Deposit deduction for redecoration

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Deposit deduction for redecoration

    We have moved out of our previous home and our former landlady wants to make some deductions from the deposit. A couple are unreasonable and we are backed up by very thorough check in and out inventories. One we accept. And one I have a query about:

    Our landlady would like to charge for the cost of redecorating a room due to damage to the walls. We accept that there is some damage to the walls, caused by our daughter putting stickers up which peeled the paint away when removed - this would appear to me to not be covered under wear and tear. And we are happy to pay to make good that damage. However, my questions are:

    1. The landlady has made it clear that the whole room will be redecorated - although the damage we caused was only on one wall, and is very small (easily less than 0.5% of the wall area). If she is paying for the room to be repainted, what would be a reasonable proportion to pay here?
    2. The room was not newly decorated when we moved in, and marks and damage are noted on the check in inventory. Is there something here where it is reasonable to pay only based on how long you would expect a newly decorated room to last before it needs to be decorated again?

    Grateful for any advice. Landlady is happy with the house generally, but is a bit of a newbie so I want to ensure we are reasonable in our responses (and either pay what's reasonable or reject her proposals). She hasn't confirmed the price yet but has indicated it would cost about £200 for a decorator to decorate the entire room.

    #2
    The charge should be based on how much was paid to redecorate it last time and how long ago that was. If it was more than 5 years ago, there is probably nothing to pay.

    If the deposit is with The Deposit Scheme, their leaflet suggests they won't accept claims for redecoration if the previous decoration is more then five years old, and might not accept them for three year old decoration.

    The cost of the previous decoration is written off, linearly, over this period.

    https://www.thedisputeservice.co.uk/...de_DIGITAL.PDF

    Comment


      #3
      Wow. That's very useful! The decoration was about 15 years ago. I feel quite bad that there might be nothing for us to pay, as in fairness we did put stickers on the wall which led to paint peeling off. But in fairness, we did feel that the landlord should expect to redecorate now anyway.

      Amazingly, the walls, etc, are still in quite good condition considering the length of time since they were last decorated.

      Comment


        #4
        Use DPS ADR or agree part donation to cost of repainting affected woodwork with ex LL.

        Comment


          #5
          You can say explicitly that you dont believe their is any liability for damage as the room has not been decorated for years and therefore the paintwork had no residual value - but that you are prepared to offer something as a gesture of goodwill if she drops her claims for the items you dispute. Then offer what you consider fair.

          Comment


            #6
            There is a difference between paintwork that is ageing in color and requires refreshing, and a surface that has been damaged by stickers. The latter is DAMAGE not wear and tear. The damage will no doubt cost something to rectify. The exact amount is another matter.

            The key words are "peeled the paint away". Regardless of what bizarre decision might be made by an adjudicator, it is rather cheeky to think that you can cause damage and walk away from your responsibilities as an upright human.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by AndrewDod View Post
              Regardless of what bizarre decision might be made by an adjudicator, it is rather cheeky to think that you can cause damage and walk away from your responsibilities as an upright human.
              I have to wonder if in your passive aggressive posting you actually read the op? It appears a number of people regularly don't bother reading what is being asked and just go off on a rant.

              For me, I see this:

              Originally posted by GillsMan View Post
              this would appear to me to not be covered under wear and tear. And we are happy to pay to make good that damage.
              Odd, because what you see is apparently something different.

              Comment


                #8
                A claim for compensation isn't just about whether someone damages something, it's also about whether there's any loss in value to require compensation.
                You can damage something that has no value.
                When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
                Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by AndrewDod View Post
                  There is a difference between paintwork that is ageing in color and requires refreshing, and a surface that has been damaged by stickers. The latter is DAMAGE not wear and tear. The damage will no doubt cost something to rectify. The exact amount is another matter.

                  The key words are "peeled the paint away". Regardless of what bizarre decision might be made by an adjudicator, it is rather cheeky to think that you can cause damage and walk away from your responsibilities as an upright human.
                  As Welshie said, you appear not to have read my posts (I'd invite you to read post #4 as well) - you can clearly see my views on the matter. I don't think I can cause damage and walk away. Do one, frankly.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by GillsMan View Post

                    As Welshie said, you appear not to have read my posts (I'd invite you to read post #4 as well) - you can clearly see my views on the matter. I don't think I can cause damage and walk away. Do one, frankly.
                    Also, let's not forget that the landlady hasn't decorated in 15 years and is asking us to pay for the room to be newly redecorated. Which is a bit "cheeky" in itself.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      So what we are saying is that it is as easy to decorate a room which has bits of the surface pulled away, as it is to redecorate a room with a tired but good surface. Frankly that is a nonsense -- and that is where the damage element comes into play.

                      Whilst I agree with you JP that it is possible to damage something which has no value, that does not mean that compensation (we are discussing the principle here not the amount or the degree of offset) is not due. My front door is not of any value (insofar as it could do with replacing possibly, and if someone were to steal it, it would have no resale value. That does not mean that I suffer no loss when the thing without value is damaged.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by AndrewDod View Post
                        Whilst I agree with you JP that it is possible to damage something which has no value, that does not mean that compensation (we are discussing the principle here not the amount or the degree of offset) is not due. My front door is not of any value (insofar as it could do with replacing possibly, and if someone were to steal it, it would have no resale value. That does not mean that I suffer no loss when the thing without value is damaged.
                        That is a reasonable point (as is your comment that painting a damaged surface is not the same as painting a smooth one).
                        When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
                        Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

                        Comment


                          #13
                          The expression is "wear and tear", not just "wear". To me tear includes the normal level of scuffs and scrapes. Also, if blu-tack (guessing) pulls off paint it is probably because the paint film was defective in the first place., and needed removing as part of the normal preparation for redecorating I would suggest that the use of blu-tack on walls is normal use for a normal family. People use it to avoid having to actually put holes in the wall.

                          In any case, if that is all the damage, the marginal cost of feathering in the edges of the missing flakes is going to rather small.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by leaseholder64 View Post
                            The expression is "wear and tear", not just "wear". To me tear includes the normal level of scuffs and scrapes. Also, if blu-tack (guessing) pulls off paint it is probably because the paint film was defective in the first place., and needed removing as part of the normal preparation for redecorating I would suggest that the use of blu-tack on walls is normal use for a normal family. People use it to avoid having to actually put holes in the wall.

                            In any case, if that is all the damage, the marginal cost of feathering in the edges of the missing flakes is going to rather small.
                            As a non-professional painter -- the problem is that is not generally what happens. It is not a case of a layer of paint being thinned. The almost universal outcome is that lining paper is either detached or roughened (and sometimes that plaster is removed too). This converts a simple decorating touch up (a single coat of same shade) to a requirement to double-coat, use very thick emulsion, or re-line the walls. Nor does emulsion adhere well to a petroleum impregnated surface.

                            The tenant doesn't use blue-tack "to avoid having to actually put holes in the wall" -- they don't use it because it is prohibited in the tenancy agreement, as is the making of holes. Of course there is the need to be reasonable here -- long-term (10 year) tenants are different from the 6 monthly ones. If every 6 month tenancy involves blue-tack that leads to rapid destruction and accumulating costs (ultimately to tenants).

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by leaseholder64 View Post
                              I would suggest that the use of blu-tack on walls is normal use for a normal family.
                              For what it is worth (not much), Mydeposits at least, don't agree. "blu-tack marks do not count as reasonable wear and tear"

                              https://www.mydeposits.co.uk/wp-cont...EW_v1_7731.pdf

                              Comment

                              Latest Activity

                              Collapse

                              • 'pausing' a tenancy
                                henry_of_hillbridge
                                Hi everyone,

                                I'm here seeking for opinions from more experienced landlords. I'm brand new in the forum and in the landlord world and English is not my first language, so please forgive any absurdities you may hear from me.

                                I recently bought a flat in Edinburgh which I'm renting...
                                20-08-2019, 19:59 PM
                              • Reply to 'pausing' a tenancy
                                Ted.E.Bear
                                There is a specific forum for questions about tenancies in Scotland.

                                My guess is that you could possibly arrange to sublet from your tenant during that period - but there is no real way to be sure they will actually move out.
                                It may not be possible, but would likely be difficult...
                                20-08-2019, 20:33 PM
                              • Reply to 'pausing' a tenancy
                                AndrewDod
                                In an ideal world where mature adults could contract with each other as mature adults you could do this.

                                However given the state of play in 2019 this is not a safe thing to do. There is no way you can write a contract to guarantee it will be available to you to put on AirBnB. So the tenant...
                                20-08-2019, 20:28 PM
                              • Can I charge...
                                t-mhrwl
                                I have paid an agent to market my property. They have found a tenant who was due to move in yesterday. The dates have already been delayed once. They have paid 3 months advance rent and a 5 week deposit. All paperwork has been prepared and checked by all parties. The tenant has now decided they don't...
                                17-08-2019, 12:08 PM
                              • Reply to Can I charge...
                                t-mhrwl
                                Thanks all....
                                20-08-2019, 20:13 PM
                              • Whose Responsibility For Change Of Locks?
                                ABC123
                                Just wondering what people's opinions were on this.

                                The block has a front door that opens onto a courtyard and then a door that leads into a stairwell and then the door to the flat. A separate key is needed for each door.

                                The tenant says he put the latch on the door to the...
                                20-08-2019, 15:29 PM
                              • Reply to Whose Responsibility For Change Of Locks?
                                ABC123
                                Well, while I’m not disagreeing, that’s kind of what I’m questioning. How far is a LL liable and does a T have an obligation to the LL to mitigate such expenses?

                                If there were 20 locked doors in the development before the locksmith could reach the bedroom then would the LL be liable...
                                20-08-2019, 19:49 PM
                              • would you accept these tenants with a void of nearly 5 months
                                Maikkia
                                Hi everyone, just looking for a bit of advice as everyone has been so helpful in the past. One of my 5 bed properties that used to be a family home is currently vacant for 5 months at the end of Aug. Its in the middle of nowhere and has always been difficult to rent out although a tenant family of 2...
                                20-08-2019, 18:22 PM
                              • Reply to would you accept these tenants with a void of nearly 5 months
                                AndrewDod
                                We should reiterate again that the only reason these folk are high-risk (and will have difficulty finding a property to let) is as a result of legislation. In a normal world where you could easily and efficiently evict tenants who did not fulfil their side of the contract, they would not be high-risk...
                                20-08-2019, 19:43 PM
                              • Reply to Whose Responsibility For Change Of Locks?
                                nukecad
                                Maybe not as secure as you thought?
                                Maybe someone left them open or let him in?

                                Less cost than having to drill extra (communal) locks to get to the bedroom.
                                20-08-2019, 19:36 PM
                              Working...
                              X