Mattress Disposal Charge

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

    Mattress Disposal Charge

    Hello Everyone,

    My former landlord has just returned my deposit minus a £80 charge for disposing the mattress I have been using in the house since moving into the house in October 2016.

    The mattress was still in a good usable condition (no marks or any tears) but he asked me to remove the mattress from the room before leaving the property.

    I left it outside the house for him to take it away and a week later he emailed me asking me if there is anyway I could take it away as it was expensive (for him) to do so,I told him this will
    not be possible as I had no means of doing so.

    I have also just discovered that the deposit was not protected under the tenancy deposit scheme so not sure whom I can approach to dispute this charge?


    Many Thanks.


    #2
    If the landlord disposes of the mattress, it is commercial waste, and he will normally have to get a private contractor to do it. If you dispose of the mattress, many councils offer a free or discounted bulk waste service to residents.

    Mattresses in front yards are one of the common eyesores indicating rented properties, so I hope yuu haven't left it there.

    I'm assuming this is your own mattress, not one that the landlord supplied.

    The citizen's advice bureau would be a good place to start for any claim for unprotected deposits, although there are no win no fee lawyers who will take on any winnable case. Landlords often discover lots of damage when faced with these, so you will need to be prepared to defend against such counter claims.

    Comment


      #3
      Returning a deposit with a smallish but still signifcant sum deducted seems to be a common ploy. The idea is that the tenant will be relieved to get most of the deposit back and conclude that it is not worth pursuing the balance. In this case though if the deposit was not protected you are very much n the driving seat and when making a claim for the "compensation" you can also claim the £80. Indeed, there is a possibilty that including the claim will help get more than the minimum compensation as it will show the landlord in a bad light. As leaseholder64 suggests, find a no win no fee lawyer to take on the case, but make sure you do not fall for a scam. Shelter has advice if you want to go it alone: https://england.shelter.org.uk/housi...nsation_claims

      As to a possible counter-claim, see the posts at the end of this thread: http://swarblaw.co.uk/viewtopic.php?...123753#p123753

      Comment


        #4
        Thank you leaseholder64,

        The mattress belonged to the landlord and I left it in the bin storage which is located well away from public view, behind the house.

        So at risk of the Landlord possibly discovering other damages, it would be better to think carefully about chasing this charge?

        Also i do not believe it's worth pursuing via no win no fee lawyers for such an amount , I was thinking more mediation approach via Citizens advice.

        Comment


          #5
          Thank you Lawcruncher

          That's very helpful.

          Comment


            #6
            If the mattress belongs to the landlord, disposal is their responsibility. I think it is common to change mattresses anyway, but there is a current TV advert advising doing this every 8 years, so any costs for damage to the mattress should be written off over those 8 years.

            I think they are trying this on. If they had protected the deposit, the deposit scheme would have mediated, and probably rejected the deduction. As it is, if wants to pursue the debt, he'll have to go to court, at which case you have the option of challenging. Although small claims courts shouldn't really deal with failure to protect, if it comes to this, mention that anyway, as they have been known to deal with that at the same time.

            Unfortunately, the stress of exercising your rights may not be worth it, even though this landlords may need teaching a lesson.

            Comment


              #7
              Thank you leaseholder64

              I will now go and weigh my options.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by SofiaN.M View Post
                Also i do not believe it's worth pursuing via no win no fee lawyers for such an amount
                I notice no one has mentioned it yet, but you are aware that the penalty for non-protection of the deposit is up to 3x the amount of the deposit?

                So you are not just talking about £80 here, you are talking up to 3x the full deposit.

                If the LL is found to have deliberately not protected the deposit in one of the approved schemes then you would get your full deposit back plus up to 3x the amount.

                Comment


                  #9
                  By not protecting the deposit, the landlord has also denied the tenant the ability to ask the deposit scheme to adjudicate on the disputed deduction.

                  If the mattress was the tenant's (otherwise why was it being thrown away if it was in decent condition) I'd suggest that the charge is actually reasonable.

                  But you can't not protect a deposit.
                  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


                    #10
                    ?? Let me just check:

                    The mattress belongs to the landlord
                    He is not claiming it is in any way damaged, stained or unusable
                    He asked you to remove it
                    He then charged you for its removal

                    That is ridiculous. It is his property, he cannot put the onus on you to deal with it.

                    As he has not placed your deposit ina scheme he has denied you the arbitration route, where he would be told he is being ridiculous. So you MUST challenge him. AT least a no win no fee lawyer will be little hassle for you

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by jpkeates View Post

                      If the mattress was the tenant's (otherwise why was it being thrown away if it was in decent condition) I'd suggest that the charge is actually reasonable.

                      .
                      If I were the landlord. And there was an unwanted mattress, I'd have ratchet strapped it to the roof of my car, and dropped it off at the tip on my way home.

                      And not deducted a penny from.the deposit, which would have been protected. Because......id be happy that rent had been paid and the house was still in one piece.

                      **** land lords are fuel to Shelters firery hatred of all landlords, and make regulation and licencing more likely, and give Government more excuse to over burden Good landlords with tax and extra administration.

                      note: I'm.not saying I'm a brilliant landlord, but i do my best to provide a decent home for someone who is helping me pay for a house that one day I will.own outright.

                      To the OP please educate your landlord in the appropriate manner.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by Logical.Lean View Post
                        If I were the landlord. And there was an unwanted mattress, I'd have ratchet strapped it to the roof of my car, and dropped it off at the tip on my way home.
                        That would be fraud, unless you declared it as commercial waste and paid the tip's commercial waste rates.

                        You also need a lower tier waste carrier licence to do this, although that is free of charge. If you charge a tenant to remove their waste, and move it yourself, you will need a higher tier licence.

                        I'm sure it happens quite a lot, but my council has actually suggested that one of the main reason for mattresses being fly-tipped is because landlords cannot dispose of them free of charge.

                        This is not my council, but explains the general rules: https://www.durham.gov.uk/article/18...from-landlords

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by Logical.Lean View Post
                          **** land lords are fuel to Shelters firery hatred of all landlords, and make regulation and licencing more likely, and give Government more excuse to over burden Good landlords with tax and extra administration.
                          I don't think that Shelter has a fiery hatred of landlords. They are a pressure group who business is to fight for decent affordable housing and against homelessness. I go to their site now and again and have found all their advice given in measured terms.

                          Whenever regulation for anything is proposed we always hear it is the few spoiling it for the many. Very often the "few" are more than is admitted, but the point is that you cannot deal with those few, however many they are, without having regulations which apply to all. It is a fact of life that the many often pay for the actions of the few - prices in supermarkets would be lower if there were no shoplifters.

                          We have to distinguish between regulation and registration. Registration is a tactic of government to make it look as if they are doing something, but registration means nothing if you can get registered just by filling in a form. When it comes to regulation how many regulations are there which are in fact unreasonable? Some may require a landlord to incur expense, but that does not make them unreasonable.

                          It is landlords collectively who have made government action necessary, not Shelter. All Shelter do is point out where where things are wrong.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            With respect, I disagree.

                            Shelter have two primary functions.
                            One is a charity that offers support for people who are homeless and advice for people relating to their homes.
                            In this realm, they are close to exemplary.
                            Their free advice is good and they are a valuable resource to tenants particularly.

                            The second activity is as a pressure group in the domain of housing and homelessness.
                            In this realm, they are political and profoundly anti-landlord.
                            They conflate housing associations, private landlords and criminal/rogue "landlords" as though they are interchangeable.
                            Their PR output is biased, inaccurate and profoundly hostile to the PRS.

                            In an ideal world, the two functions should be split, so that the second (political/lobbying) activity is not linked to the charitable role - which is something that charities are not supposed to be involved with.

                            Originally posted by Lawcruncher View Post
                            It is landlords collectively who have made government action necessary, not Shelter. All Shelter do is point out where where things are wrong.
                            One of the biggest underlying issues for landlords (and tenants, councils, shelter, parliament and everyone else) is that landlords don't act collectively and can't be addressed collectively.
                            They're a massive number of independent small businesses, with varying levels of skill and experience.

                            You might as well complain that the fast food industry "collectively" fails when trading standards finds a kitchen full of rats in Southark.
                            In reality, it doesn't tell you anything about people selling take away food in Bolton.

                            That's the fundamental error in shelter's PR thinking.
                            Landlords aren't a collective.
                            Someone criminally letting beds in sheds in Bristol doesn't tell you anything about landlords, anymore than someone selling cigarettes illegally in a pub tells you anything about tobacconists.

                            It might tell you something about criminals - but no one thinks crooks are a collective.
                            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


                              #15
                              Charities are allowed to lobby for political change as long as that is not their primary purpose and the change supports their primary purpose: https://assets.publishing.service.go...actsheet_6.pdf

                              Comment

                              Latest Activity

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X