Tenant moving in before refurbishment

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

  • Tenant moving in before refurbishment

    Hello everyone.

    I have an incoming tenant who needs to move into my property quickly, but I have an appreciable amount of cleaning, repairs and replacements to do first, including carpets. There is an inventory and there is expected to be a contribution towards the cost from the outgoing tenant's deposit, which is held by the DPS. The cleaning can be scheduled before the incoming tenant moves in next week, but the tradesmen cannot fit in the other remedial work until later. I hope that the new tenant would allow access for carpet fitters and agree to sign a fresh inventory but that I suppose that can't be guaranteed.

    I'm wondering:
    - do I need photos of property before replacements and repairs for the DPS?
    - should I move in the new tenant based on a new inventory that only reflects part of the work that I plan to get done? I am concerned that I could have difficulty later.

    Thanks for any help!

  • #2
    Was the original tenancy contract agreed and signed on the understanding that all the works, etc., would have been completed before new T moved in?

    In other words, whose 'fault' will it be it that the house is not in an ideal state when he moves in - your new T's (for wanting to move in 'early) - or yours (for being unable to get it all done before the date originaly agreed)?

    The answer to these questions will help us help you better. (It's not meant to sound judgemental!)
    'Pause you who read this, and think for a moment of the long chain of iron or gold, of thorns or flowers, that would never have bound you, but for the formation fo the first link on one memorable day'. Charles Dickens, Great Expectations

    Comment


    • #3
      If I had just moved all my stuff into a new property, I would be mightily displeased if I had to shift it all around a fortnight later to allow carpet fitters to do their job. Have you spoken with your new tenant about this?

      So far as inventory is concerned - you do the inventory with the property in the state it is in when the T moves in, including tatty carpets. If you have to claim for damage to new carpets at the end of the tenancy, you use the dated receipt as proof of their new condition on date X.

      Comment


      • #4
        I think my real question has become clearer:

        Would the DPS agree a claim for damage by the old tenant if I have obtained a quote but the new tenant is moving in before I can replace the carpets?

        Comment


        • #5
          Yes.

          Is the checkout inventory agreed by the tenant? (signed?)
          Were they at the checkout?
          Were they invited to be at the checkout?
          Who performed the checkout inventory?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Snorkerz View Post
            Yes.

            Is the checkout inventory agreed by the tenant? (signed?)
            Were they at the checkout?
            Were they invited to be at the checkout?
            Who performed the checkout inventory?
            - yes to first three questions. Last question: I did.

            Comment


            • #7
              Thats fine, the signed checkout inventory is your proof.
              Had you not had that, an inventory carried out by an independent inventory clerk would have held much more sway with an adjudicator than a DIY one (on the basis you may be just a little bit biased).

              Comment


              • #8
                I appreciate your comments. Thanks.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Direct View Post
                  - yes to first three questions. Last question: I did.
                  Take note that the deposit scheme adjudicators place less weight on inventories carried out by the landlord, as opposed to an independent clerk.* Also note that adjudication is not compulsory; you can opt out and settle the matter in the county court (and the general view is that you are more likely to get a fair judgment in the county court).

                  * See 'A Guide to tenancy deposits, disputes and damages' - the official guide for all three schemes, downloadable here:
                  http://www.depositprotection.com/doc...processes.aspx

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by westminster View Post
                    Take note that the deposit scheme adjudicators place less weight on inventories carried out by the landlord, as opposed to an independent clerk.* Also note that adjudication is not compulsory; you can opt out and settle the matter in the county court (and the general view is that you are more likely to get a fair judgment in the county court).

                    * See 'A Guide to tenancy deposits, disputes and damages' - the official guide for all three schemes, downloadable here:
                    http://www.depositprotection.com/doc...processes.aspx
                    In the reference you give here, the DPS doesn't openly say that it places less weight on inventories carried out by the landlord, though I imagine that you are speaking from personal experience, to which I defer.

                    If then the DPS does look less favourably at inventories that have been agreed between landlord and tenant, then that would tend to reinforce the impression that Deposit Protection legislation is merely a burden on the honest landlord and tenant, who do not need an inventory clerk to help them establish the truth.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Direct View Post
                      In the reference you give here, the DPS doesn't openly say that it places less weight on inventories carried out by the landlord, though I imagine that you are speaking from personal experience, to which I defer.
                      No, not my personal experience. See paragraph 2 of the section entitled '2. INVENTORY REPORTS AND CHECK-IN/CHECK-OUT INSPECTIONS'. I quote: "Tenancy deposit protection schemes do not disregard, out of hand, inventories that are not prepared by independent companies or individuals. However, they are likely to place less weight on their contents."

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        So it sounds as if an inventory clerk is necessary then. It feels a bit like paying protection money. Anyway thanks for pointing this out.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Direct View Post
                          So it sounds as if an inventory clerk is necessary then. It feels a bit like paying protection money. Anyway thanks for pointing this out.
                          Ha! That does indeed seem a good analogy. Preparing a detailed and thorough inventory is not neurosurgery. Most literate adults who can also count, could produce one if they wanted to.

                          It is totally illogical of the schemes to take this approach, since if the tenant has agreed the check-in inventory (regardless of who prepared it) and the LL has evidence to support any claims he wishes to make from the deposit following the check-out inventory,why should it make any difference who prepared the inventory in the first place?

                          If the tenants haven't agreed the check-in, I could see the DPS's point. But usually, they have. They have also had the chance to modify it to reflect the true state of the place, if the inventory is too 'glowing'. Plus, any omissions on the LL's part can only work to the T's ultimate advantage.

                          Sounds like a job creation scheme for inventory clerks, to me.
                          'Pause you who read this, and think for a moment of the long chain of iron or gold, of thorns or flowers, that would never have bound you, but for the formation fo the first link on one memorable day'. Charles Dickens, Great Expectations

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by mind the gap View Post
                            Ha! That does indeed seem a good analogy. Preparing a detailed and thorough inventory is not neurosurgery. Most literate adults who can also count, could produce one if they wanted to.

                            It is totally illogical of the schemes to take this approach, since if the tenant has agreed the check-in inventory (regardless of who prepared it) and the LL has evidence to support any claims he wishes to make from the deposit following the check-out inventory,why should it make any difference who prepared the inventory in the first place?

                            If the tenants haven't agreed the check-in, I could see the DPS's point. But usually, they have. They have also had the chance to modify it to reflect the true state of the place, if the inventory is too 'glowing'. Plus, any omissions on the LL's part can only work to the T's ultimate advantage.

                            Sounds like a job creation scheme for inventory clerks, to me.
                            I have to agree. If indeed the DPS literature really is so bold as to say openly that they don't trust an AGREED inventory as much as an inventory clerk, then it looks to be no better than a scheme to redistribute income from landlords to inventory clerks, coupled with a public insult to landlords and tenants generally.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Direct View Post
                              I have to agree. If indeed the DPS literature really is so bold as to say openly that they don't trust an AGREED inventory as much as an inventory clerk, then it looks to be no better than a scheme to redistribute income from landlords to inventory clerks, coupled with a public insult to landlords and tenants generally.
                              ADR is not compulsory; there is always the option of the county court, which will consider evidence on its own merits.

                              You can, if you wish, make T liable for the cost of the inventory check-out (LL pays the check-in). This is a fairly standard arrangement in tenancy contracts.

                              Comment

                              Latest Activity

                              Collapse

                              • When do tenants' requests go too far?
                                Suzy76
                                Tenants moved in at the beginning of the year and have issued a stream of requests/demands since then, the main ones being

                                - After signing the contract but before moving in, requesting that I change the wallpaper in one room as they decided they didn't like the colour
                                - Asking to...
                                12-07-2017, 16:46 PM
                              • Reply to When do tenants' requests go too far?
                                Landlord1206
                                If you trust the tenant I would allow them to decorate upon approval. To agreed specifications and at THEIR EXPENSE. This improves the property and keeps them happy. I have had this happen, new paint colour in lounge. More difficult in your case with a new tenant so I would have said wait and see....then...
                                23-08-2017, 11:18 AM
                              • Private letting advice
                                xNicolex
                                My partner and I have recently moved into a private let with our 7 month old son.
                                now the flat was in a right state when we moved in - bathroom hadn't been cleaned, kitchen was a mess, oven absolutely caked in grease from the previous tenant (it still is, I refuse to clean it so I'm just not...
                                23-08-2017, 08:28 AM
                              • Reply to Private letting advice
                                xNicolex
                                Wannadonnadoodahl - a few of the issues were noticeable when we moved in, however the landlord reassured us they would be dealt with within a week or two, its now been 6 weeks

                                JK0 - we aren't on any benefits, we both work and have been full rent of £150 a week, which feels like robbery...
                                23-08-2017, 11:05 AM
                              • Reply to Private letting advice
                                Landlord1206
                                Not sure if you have a gas cooker or not. Either way, please check that you have a valid Gas Safe certificate. You do not mention the boiler but given the other issues, I hope this is safe for you.
                                You may wish to ask for a PAT on any electrical items.

                                Not sure why you moved in given...
                                23-08-2017, 11:02 AM
                              • TT not leaving
                                johnson13
                                A friend of mine (LL) rents his property through an agent and has asked them to get the tenant out as he's coming back to live in it. The agent served a S21 notice which is due to expire soon (we'll check, but for the purposes of this post assume that everything has been served correctly and the notice...
                                23-08-2017, 09:00 AM
                              • Reply to TT not leaving
                                Darth Wookie
                                The tenant may be 'morally' in the wrong, but is legally in the right. They have no outright legal obligation to leave at the end of the tenancy agreement, which can only be truly ended by the court. In essence, the court are the 'adjudicators' of the contract and decide whether to enforce it or not....
                                23-08-2017, 09:43 AM
                              • Reply to TT not leaving
                                jpkeates
                                The current tenancy continues until the landlord has recovered possession (or the tenant serves notice) so there's no danger of a new one coming into being accidentally .

                                The tenant is awarded costs if they lose, which is pretty standard in legal cases. If the landlord loses the case, the...
                                23-08-2017, 09:38 AM
                              • Reply to TT not leaving
                                johnson13
                                Ok, thanks. This seems to imply that the tenant is in the wrong by not leaving then.

                                The notice might as well say, "you don't have to leave when this notice expires, but you'll have a large legal bill if you don't."



                                Thanks again.

                                Is this...
                                23-08-2017, 09:19 AM
                              • Reply to TT not leaving
                                jpkeates
                                The landlord can carry on accepting rent, which is due until the tenancy ends.

                                The tenant has every right to stay, as the landlord's notice doesn't actually end the tenancy. To bring the tenancy to an end, the landlord will need to go to court. If the landlord is successful, the tenant...
                                23-08-2017, 09:12 AM
                              Working...
                              X