed be foolish. I would ask in writing for a breakdown of what he is claiming for in writing within 14 days, sending said request with signature on delivery. If he fails to respond or the response is not satisfactory, I'd initiate a small claims court case. These are easy and low cost.
However, from what I've read I would not at all assume you'll win. Tenants are notorious for denying all responsibility for their behaviour and damage.
NT
Reply to
meow2222
He has to do so, if he's claiming the cost of the solvent as an expense to be deducted from the deposit.
Sue 'im.
(How much of the 1000 GBP is down to the solvent, though?)
BTW I got number 1 daughter's Xmas snow off using a Stanley scraper followed by windowlene or something. She won't be using it this year...
David
Reply to
Lobster

Site Timeline Threads

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.