Moving out, landlord wants to deduct cleaning and lightbulbs

cpoh1

I would be looking to meet the landlord and have him outline exactly what parts of the house need to be cleaned and offer to complete yourself. If you let him take your money you are unlikely to get it back, PRTB or not.

Thargor

seabhcan wrote: »

1/2. A few, in a 3 story 5 bed house. They are those annoying spotlight bulbs that never seem to last very long. There are 8 of them in the living room, of which maybe 3 were blown.

2) The house was not dirty. The landlord doesn't even claim the rooms with the blown bulbs are dirty. All rooms have windows (real questions?)

3) the question isn't whether the landlord needs to replace the bulbs. Its whether he has a right to make me pay for it.

They sell those bulbs in Aldi, 2 for a fiver.

seabhcan

Thargor wrote: »

They sell those bulbs in Aldi, 2 for a fiver.

Ya. You'd think the 100k in rent I paid would have covered it.

sarkozy

Yeah, you're right. You think it's a case of the LL just passing the cost of this onto the tenant. I guess, in that case, it sounds really unreasonable.

I guess I was just saying, in a roundabout way, that we don't know the full situation enough to dive a definitive answer.

Thargor

seabhcan wrote: »

Ya. You'd think the 100k in rent I paid would have covered it.

That was the rent on the property, I think my landlord would laugh at me if I asked him for lightbulb money to replace ones that were working when I moved in.

seabhcan

Thargor wrote: »

That was the rent on the property, I think my landlord would laugh at me if I asked him for lightbulb money to replace ones that were working when I moved in.

That works both ways surely.

pawrick

Ask him to meet with you at the house to go over what exactly required cleaning outside of normal wear and tear over 5 years.
Some landlords I had over the years tried to do the same thing by default it seems- he's leaving it at an amount small enough so that it probably isn't worth the hassle for you to argue about it but it might not be worth it for him either at the first sign of you making an issue over it.

Light bulbs I would have replaced though as it's a small thing and you have been living there using them or at least I would have said to the LL that you were busy cleaning etc but never got around to getting them replaced before moving out and let him decide if he wants to try to charge you.

Weyhey

Seems very odd. Did you take photos when moved in and more importantly when you left? I always do in case of any disagreements.
I would say the landlord probably got a shock at the normal wear and tear after 5 years of renting. There is no way I would pay for the cleaning if it wasn’t in the lease and I have left the house in proper shape. But ring Threshold and the PRTB to check if LL can do this.

As for the light bulbs, they could have been fine when you left and just went before or when landlord was there they went.
I agree unless there was over half the house without bulbs then after 5 years there should be no need for you to replace them.

damienirel

Thargor wrote: »

That was the rent on the property, I think my landlord would laugh at me if I asked him for lightbulb money to replace ones that were working when I moved in.

Yeah good point. When you move into a gaff with nice recessed lights and they all worked I'm sure you were thinking - oh this is a nice gaff with nice recessed lights. Now that the buggers are blown I think it would seem reasonable you replace them. As an earlier poster said a twin pack cost a fiver in aldi.
You need to weigh up whether it's worth hassle of debating this with prtb?

ted1

quadrifoglio verde wrote: »

Op the best thing to do is let the landlord deduct, then bring it to the prtb, because I can tell you, he ain't going to have receipts for a professionally cleaning company, as they'll cost a lot more than 100 euro.
Don't mention receipts until after he goes to return the deposit.
Did you take photos of the house before leaving? If so, you can use these as proof that the house was clean?

hassle.com 12 euro an hour for a cleaner, day 6 hours= €72 allow €28 for lights =€100

the tenant should replace lamps if they blow. Lamps have a life cycle, like toilet paper, if you use it, then there is none left.

damienirel

A quick google brought up this - it's uk based but seems reasonable.

http://england.shelter.org.uk/get_advice/repairs_and_bad_conditions/responsibility_for_repairs/repairs_in_rented_homes_-_whos_responsible_for_what

Tiddlypeeps

The law states that reasonable wear and tear is expected during any tenancy and the tenant is not responsible for paying for this to be brought back up to scratch. Unfortunately what constitutes as reasonable isn't defined so some landlords will take the piss and charge for whatever they can get away with.The PRTB more often than not sides with the tenant in these cases because the onus is on the landlord to provide the evidence and most are pretty terrible at providing this. I've never had a landlord have me sign an inventory list on moving in for example. I wouldn't allow him to get away with it, even if the place wasn't spotless it's a dick move after such a long tenancy.

quadrifoglio verde

seabhcan wrote: »

Would you deduct the cost of that from the deposit of the outgoing tenant?

I'm not a ll but my parents are and would always paint, clean etc when a new tenant is moving in. They'd never deduct from the deposit for it though, they'd just rather the tenant moved into somewhere that was clean and fresh as opposed to somewhere that the previous tenant and given an ok cleaning to.

damienirel

Here's the conclusion I've come to:

1. You should replace the bulbs - think Landlord is within his rights here.

2. Cleaning - very grey area - think they would need proof in the form of pictures etc for this.

cerastes

Would the OP or anyone move into a house where the landlord refused to provide bulbs?? people would be ranting like mad on here.

If they were there when they arrived then they should be replaced, like for like.
If they were energy saving bulbs, then the replacement cost can add up. Ive used cheaper energy efficient bulbs at home and they either didnt have the same light or life as more expensive ones.

Best thing here would be if the landlord put in cheap filament bulbs and recommends the tenant use energy efficient bulbs if they want and then leave working what they arrived to.

I can see situations both where a landlord might try scam a tenant for made up things and a tenant who thinks they are being smart by taking out bulbs.
If this is a few filament bulbs then the landlord is being an ass, if its LED bulbs or halogen bulbs missing or a significant amount not working, then I think they are right to charge, I bought a load of bulbs on sale for my own home and the cost would have added up at 12.99 per bulb normally, you wouldnt have any change out of 100.

No matter what is normal wear and tear, the contract is to pay the rent, this does not mean they can leave as they see fit. Ive seen tenants leave kitchens filthy with grease (from never cleaning) and try claim it was clean, I wouldnt try pass that off to another tenant and I wouldnt cleanup after someone like that again, as I have previously.

damienirel

cerastes wrote: »

Would the OP or anyone move into a house where the landlord refused to provide bulbs?? people would be ranting like mad on here.

If they were there when they arrived then they should be replaced, like for like.
If they were energy saving bulbs, then the replacement cost can add up. Ive used cheaper energy efficient bulbs at home and they either didnt have the same light or life as more expensive ones.

Best thing here would be if the landlord put in cheap filament bulbs and recommends the tenant use energy efficient bulbs if they want and then leave working what they arrived to.

I can see situations both where a landlord might try scam a tenant for made up things and a tenant who thinks they are being smart by taking out bulbs.
If this is a few filament bulbs then the landlord is being an ass, if its LED bulbs or halogen bulbs missing or a significant amount not working, then I think they are right to charge, I bought a load of bulbs on sale for my own home and the cost would have added up at 12.99 per bulb normally, you wouldnt have any change out of 100.

No matter what is normal wear and tear, the contract is to pay the rent, this does not mean they can leave as they see fit. Ive seen tenants leave kitchens filthy with grease (from never cleaning) and try claim it was clean, I wouldnt try pass that off to another tenant and I wouldnt cleanup after someone like that again, as I have previously.

Yeah agree. Simple rule of thumb(and be honest with yourself first) are you leaving the place the way you got it? Maybe you're not and you'll have to suck it up.

seabhcan

damienirel wrote: »

Yeah agree. Simple rule of thumb(and be honest with yourself first) are you leaving the place the way you got it? Maybe you're not and you'll have to suck it up.

Of course, after 5 years, its not exactly how I got it. The microwave, for example, it probably on the way out as its now 5 years older and they don't last that long. Had it died a week ago it would have been the landlords responsibility to replace it. Time passes, things get older.

Yet its generally accepted that the passage of time is not the responsibility of the tenant.

damienirel

seabhcan wrote: »

Of course, after 5 years, its not exactly how I got it. The microwave, for example, it probably on the way out as its now 5 years older and they don't last that long. Had it died a week ago it would have been the landlords responsibility to replace it. Time passes, things get older.

Yet its generally accepted that the passage of time is not the responsibility of the tenant.

Yeah but the Landlord didn't charge you for the microwave - So I don't get your point?

seabhcan

damienirel wrote: »

Yeah but the Landlord didn't charge you for the microwave - So I don't get your point?

So why charge for the light bulbs?

damienirel

seabhcan wrote: »

So why charge for the light bulbs?

Because they are something you would have needed yourself while you were there. And because they are cheap to replace unlike a microwave.

Also for the landlord to rent the place again quickly they would need to be working or somebody else viewing it might think the place was a dump if it had blown bulbs they generally wouldn't think a place was a dump if the microwave wasn't working.

cerastes

seabhcan wrote: »

Of course, after 5 years, its not exactly how I got it. The microwave, for example, it probably on the way out as its now 5 years older and they don't last that long. Had it died a week ago it would have been the landlords responsibility to replace it. Time passes, things get older.

Yet its generally accepted that the passage of time is not the responsibility of the tenant.

5 years? for a microwave? what's being done to it, maybe daily or maybe not daily use, depends if the damage was as a result of damage or just it failing. Tenants seem to have a different view of how long items should last. If my own microwave only lasted 5 years, Id never buy that brand again. In my opinion these items should be provided by the tenant, from their perspective they know they are clean/they are happy to use them and there are no arguments if they fail or need repairing.
But this was never about a microwave?

seabhcan wrote: »

So why charge for the light bulbs?

If someone couldnt be bothered to replace a few light bulbs and Id made sure they were all fitted on their arrival, then Id be more inclined to go through the inventory as they are a simple obvious item to replace and easy to spot faulty by the tenant. I wouldnt make a big issue of an item missing on an inventory but if there were a catalogue of things or an attitude of they couldnt be arsed and it added up replacing things or even the inconvenience then Id charge for it.

If I went as a tenant and there were no or missing light bulbs, Id notice it, why wouldnt a landlord on their departure. It's as cheap for a tenant not to replace a few bulbs as it is for a landlord not to provide them.

beauf

Why would you not replace the bulbs. Make life simpler.

The LL is not allowed to charge for cleaning unless the place needs excessive cleaning.

L1011

Thargor wrote: »

They sell those bulbs in Aldi, 2 for a fiver.

18 euro for 20 in B&Q which you'd imagine anyone with large volumes of them would need

o1s1n

This happened to us many moons ago when we rented our first apartment (dingy basement flat in Dublin)

Before leaving we left the place absolutely spotless. Thoroughly cleaned and steamed from top to bottom.

When we asked for our deposit back, they wanted to deduct €300 for cleaning.

We went mad and refused. In the end settled at €100.

As a matter of interest, we wanted to see this amazing clean that was going to happen after we moved out, so dropped by a little while later for a viewing

- it was exactly how we'd left it.

The last place we rented in the city centre suffered the OPs blown bulb issue. All of the hallway bulbs were gone after two years. No mention of this from the landlord at all.

beauf

seabhcan wrote: »

1/2. A few, in a 3 story 5 bed house. They are those annoying spotlight bulbs that never seem to last very long. There are 8 of them in the living room, of which maybe 3 were blown.

2) The house was not dirty. The landlord doesn't even claim the rooms with the blown bulbs are dirty. All rooms have windows (real questions?)

3) the question isn't whether the landlord needs to replace the bulbs. Its whether he has a right to make me pay for it.

You'd have to leave it as you got it.

cerastes

MYOB wrote: »

18 euro for 20 in B&Q which you'd imagine anyone with large volumes of them would need

Are they energy efficient bulbs? if they are the cheap energy efficient bulbs they arent as good or as long lasting as something like phillips. Ive tried, had the cheap energy efficient bulbs, one went within a day, some within a week, dont give off the same light, would make you wonder how efficient they are too.

From landlords point of view, I wouldnt leave more expensive bulbs as they will need replacing, the cheapest way around any argument is to just provide the cheapest filament bulb and expect it that way at the end too, if its isnt, its not too much to replace, if the tenant wants energy efficient bulbs they can provide them themself and get what ever quality they are prepared to pay for.

From a tenant point of view, if I went in somewhere with a load of halogens in place, Id make a note of what was working, remove them put them in a box and swap them with LED replacements and then remove them before I leave.

brownej

sarkozy wrote: »

Guaranteed, the LL is already thinking of the usual costs associated with the end of a long let: repainting, new beds/mattresses, new appliances, furniture, etc. That could run to over €1,000. Of course, LL's factor this into the costs of running their business, but just consider that perspective.

Landlords don't just factor this into the cost of doing business they offset it as a capital expense against the tax liable on the rent of the property. This is done over 8 years at 12.5%. Of course some amateur landlords don't relaise this is what they are doing when they claim the tax relief on rental income. They just claim the maximum allowance without realising what they are doing.
When they try and charge tenants for wear and tear damage they are effectively committing fraud (against revenue perhaps?) as these expenses have already been claimed for against the tax liable on the rental income.

damienirel

brownej wrote: »

Landlords don't just factor this into the cost of doing business they offset it as a capital expense against the tax liable on the rent of the property. This is done over 8 years at 12.5%. Of course some amateur landlords don't relaise this is what they are doing when they claim the tax relief on rental income. They just claim the maximum allowance without realising what they are doing.
When they try and charge tenants for wear and tear damage they are effectively committing fraud (against revenue perhaps?) as these expenses have already been claimed for against the tax liable on the rental income.

Rubbish. Fraud to demand you replace a light bulb? get real! You've got one hell of an imagination I'll give you that.
Also they would have to show receipts for any work done or items purchased. If the bulbs were replaced by the tenant they wouldn't have to go out and buy new ones. Looking for a tax angle on 100 quid - you must think revenue have nothing to be doing?

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

damienirel

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

What makes you think landlord is male?