Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Hysterical Landlord - inspection & deposit retention

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    TheChizler wrote: »
    The quote in your own response was literally "we were told 'they said...".

    Yes referring to the people viewing


  • Options
    #33
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    beyondbelief67 wrote: »
    I would suggest they do use that picture as its showing barely any damage and I believe another poster also said this, so I think the picture will only go to helping the ops case to show how unreasonable the landlord is being.
    And even if the amount they win is small it is better in their pockets than the landlord and also might show the landlord they cant behave in the way they have.

    I would ask to see close up damage first that pic is very far back. LL would be due to ask for a repair or replacement due to any excessive damage nl matter how small anyway


  • Options
    #34
    Endthescam
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 156 ✭✭Endthescam


    Why


  • Options
    #35
    BabySlam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 349 ✭✭BabySlam


    You will be doing a public service if you go to the PRTB. That type of landlord needs a lesson.


  • Options
    #36
    beyondbelief67
    Registered Users Posts: 550 ✭✭✭beyondbelief67


    gravehold wrote: »
    I would ask to see close up damage first that pic is very far back. LL would be due to ask for a repair or replacement due to any excessive damage nl matter how small anyway

    There Is a close up pic underneath the one far back ?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    beyondbelief67 wrote: »
    There Is a close up pic underneath the one far back ?

    Missed that one, saw it now and would definitely want it repaired, she should take it to a specialist and tske the repair for that out of the deposit if unrepairable she should buy a new one from the deposit.

    Op if she has to buy a new one you should ask to keep the damaged one


  • Options
    #38
    Stheno
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 51,688 Mod ✭✭✭✭Stheno


    The sofa is damaged and regardless of op saying it's minimal it can be taken out of the deposit


  • Options
    #39
    Sligo1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,948 ✭✭✭Sligo1


    gravehold wrote: »
    if unrepairable she should buy a new one from the deposit

    Wrong. The landlord would not be entitled to buy a new couch because of the damage and subtract this from the deposit. The couch looks about 20 years old anyway so they are only entitled to replace like for like. i.e. Not a NEW couch. By the looks of it... Even if the PRTB ruled against you for the damaged couch, a similar one to this could be picked up second hand prob for €50! The LL can buy a new couch if she wants one... But the tenant would not be liable for the full cost of this. Only partial cost. This cost would be decided by the PBTB adjudicator.


  • Options
    #40
    Sligo1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,948 ✭✭✭Sligo1


    Damage on the other hand (if repairable) could be subtracted from the deposit.


  • Options
    #41
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    Sligo1 wrote: »
    Damage on the other hand (if repairable) could be subtracted from the deposit.

    I would spend 500 get the base fully rewoven then even if a new one was 250. Most second hand stuff has damage anyway to not worth replacing damaged with damage


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    timetogo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 990 ✭✭✭timetogo


    Not sure if some posters are taking from experience on this thread or out of other places. A mate of mine rented out an apartment. The tenant broke a drawer in a chest. Whoever was adjudicating gave the landlord about €50 for the drawer. It didn't matter that the chest was useless.

    As for the cost of the whole sofa, the landlord should have been claiming depreciation on it. So taking into account age and residual value will reduce the cost of the sofa hugely. I doubt the ll could just buy a new sofa and expect the tenant to pay for all of it, especially as the damage is minimal.


  • Options
    #43
    Sligo1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,948 ✭✭✭Sligo1


    gravehold wrote: »
    I would spend 500 get the base fully rewoven then even if a new one was 250. Most second hand stuff has damage anyway to not worth replacing damaged with damage

    You would be silly to do this as (imo) the adjudicator would prob rule against you in this case. They are not silly and would see through what you have chosen to do regarding the damage. As opposed to replacing the couch. Obviously I'm not an adjudicator myself but I'm guessing when they see the photos and see your receipt for the €500... I could not see them ruling in your favour. Not all second hand furniture is damaged. And tbh... I doubt the LL would actually go and spend €500 to repair this old couch! Histrionics and all... They'd need to he absolutely brainless to do this....


  • Options
    #44
    Sligo1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,948 ✭✭✭Sligo1


    timetogo wrote: »
    Not sure if some posters are taking from experience on this thread or out of other places. A mate of mine rented out an apartment. The tenant broke a drawer in a chest. Whoever was adjudicating gave the landlord about €50 for the drawer. It didn't matter that the chest was useless.

    As for the cost of the whole sofa, the landlord should have been claiming depreciation on it. So taking into account age and residual valual will reduce the cost of the sofa hugely. I doubt the ll could just buy a new sofa and expect the tenant to pay for all of it, especially as the damage is minimal.

    +1. Exactly.


  • Options
    #45
    Miaireland
    Registered Users Posts: 4,065 ✭✭✭Miaireland


    Just curious but did the landlord allow pets as part of the lease?


  • Options
    #46
    Mr. Incognito
    Registered Users Posts: 9,798 ✭✭✭Mr. Incognito


    Hi there.

    Few things.

    1. A landlord cannot claim own labour as a deduction, either from tax perspective or deposit.

    2. Never give keys back without your deposit.

    3. Refuse to move out without a deposit ( seems that ship has sailed)

    4. Wear and tear is to be expected in a rental.

    5. Lodge a claim with the prtb. Keep records of everything.


  • Options
    #47
    bjork
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,554 ✭✭✭bjork


    If you don't give back the keys, you'll be looking at a bill for replacing locks

    ;)


  • Options
    #48
    mcljot
    Registered Users Posts: 13 ✭mcljot


    I agree the couch is damaged and that it's fair that we lose some of our deposit over it, I'm just not sure the damage is recourse for purchase of a new couch. I would be inclined to use those photos in a case with the PRTB.

    About the landlord's comments about what potential tenants coming to view the place had said – to me, they sound so contrived that I would question their authenticity. The house was in a lived-in condition but was very clean. Freshly hoovered and mopped for every inspection, surfaces cleaned and all general living debris cleared out of sight.

    Re: pets, yes they were allowed.

    Re: keys, we were only given one set of keys when we moved in and made another because there are two of us. We've given back the set we were given and nothing has been said about the other keys.


  • Options
    #49
    Stheno
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 51,688 Mod ✭✭✭✭Stheno


    mcljot wrote: »
    I agree the couch is damaged and that it's fair that we lose some of our deposit over it, I'm just not sure the damage is recourse for purchase of a new couch. I would be inclined to use those photos in a case with the PRTB.

    About the landlord's comments about what potential tenants coming to view the place had said – to me, they sound so contrived that I would question their authenticity. The house was in a lived-in condition but was very clean. Freshly hoovered and mopped for every inspection, surfaces cleaned and all general living debris cleared out of sight.

    Re: pets, yes they were allowed.

    Re: keys, we were only given one set of keys when we moved in and made another because there are two of us. We've given back the set we were given and nothing has been said about the other keys.

    Given the comments about dog hair and the fact you agree you damaged the carpet with stains, and including the sofa damage, it could be there is a gap in what you consider clean and lived in and others perception of the same


  • Options
    #50
    Miaireland
    Registered Users Posts: 4,065 ✭✭✭Miaireland


    Stheno wrote: »
    Given the comments about dog hair and the fact you agree you damaged the carpet with stains, and including the sofa damage, it could be there is a gap in what you consider clean and lived in and others perception of the same

    I can of wonder that in regards to the sofa? If I was the landlord I would have expected you to keep animals off the sofa and I would have expected the cushions to be steamed cleaned/dry cleaned/covers washed etc.


  • Options
    #51
    TheChizler
    Registered Users Posts: 9,455 ✭✭✭TheChizler


    Considering they had less than a day's notice I don't think it reasonable to expect the place to be perfect.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    mcljot
    Registered Users Posts: 13 ✭mcljot


    Stheno wrote: »
    Given the comments about dog hair and the fact you agree you damaged the carpet with stains, and including the sofa damage, it could be there is a gap in what you consider clean and lived in and others perception of the same

    I agree there is that possibility, however the carpet (upstairs where dog did not go) was already stained and burned. We added one stain to it, which according to the PRTB's information about what constitutes wear and tear, constitutes wear and tear.

    The couches were covered at all times during our tenancy as we wanted to protect them as best we could. If she had wanted the cushion covers dry cleaned then she could have asked us at any point during the month prior to us leaving?

    edit: it's also worth adding that the sofas, as regards animal hair, were given hours of attention each and are PERFECT


  • Options
    #53
    Miaireland
    Registered Users Posts: 4,065 ✭✭✭Miaireland


    mcljot wrote: »
    I agree there is that possibility, however the carpet (upstairs where dog did not go) was already stained and burned. We added one stain to it, which according to the PRTB's information about what constitutes wear and tear, constitutes wear and tear.

    The couches were covered at all times during our tenancy as we wanted to protect them as best we could. If she had wanted the cushion covers dry cleaned then she could have asked us at any point during the month prior to us leaving?

    edit: it's also worth adding that the sofas, as regards animal hair, were given hours of attention each and are PERFECT

    To be honest the landlords sound like they are trying to do you out of the lease but giving something hours of attention does not necessarily mean it was done right. For example spending hours hoovering up the dog hairs is not the same as washing the covers.

    I am not trying to rain on your parade but I think you need to prepare all angles before talking to the landlord/prtb etc.


  • Options
    #54
    mcljot
    Registered Users Posts: 13 ✭mcljot


    Miaireland wrote: »
    To be honest the landlords sound like they are trying to do you out of the lease but giving something hours of attention does not necessarily mean it was done right. For example spending hours hoovering up the dog hairs is not the same as washing the covers.

    I am not trying to rain on your parade but I think you need to prepare all angles before talking to the landlord/prtb etc.

    Thanks, no I don't feel you're trying to rain on my parade. All input is appreciated!


  • Options
    #55
    Squatman
    Registered Users Posts: 1,608 ✭✭✭Squatman


    Hi op. I think it may be a little premature for you to go to the PRTB just yet, as this is seemingly a vey lengthy process. If i were you, i would contact the landlord, let him know that regardless of his personal arrangement with his wife, all further communications will be between yourself and himself. Address the fact that he has to spend2 days cleaning - with the fact that he cannot charge for his own labour, and that if any cleaning is required, it is his personal choice to do so, but it is not required to re-rent the house out, and that you have photo evidence to prove. Again, address the couch, with the same logic, he is perfectly entitled to replace the couch if he likes, but this will be done at his own expense, and your photos show the couch to be in as new condition and fully functional. record any phonecall - apps to do this, but advise him at the start of the conversation that he is being recorded. Allow him until tuesday evening at 5.30 to return the deposit in full, or close to full - or to have a fully agreeable plan to return the deposit, otherwise you will be in touch with the PRTB.


  • Options
    #56
    Stheno
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 51,688 Mod ✭✭✭✭Stheno


    Squatman wrote: »
    Hi op. I think it may be a little premature for you to go to the PRTB just yet, as this is seemingly a vey lengthy process. If i were you, i would contact the landlord, let him know that regardless of his personal arrangement with his wife, all further communications will be between yourself and himself. Address the fact that he has to spend2 days cleaning - with the fact that he cannot charge for his own labour, and that if any cleaning is required, it is his personal choice to do so, but it is not required to re-rent the house out, and that you have photo evidence to prove. Again, address the couch, with the same logic, he is perfectly entitled to replace the couch if he likes, but this will be done at his own expense, and your photos show the couch to be in as new condition and fully functional. record any phonecall - apps to do this, but advise him at the start of the conversation that he is being recorded. Allow him until tuesday evening at 5.30 to return the deposit in full, or close to full - or to have a fully agreeable plan to return the deposit, otherwise you will be in touch with the PRTB.

    Did you look at the photos? The couch is not in as new condition


  • Options
    #57
    Arbiter of Good Taste
    Registered Users Posts: 2,200 ✭✭✭Arbiter of Good Taste


    mcljot wrote: »
    I agree the couch is damaged and that it's fair that we lose some of our deposit over it, I'm just not sure the damage is recourse for purchase of a new couch. I would be inclined to use those photos in a case with the PRTB.

    if the sofa is damaged, of course she can buy a new one


  • Options
    #58
    timetogo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 990 ✭✭✭timetogo


    Arbiter of Good Taste wrote: »
    if the sofa is damaged, of course she can buy a new one


    Really? If a couch is a few years old and has a small amount of damage the LL can buy a new one and charge the tenant for all of it?
    Even though they should have been claiming tax relief on it. The couch is at least one year old so will have depreciated at least 12%

    Or have I understood your post incorrectly?

    I'm not disputing you. Would just like more info.
    Can you link to where you got that info please?


  • Options
    #59
    bjork
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,554 ✭✭✭bjork


    timetogo wrote: »
    Really? If a couch is a few years old and has a small amount of damage the LL can buy a new one and charge the tenant for all of it?
    Even though they should have been claiming tax relief on it.

    Or have I understood your post incorrectly?

    I'm not disputing you. Would just like more info.
    Can you link to where you got that info please?

    No, they can't.

    8% depreciation value/year for starters


  • Options
    #60
    timetogo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 990 ✭✭✭timetogo


    bjork wrote: »
    No, they can't.

    8% depreciation value/year for starters

    Says 12.5% on revenue.
    http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/it/rental-income.html

    I know they can't. Just asking the other poster to back up their post.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Silver Bullet
    Registered Users Posts: 9 ✭Silver Bullet


    If all reason fails the small claims court is very good in getting deposits back. My brother had a similar ( not as bad as what you guys are suffering!) problem and took the reluctant landlord to the SCC. Despite the landlords best efforts he paid up in the end. Took a long time, several months i think?


Advertisement