Filthy Apartment - deposit

shoes34

3DataModem wrote: »

Just give your mam an invoice for 400 for your work, expenses, etc and declare it in your income tax some time before next October.

I think I might just do this as I did the majority of the work. I expect normal wear and tear but not to the extent they left this apartment in. also a light fitting on the hall ceiling had been broken where a Electrician will have to come out and repair same and one of the tenants has said that he did this. Also the microwave which was purchased for them new at the start of the year was beyond cleaning and has to be thrown out together with the toaster and kettle was broken.

Going to contact our Solicitor for advice and then may contact the PRTB as the landlord is a registered landlord.

djimi

shoes34 wrote: »

I think I might just do this as I did the majority of the work. I expect normal wear and tear but not to the extent they left this apartment in. also a light fitting on the hall ceiling had been broken where a Electrician will have to come out and repair same and one of the tenants has said that he did this. Also the microwave which was purchased for them new at the start of the year was beyond cleaning and has to be thrown out together with the toaster and kettle was broken.

Going to contact our Solicitor for advice and then may contact the PRTB as the landlord is a registered landlord.

I'd be very much surprised if you will be able to invoice your mother for your time and have that as an acceptable deduction from the tenants deposit, but it is worth consulting with your solicitor and the PRTB and see what they have to say. Please keep us updated as I would be interested to hear their response.

Pawwed Rig

djimi wrote: »

Please keep us updated as I would be interested to hear their response.

Interesting idea and I don't see any reason why theoretically you couldn't do this.
VAT would be an issue but you would not need to register as you wouldn't be earning enough in the year.
The only issue I can think of would that could be easily challenged by the tenant would be the excessive amount that was charged for the cleaning. As another poster pointed out €12.50 an hour would seem like a reasonable amount to charge whereas the OP charged €80 which is extortion by any standards. The tenant should have been given the option to clean it themselves or hire a cleaner. If they refused then the landlord could do it.

djimi

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Interesting idea and I don't see any reason why theoretically you couldn't do this.
VAT would be an issue but you would not need to register as you wouldn't be earning enough in the year.
The only issue I can think of would that could be easily challenged by the tenant would be the excessive amount that was charged for the cleaning. As another poster pointed out €12.50 an hour would seem like a reasonable amount to charge whereas the OP charged €80 which is extortion by any standards. The tenant should have been given the option to clean it themselves or hire a cleaner. If they refused then the landlord could do it.

Two problems I can see straight off is that it would be massivley open to abuse if the landlord could get an invoice from a family member for cleaning, and also its a pretty blatent attempt to circumvent tenancy law, which I have no doubt the PRTB would take a dim view of.

If the OP had an established cleaning company then it might be a different story, but as it stands I really dont see the PRTB giving this the time of day. I could, of course, be wrong about that though, and I am interested to see how it goes.

foggy_lad

shoes34 wrote: »

I think I might just do this as I did the majority of the work. I expect normal wear and tear but not to the extent they left this apartment in. also a light fitting on the hall ceiling had been broken where a Electrician will have to come out and repair same and one of the tenants has said that he did this. Also the microwave which was purchased for them new at the start of the year was beyond cleaning and has to be thrown out together with the toaster and kettle was broken.

Going to contact our Solicitor for advice and then may contact the PRTB as the landlord is a registered landlord.

What you are describing here is items damaged under normal wear and tear, Electrical fittings as well as things like door handles and paintwork do get damaged from time to time, you are lucky they didn't break any windows or knock holes in some walls.

In a rented property with several tenants the kettle and toaster are lucky to have lasted as long and the microwave was a bit grubby but most likely still working well for them.

Pawwed Rig

djimi - Yes I agree with you 100% in that it would be open to abuse. That is why I would imagine the agreement of the tenant should be obtained prior to incurring the charges and it should also be charged at a market rate rather than the extortionate rate the OP charged.
Also consider the fact that the daughter would have to pay tax on it so the actual amount she would get to keep would be around €6 per hour (if on the higher rate of tax) never mind the hassle of filling out a Form 11 or 12.

I would think the PRTB would scrutinise a related party arrangement more but only if it was brought to their attention otherwise I don't think they really check.

djimi

foggy_lad wrote: »

What you are describing here is items damaged under normal wear and tear, Electrical fittings as well as things like door handles and paintwork do get damaged from time to time, you are lucky they didn't break any windows or knock holes in some walls.

In a rented property with several tenants the kettle and toaster are lucky to have lasted as long and the microwave was a bit grubby but most likely still working well for them.

None of that is normal wear and tear. A tenant would have a hell of a time proving that a light fitting broke through normal wear and tear. Electrical appliances should be expected to last more than a year, and certainly in the case of the microwave that has been damaged through the neglect of not cleaning it.

djimi

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

djimi - Yes I agree with you 100% in that it would be open to abuse. That is why I would imagine the agreement of the tenant should be obtained prior to incurring the charges and it should also be charged at a market rate rather than the extortionate rate the OP charged.
Also consider the fact that the daughter would have to pay tax on it so the actual amount she would get to keep would be around €6 per hour (if on the higher rate of tax) never mind the hassle of filling out a Form 11 or 12.

I would think the PRTB would scrutinise a related party arrangement more but only if it was brought to their attention otherwise I don't think they really check.

The easiest thing would be for the landlord to remove all possible confusion and just hire a cleaning contractor to do the job and issue an invoice accordingly. That way everyone is perfectly clear where they stand and no one can have any cause for complaint.

foggy_lad

djimi wrote: »

None of that is normal wear and tear. A tenant would have a hell of a time proving that a light fitting broke through normal wear and tear. Electrical appliances should be expected to last more than a year, and certainly in the case of the microwave that has been damaged through the neglect of not cleaning it.

Accidents do happen and things get broken all the time. A landlord might not like it but a certain amount of breakage is covered under normal wear and tear and a house with 4 youths living unsupervised will have a lot more normal wear and tear than a house with a granny and her little old dog or cat.

mitosis

Agent Smith wrote: »

€100 from Each?

Handy little side earner. you have receipts for the cleaning of the apartment? If not its the tennents word against yours....


no lease has been signed? Is your mother Registered as a landlord?

Two people cleaning for five hours. That's 10 manhours of cleaning. €400 doesn't sound exorbitant.

djimi

mitosis wrote: »

Two people cleaning for five hours. That's 10 manhours of cleaning. €400 doesn't sound exorbitant.

Some people have mentioned rates of €12.50 an hour for cleaning so even if it was as high was €20 a hour then youre only talking €200 for that job if 2 people spend 5 hours each on it. The place would have to have been turned over completely from top to bottom to justify €400 worth of cleaning.

Just a few examples:

http://www.domesticbliss.ie/ €15 an hour
http://maid4u.ie/rates/ €16.25 an hour
http://www.cleanmyhome.ie/ €15 an hour

Just the first three that I came across that have rates online.

djimi

foggy_lad wrote: »

Accidents do happen and things get broken all the time. A landlord might not like it but a certain amount of breakage is covered under normal wear and tear and a house with 4 youths living unsupervised will have a lot more normal wear and tear than a house with a granny and her little old dog or cat.

Accidents do happen and things get broken, but that doesnt mean that the tenant isnt liable to pay for the damage. I dont really know how damage to a light fitting could ever fall under wear and tear; how would something that should almost never be touched get damaged in the course of normal use?

syklops

djimi wrote: »

dont really know how damage to a light fitting could ever fall under wear and tear; how would something that should almost never be touched get damaged in the course of normal use?

Changing the bulb?

djimi

syklops wrote: »

Changing the bulb?

Can happen, Im not saying it doesnt, but if I break a fitting while changing a lightbulb then I fully expect to pay for it. If the fitting is worn or damaged then it is up to the tenant to cover their ass and bring it to the attention of the landlord before they risk doing any further damage to it.

MariMel

I would really like to know why the LL did not do an inspection while the tenants were still there or on the day they were leaving and handing keys back?

Surely this would have given the option for both the tenants and LL to rememdy the situation before now.

3DataModem

djimi wrote: »

Two problems I can see straight off is that it would be massivley open to abuse if the landlord could get an invoice from a family member for cleaning, and also its a pretty blatent attempt to circumvent tenancy law, which I have no doubt the PRTB would take a dim view of.

If the OP had an established cleaning company then it might be a different story, but as it stands I really dont see the PRTB giving this the time of day. I could, of course, be wrong about that though, and I am interested to see how it goes.

Threshold have already confirmed the tenants were liable [EDIT: Not true, my mistake]. PRTB will probably assume the place was in rag order, and probably not be too sympathetic with the tenant. That's the core issue here; is 100 per head reasonable for the damage.

A legit invoice with PRSI disclosed etc on it won't cause a problem for the PRTB. It's an "actual" cost paid, with tax paid on it.

If PRTB start adjudicating as to what's a fair price for cleaning, that opens a whole can of worms around cost of agents, etc.

And best of all the 400 is tax deductible for your mum.

D3PO

3DataModem wrote: »

Threshold have already confirmed the tenants were liable. PRTB will probably assume the place was in rag order, and probably not be too sympathetic with the tenant. That's the core issue here; is 100 per head reasonable for the damage.

A legit invoice with PRSI disclosed etc on it won't cause a problem for the PRTB. It's an "actual" cost paid, with tax paid on it.

If PRTB start adjudicating as to what's a fair price for cleaning, that opens a whole can of worms around cost of agents, etc.

And best of all the 400 is tax deductible for your mum.

No the PRTB will assume that a professional Landlord will have dated photographs showing the filth and also expect the professional landlord to have itemised legitimate receipts form a cleaning company showing the cost of the cleaning.

If the landlord doesn't have both they will most likely lose any adjucation. Whilst everybody is in agreement that a deduction is warranted for the cleaning the facts are they landlord screwed up by cleaning themselves and given they screwed up this way I suspect they have also screwred up by not taking photographs of the filth.

in that case you can be as sure as night follows day that if the tenants took a case to the PRTB they would win.

As it stands in my interpretation of tenancy law due to the landlord doing the work themselves anything above the cost of the cleaning materials and waste disposal costs (which would need to be receipted) is unwarranted.

Pawwed Rig

3DataModem wrote: »

And best of all the 400 is tax deductible for your mum.

I would need to look it up and am open to correction here but afaik it would be tax neutral as the withheld deposit would be considered extra income with the cost of cleaning (if invoiced) offset against this same figure. But with no invoice it is taxable but not deductible

3DataModem

D3PO wrote: »

No the PRTB will assume that a professional Landlord will have dated photographs showing the filth and also expect the professional landlord to have itemised legitimate receipts form a cleaning company showing the cost of the cleaning.

If the landlord doesn't have both they will most likely lose any adjucation. Whilst everybody is in agreement that a deduction is warranted for the cleaning the facts are they landlord screwed up by cleaning themselves and given they screwed up this way I suspect they have also screwred up by not taking photographs of the filth.

in that case you can be as sure as night follows day that if the tenants took a case to the PRTB they would win.

My mistake - I read above another poster talking about showing Threshold the photos and mistook this for the OP.

Yes I agree, a pro landlord should take pics of the filth if they hope to keep any deposit. That OR a receipt from a non-related cleaning firm.

Without the photos the family invoice is more likely to be challenged. With photos, not so much.

djimi

3DataModem wrote: »

PRTB will probably assume the place was in rag order, and probably not be too sympathetic with the tenant.

I would that any body who is carrying out a legal process would not be so flippant about the law and would not skip over tenancy law just because they dont like the look of the accused.

The law regarding this is very clear; the landlord cannot put a price on their own time, and they cannot deduct from the deposit for work which they have carried out themselves. A homemade invoice from the landlords daughter, even if it is complete with PRSI cert, looks to all the world like a blatent attempt to circumvent this law. Maybe youre right, maybe the PRTB would accept it as a legitimate deduction, but I would not be at all surprised if they saw it for what it was and awarded in favour of the tenant.

Also there is no way that a €400 cleaning bill would hold up unless there was an absolute mountain of evidence to back it up. At the rates which I have posted above €400 equates to about 26 hours of cleaning time; the tenants would have to have near destroyed the property completely to warrant that sort of cleaning. If the OP can back up that sort of claim then more power to them, but I suspect that if there genuinely was €400 worth of cleaning required it is not a job that they would have tackled themselves, and it is not a job that would have been completed in 5 hours by two people (as outlined in the first post).

3DataModem

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

I would need to look it up and am open to correction here but afaik it would be tax neutral as the withheld deposit would considered extra income with the cost of cleaning (if invoiced) offset against this same figure. But with no invoice it is taxable but not deductible

You're right, the extra income offsets the tax benefit of the outlay, hadn't thought of that.

If paid out it is tax deductible even without the invoice. You don't need a receipt to claim a tax deduction, just be able to prove the expense was incurred. But as said above, not deductible from the tenant's deposit.

MariMel

I cant see why the tenants weren't given the opportunity to clean and then given notice that X, Y and Z would be retained from their deposits for the microwave, rubbish to dump, replacement light fitting and possibly the kettle and toaster, upon receipts being received.

I do feel for the OPs mother in this instance but maybe its a valuable lesson learned to inspect the property BEFORE the tenants move out. Not after they have left.

3DataModem

djimi wrote: »

A homemade invoice from the landlords daughter, even if it is complete with PRSI cert, looks to all the world like a blatent attempt to circumvent this law. Maybe youre right, maybe the PRTB would accept it as a legitimate deduction, but I would not be at all surprised if they saw it for what it was and awarded in favour of the tenant.

But it is NOT an attempt to circumvent the law. A third party was engaged to do the cleaning. Yes, using a family member as an invoice-able party is certainly benefiting from a technicality, but that is no worse than the tenants citing the technicality that the landlords time for cleaning or repairs isn't admissible for deposit deduction so a family member's shouldn't be admissible either. I realise the law is there to protect tenants against crap landlords but it also punishes good landlords who do repairs themselves. The fact is a lot of work went into sorting out the place, and assuming - as the OP says - it is not wear and tear the landlord should be able to make an appropriate deposit deduction.

I agree that without the photos the PRTB will likely fall in the tenants favour; that's a massive error on the landlord's part, especially as the cost of the cleaning (400) is relatively high.

3DataModem

MariMel wrote: »

have i missed the post where the threshold had confirmed the OPs tenants were liable? Ladysarahs tenants had.....had the OPs aswell?.

Yeah that was my mistake corrected above.

Duggys Housemate

djimi wrote: »

Some people have mentioned rates of €12.50 an hour for cleaning so even if it was as high was €20 a hour then youre only talking €200 for that job if 2 people spend 5 hours each on it. The place would have to have been turned over completely from top to bottom to justify €400 worth of cleaning.

Just a few examples:

http://www.domesticbliss.ie/ €15 an hour
http://maid4u.ie/rates/ €16.25 an hour
http://www.cleanmyhome.ie/ €15 an hour

Just the first three that I came across that have rates online.

They can hardly charge for 2 people as one is the owner ( and the relationship makes the other person a bit suspect).

The way to do this was to get a cleaner. And take before and after photos.

As for broken fittings, thats relatively normal.

3DataModem

MariMel wrote: »

I do feel for the OPs mother in this instance but maybe its a valuable lesson learned to inspect the property BEFORE the tenants move out. Not after they have left.

There's no reason to do this prior to tenant moving out; just do a proper inspection afterward, take pics, then contact the tenant to agree how to remedy any problems.

D3PO

3DataModem wrote: »

But it is NOT an attempt to circumvent the law. A third party was engaged to do the cleaning. Yes, using a family member as an invoice-able party is certainly benefiting from a technicality, but that is no worse than the tenants citing the technicality that the landlords time for cleaning or repairs isn't admissible for deposit deduction so a family member's shouldn't be admissible either. I realise the law is there to protect tenants against crap landlords but it also punishes good landlords who do repairs themselves. The fact is a lot of work went into sorting out the place, and assuming - as the OP says - it is not wear and tear the landlord should be able to make an appropriate deposit deduction.

I agree that without the photos the PRTB will likely fall in the tenants favour; that's a massive error on the landlord's part, especially as the cost of the cleaning (400) is relatively high.

I agree with your sentiment but I would not like to think nor do I think the PRTB would accept this circumvention as admissible. I feel for the OP's mother but I think she has screwed up here.

The system has to have checks and balances and be fair to both the tenant and the landlord, allowing a landlord circumvent a defined process and essentially chose carte blanche how much they want to charge for cleaning would not be fair or just.

padma

It seems like an awful amount to charge for what amounted to two people who aren't professional cleaners to charge. It took them 5 hrs to clean. How long would it take for a professional cleaner? Deciding not to clean the microwave as they didn't know how but to throw it out instead. A handy earner indeed 400 for a few hrs with a rag. I'm a professional cleaner and I don't even get 400 for a 40 hr week.

djimi

3DataModem wrote: »

But it is NOT an attempt to circumvent the law. A third party was engaged to do the cleaning. Yes, using a family member as an invoice-able party is certainly benefiting from a technicality, but that is no worse than the tenants citing the technicality that the landlords time for cleaning or repairs isn't admissible for deposit deduction so a family member's shouldn't be admissible either. I realise the law is there to protect tenants against crap landlords but it also punishes good landlords who do repairs themselves. The fact is a lot of work went into sorting out the place, and assuming - as the OP says - it is not wear and tear the landlord should be able to make an appropriate deposit deduction.

Im not so sure that in this case a family member would be seen as a third party; in other areas of tenancy law the landlords immediate family are seen as an extension of the landlord. Im only speculating at this though; I dont know for a fact how the PRTB would see it.

Whether or not in this case the intention was to circumvent the law, I really can see why the PRTB would assume that it was and would take a dim view to being presented with a cleaning invoiced issued by the landlords daughter. To allow such a thing to happen would open up such a huge risk of abuse I really dont think they could allow it to happen. Otherwise every landlord would get their kids to issue invoices for cleaning and it could be used to freely and legally deduct as much as they like from the deposit once the opportunity as been presented to them. Im intersted to see how this plays out because I really hope that the PRTB are wise to this potential loophole and do not allow it to happen.

Citycap

djimi wrote: »

Accidents do happen and things get broken, but that doesnt mean that the tenant isnt liable to pay for the damage. I dont really know how damage to a light fitting could ever fall under wear and tear; how would something that should almost never be touched get damaged in the course of normal use?

Pulling in the air is one of the more difficult skills of hurling and takes a lot of practice