Home

Latest News

News Archive

Legal

Portals Today

Industry Blogs

60 Second Interview

Featured Suppliers

Capita enters into tenancy deposit protection Rental services firm offered ministers free immigrant check service Fresh expansion for Leaders after deal with Cotswolds agent Belvoir scoops Redwoods business for £1.5m Average rents on the rise as London hits new record

Tenants unhappy over withheld deposit money

Tuesday 10th July 2012

Tenants have lost £1.1bn in the past three years, averaging £367m per year, as a result of deposits being withheld.

According to FindaProperty, 40% of tenants in the last three years have lost some or all of their deposit, with the amount averaging £313 per tenant. One in five said they had had over £500 withheld.

One-fifth of tenants claim they were penalised because of damage caused by previous tenants, and 10% resorted to legal action to try to recover withheld deposit money.

The most common reason for deposit monies being withheld was to cover the cost of cleaning (37%) and damage to carpets and curtains (21%), while 19% of charges related to marks on the wall and 13% to poor garden maintenance.

A disgruntled 43% of tenants who have had deposit funds withheld say the amount of money deducted was considerably more than it would have cost to fix the problems.

This item read :: 1364 times

No. of Users online :: 77

Send to a Friend

Today's other headlines

(15) Comments

RSS Feed

View Comments

Click here to comment on this story

(15) Comments | Report Abuse

Added by Jimmy on 2012-07-10 13:08:39

Ray, the typo was the missing "?", not the spelling, although that was also misspelt. I have pointed out the error and apologised for it. I am not stating that you are dishonest, merely asking for accountability. If your company does not add onto the costs then you are to be commended and your company should be recommended to both tenants and landlords. From your response, may I assume this is the case?

Unfortunately this forum does not allow editing of posts. Please take it up with the moderators.

IHS, finally a breath of fresh air. An honest company with a transparent system. Thank you for stepping forward. It's good to know the whole industry isn't tarnished with this blight. I feel better knowing that.

Added by Ray Comer on 2012-07-10 12:50:24

@ Jimmy

You haven't retracted. You apologised for being unable to spell 'culprit'.

Your libellous comment has caused great offence so please retract.

Added by IHS on 2012-07-10 12:37:37

We just pass on the cleaners invoice to the tenant - a final statement is sent showing the deposit less deductions, if any, and balance refundable.

We do not charge for our time in dealing with these matters even though some of them can be quite lengthy to resolve even with a detailed Schedule of Condition & Inventory - however thats what our Landlords pay a management fee for!

Added by Jimmy on 2012-07-10 11:29:51

Mr Comer, have done, see below. FYI, I never stated that "I" was charged for cleaning. Read the post.But like I said earlier, no offence intended.

Mr Evans. Not really a sound argument is it. I know excatly what's going on, and you should be ashamed. Really. It's disgusting. It may even be illegal.

I get sick of you lot saying that it is "other" agents that give the industry a bad name, and here we are, not one denial.

Added by Ray Evans on 2012-07-10 11:12:57

@Jimmy on 2012-07-10 10:00:56

You obviously have absolutely no idea and it is not worth discussing further.

Added by Ray Comer on 2012-07-10 10:59:29

@ Jimmy

I do hope you have a good brief; by stating I am 'another culprit' I take that to mean you are accusing me personally, on a public forum, of being one of these agents.

Provide your evidence here and now that I am guilty of any such practises or retract it in full

And there was no slur - you stated that you had plenty of experience of agents charging you for cleaning.

Added by Jimmy on 2012-07-10 10:25:00

I apologise to Mr Comer for the typo. No insult intended.

It should have read ..another culprit?

Stuart, I have no problem with you charging the tenant for your time, and rightly so. So long as you state the reason for the charge.

I have a problem with the dishonesty that prevails by covering up that "extra" by sliiping it under the rug of something else.

I am amazed that you lot continually come on this forum banging on about Letting Agent Registration, Accountability, Deposit Protection, RICS, ARLA, FIFA, EUFA, The Property Ombudsman etc. etc. and there isn't actually a moral fibre between you.

Added by Imfuna on 2012-07-10 10:19:50

Again, this story highlights the importance of the inventory.

The transparency of the inventory protects the Landlord, the tenant, and the property. WIth transparency, no one has anything to fear.

A lot of these disputes would never happen if a detailed inventory and Schedule of Condition was carried out at the start of the tenancy, and then cross referenced as the end of the tenancy, all with the tenant's input and agreement.

Here at Imfuna, the U.K.'s leading digital property inspection app, we are all about educating Landlords, tenants, and lettings agents about the importance of the inventory. It is actually as important as the tenancy agreement itself.

http://imfuna.com/blog has more information and views from notable industry professionals.

Added by Stuart on 2012-07-10 10:12:06

As an agent it would save hours of work if property was left clean and tidy.

There is the photographing and listing of the damage, the organising of cleaning and repairs, usually back and forward conversations to the outgoing tenant who is admimant that when they went in the property was "filthy" and in a far better condition when they left (despite the inventory including pictures showing otherwise), dealing with a disgruntled landlord who is obviously not happy their property has been left in a state, checking the works have been completed and potentially lost income from new tenants as the property has been unfit for any viewings.

We only charge what it costs to put right, but do sometimes feel we should make a charge for our time. All easily avoidable if the tenant had left the property clean and in the state they found it.

Added by Jimmy on 2012-07-10 10:00:56

Ray, I'm shocked. That's even worse. You actually think you can justify defrauding the tenant by picking up the phone to call the cleaner, and having the office open at 9am to pick up the keys. Do you tell the tenant that of the £250, £80 goes to the tenant and the rest to cover "your expenses"? Get real doesn't even come close.

It's an abhorrent, but unfortunately prevelent practice. And you think it's okay. Shame on you.

Added by Ray Comer on 2012-07-10 09:57:46

@ jimmy

Sweeping generalisations are rarely taken as conclusive evidence of a wrongdoing

Next time don't leave a property dirty and you won't get charged.

Added by Ray Evans on 2012-07-10 09:51:18

@Jimmy on 2012-07-10 09:30:19

What a nonsense. Why do you not tell the full story?

i.e. Who has to organise, correspond, check and carry out other organisational/administration procedures etc. because of the tenant failing to adhere to their legal agreement and responsibilities.

Get real!

Added by Jimmy on 2012-07-10 09:30:19

I have plenty of experience of Agents deducting hundreds of pounds for cleaning when the cleaning was done in one day. Cleaner charging £10 per hour x 8 = £80. Tenant gets charged £250.
A clear case of Agents being theives. It shamelessly goes on everywhere, with agent claiming it's all just part of their income. Discraceful.

Added by Graham on 2012-07-10 09:13:38

Compare that figure to unpaid rent and refurb costs, i'm betting figure is ten times that of withheld deposits. One months deposit doesn't cover six months rent while trying to evict a non paying tenant.

Added by IHS on 2012-07-10 08:16:59

The answer is simple - if tenants leave the property clean and the garden tidy they will not get charged. If a cooker takes four hours to clean as some do it is likely to cost £30 - £40 with the cleaners time, materials and mileage.

Post Comments

Please login to post comments.

Post Comments without Login

DISCLAIMER:The views contained in these user comments are not endorsed by Letting Agent Today(nor its associates and advertisers) in any way and are provided by users who wish to publish their independent opinions on our news.Whilst every effort is made to moderate these comments,due to the instant nature of the posting not all offensive material can be removed instantly.Please help us keep the comments areas tidy by reporting details of any infringements to team@lettingagenttoday.co.uk

Feedback:

If you have any questions or suggestions about this article or our news section, please don't hesitate to contact us.

Editorial Contact Details - Rosalind Renshaw
rosalind.renshaw@gmail.com

0845 075 0152

Email:
Password:
Forgot Password