Dirty carpet in new rental property

K.Flyer

decky1 wrote: »

no sure where you live but the way properties are going now maybe you should be glad to get somewhere, my daughter just started renting a house the landlord gave her 2 buckets of paint we had to buy the rest [another 4 buckets] she was just so happy to get somewhere she was'nt willing to argue over it, shop around you'll get a nice piece to replace it or get it cleaned may be another option, don't loose your new home over this small matter.

Are you serious?
Your daughter had to paint the place she was moving into?
That landlord had to be wetting himself laughing at her.
If she was in the place a couple of years I could understand if she wanted to brighten the place up, but if it was that bad that it needed painting from the get-go and the landlord handed her the paint for you to get on with, thats disgraceful.
Edit: unless she got a very decent discount off the first months rent?

K.Flyer

handlemaster wrote: »

I cant understand how some tenants can walk away owning thousands in rent and thousands more in damage and theres no law against that.

And there should be a law in place to deal with it.
And not all "professional" tenants keep places well, and not all "HAP / RA" recipients wreck the properties either.

Sleeper12

handlemaster wrote:

I cant understand how some tenants can walk away owning thousands in rent and thousands more in damage and theres no law against that.

Passengers get out of a taxi & run or worst still mug the taxi however the taxi still must meet minimum standards and be clean

You are trying to suggest that because there is a risk of getting a bad tenant that you should rent a dirty property?

I don't get your logic at all. Fortunately most landlords don't think this way

Pkiernan

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Passengers get out of a taxi & run or worst still mug the taxi however the taxi still must meet minimum standards and be clean

You are trying to suggest that because there is a risk of getting a bad tenant that you should rent a dirty property?

I don't get your logic at all. Fortunately most landlords don't think this way

You haven't a clue what you're on about.
There are minimum prescribed standards in law.

Sleeper12

Pkiernan wrote:

You haven't a clue what you're on about. There are minimum prescribed standards in law.

Actually I own quite a lot of property myself so I know exactly what I am talking about.

The point I was making is that a taxi that you spend 20 to 30 minutes in has real minimum standards. It has to be clean, seats comfortable and in good order with no springs sticking into tour bum or missing springs. Meanwhile a slumlord can take a 20 year old mouldy mattress with broken springs out of a skip and put it in his rental property without breaking the law.

The fact that OP even had to ask the original question says how lax the standards are. Can I rent out a property without ensuring that its clean first? The answer should be no. Sadly the minimum standard for rental property does not say that the property should be clean, have a decent standard of carpet or even have to be painted regularly.

In a commercial property where no one lives will have in the lease that it must be painted every 5 years minimum. In rental accommodation you can go 20 years without painting and you meet minimum standards.

handlemaster

Sleeper12 wrote: »

handlemaster wrote:

I cant understand how some tenants can walk away owning thousands in rent and thousands more in damage and theres no law against that.

Passengers get out of a taxi & run or worst still mug the taxi however the taxi still must meet minimum standards and be clean

You are trying to suggest that because there is a risk of getting a bad tenant that you should rent a dirty property?

I don't get your logic at all. Fortunately most landlords don't think this way

Tenant viewed property was happy signed contract.now demanding changes to be made . Thats not a very honest tenant. No evidence has been shown from OP what this dirty carpet actually looks like.you like to use examples . Heres one... husband walking back down the aisle after getting married new wife says I.want you to change.

Sleeper12

handlemaster wrote:

Tenant viewed property was happy signed contract.now demanding changes to be made . Thats not a very honest tenant. No evidence has been shown from OP what this dirty carpet actually looks like.you like to use examples . Heres one... husband walking back down the aisle after getting married new wife says I.want you to change.

In all my comments I have made a point of saying "if it's actually dirty". If it is not op should say no. If it is dirty then op should step up to the mark and clean it. Quite often tenants view a property while the last tenant is still living there. Carpets might not have looked dirty under all of the clutter. Carpets might actually have been clean at the time of viewing and might be dirty now. In this case landlord does actually have a responsibility to clean the carpets

A good landlord wouldn't dream of renting a dirty property. Best practice is to have everything tip top. All appliances fully functioning. Furniture in working order & a clean apartment. Best practice is to give it in the same condition you expect it back. If the carpet is dirty then they should be cleaned.

By the way most wives spend their lives "trying" to change their husbands. Then after years of trying to change the husband she'll say "you're not the man I married"

Graham

Although there's no statutory requirement for a landlord to clean the carpet, it sounds like a perfectly reasonable request to make if a tenant notices the carpets are dirty at the start of a tenancy.

At the end of the day, most landlords are quite reasonable.

handlemaster

Graham wrote: »

Although there's no statutory requirement for a landlord to clean the carpet, it sounds like a perfectly reasonable request to make if a tenant notices the carpets are dirty at the start of a tenancy.

At the end of the day, most landlords are quite reasonable.

Reasonable yes. But if you havent dealt with tenants before you wouldnt recognise the signs. I have an example. Had a tenant same thing. Carpet was dirty she said after signing contract. Said Id would have it cleaned. Like that been 'reasonable' still wasnt happy. So I had a new one installed. Then was the house wasnt clean enought... I paid them 200euros just to move on all was happy for a week or two. . Then the demands kept.coming. it was never ending. Just things werent adding up. Want was been said wasnt true. Of course the rent was the last thing on the tenants mind never paid on time.. All.in.all it cost me thousands with damage rubbish unpaid rent etc. . In short been reasonable gets landlords no where.. yes yes I know not all tenants are the sale but there are so many looking for properties now there s no reason to take a chance

Graham

handlemaster wrote: »

Reasonable yes. But if you havent dealt with tenants before you wouldnt recognise the signs.

I'd recognise it as a sign the tenant wanted a clean home. For most normal landlords that would be considered a good thing.

To suggest wanting a clean carpet is indicative of an unreasonable tenant is pretty absurd to be honest whatever your single personal experience might have you believe.

handlemaster

Graham wrote: »

handlemaster wrote: »

Reasonable yes. But if you havent dealt with tenants before you wouldnt recognise the signs.

I'd recognise it as a sign the tenant wanted a clean home. For most normal landlords that would be considered a good thing.

To suggest wanting a clean carpet is indicative of an unreasonable tenant is pretty absurd to be honest whatever your single personal experience might have you believe.

Your wrong. Normal. Landlords would see this as a trouble tenant.

K.Flyer

handlemaster wrote: »

Your wrong. Normal. Landlords would see this as a trouble tenant.

So you think its ok to try and let a dirty apartment, speaks volumes.

Graham

handlemaster wrote: »

Your wrong. Normal. Landlords would see this as a trouble tenant.

Obviously I can't speak to the 'normal landlords' you mix with but I can say none of the 'normal landlords' I've ever met would have had the slightest problem providing a clean property. I'd go further to say they would consider it part and parcel of being a professional landlord.

handlemaster

Graham wrote: »

handlemaster wrote: »

Your wrong. Normal. Landlords would see this as a trouble tenant.

Obviously I can't speak to the 'normal landlords' you mix with but I can say none of the 'normal landlords' I've ever met would have had the slightest problem providing a clean property. I'd go further to say they would consider it part and parcel of being a professional landlord.

True. I would however like to see what was not an.issue upon signing a contract now is. OP needs to upload a photo.

Mod Note / Edit

OP needs only to provide photographic evidence or otherwise to the landlord.
He/she is not obligated to upload a photo to boards.ie u less they want to themselves so please, do not ask them again to provide proof.

vectorvictor

handlemaster wrote: »

Your wrong. Normal. Landlords would see this as a trouble tenant.

This sums it up. Due to our memorable change of circumstances I have been in the position of being a tenant (currently) and landlord (previously).

Expectations are driven by circumstances. A tenant moving in sees it as their home. After a couple of days the excitement of the new home spots flaws and desires for perfection. Some get on with dealing with cosmetics themselves while others want it done for them because of their large monthly investment.

As a landlord I got requests ranging from cleaning the washing machine filter through to replacing bent headboards . My rule was necessary functionality not resulting from tenant damage is where my responsibility sits. If the jacks won't flush my responsibility, if they Rodger the **** out of the headboard it's on them.

Today as a tenant I've had a few occasions where I could have called the landlord (broken shower seal, leaking tap) but I spent the twenty quid myself to keep a reasonable relationship. I called once due to an electrical fault and I was thanked not chastised.

decky1

K.Flyer wrote: »

Are you serious?
Your daughter had to paint the place she was moving into?
That landlord had to be wetting himself laughing at her.
If she was in the place a couple of years I could understand if she wanted to brighten the place up, but if it was that bad that it needed painting from the get-go and the landlord handed her the paint for you to get on with, thats disgraceful.
Edit: unless she got a very decent discount off the first months rent?

She's not the sort to be moaning about everything just get's on with it so a few things may need fixing just fix them you don't need to run to the landlord for every little thing they'll soon get fed up with you in the end. Landlord seems to be a very fair guy came and done some major jobs beforehand.:rolleyes:

K.Flyer

decky1 wrote: »

She's not the sort to be moaning about everything just get's on with it so a few things may need fixing just fix them you don't need to run to the landlord for every little thing they'll soon get fed up with you in the end. Landlord seems to be a very fair guy came and done some major jobs beforehand.:rolleyes:

No, I didn't get the impression that she was.
It's just that all the L.L.s that I know, and its a lot, wouldn't hand their new tenants the paint to freshen up the place themselves as they moved in, it just sounded bizarre.
They are all very reasonable and have sent out tradesmen to repair even the simplest of things without batting an eye.
Its just given the cost of renting and the amount of almost interrogation that a potential tenant goes through nowadays, that the least one would expect is that the property is freshly cleaned, tidy and snagged for issues before letting.
This should be in turn reciprocated by the tenant in leaving the property in the same way as received, allowing for normal wear and tear.

NinetyTwoTeam

handlemaster wrote: »

One gets it returned from the landlord. And one can then take a hike with it

why are you being such a prīck?

I moved into a place once that had a large stain on the carpet.

As you suggested, I didn't make a fuss. I got a rug to cover the stain.

When I moved out the stain was blamed on me and the landlord took money from my security deposit for cleaning. The next tenant who moved in turned out to be the friend of a friend. I found out that, of course, the carpet had never been cleaned before she moved in two days after I left.

So it's not about being a pain to the landlord, it's also about stopping shysters ripping off every single tenant for something they didn't.

Graham

Mod Note

NinetyTwoTeam do not post in this thread again.

Captain Flaps

handlemaster wrote: »

Your wrong. Normal. Landlords would see this as a trouble tenant.

Aggressive, tenant-hating landlords with a massive chip on their shoulder you mean. I'm glad I've bought a house and can be well rid of such individuals.

Not really related, but when we viewed our last apartment, walls badly needed painting (not just usual wear and tear) and the landlord told me they'd be withholding the cost of getting that done from the last people's deposit and it would be completed by the time we moved in. That wasn't done, but it didn't bother me so much. What I did do was take photos of every single wall and email them to myself. We paid our rent on time every month and never asked for anything, other than replacing a broken washing machine the landlord didn't have to do a thing for us the whole time we were there.

30 months later we're moving out and the landlord says he's really not happy with the state of the walls and feels it's only fair that we pay to have the place painted from our deposit as he can't very well show it in its current state. Out comes the phone with the dated pictures, landlord isn't best pleased at all and wants to see the date on the email etc but eventually agrees to return full deposit. What do you think the chances are that the apartment is back on the market unpainted?

Fol20

K.Flyer wrote: »

From your opening post it comes across that you are the landlord.
It depends on how you want to be viewed as a landlord, do you want to hand over the place fully cleaned and fresh for your new tenant.
Or,
Are you the sort that leaves it as the last occupiers left it and hope your new tenants either don't notice the dirt or don't cause a fuss as you can't be bothered cleaning it.
Your choice.

If you are the new tenants, either ensure it is properly cleaned or get it in writing that it was like that when you arrived, either that or go elsewhere.

I think it’s a combination of both. I would leave it in good condition and when tenants move out I would expect them to leave it in good condition. If I see anything “major” however if I think it’s all ok I shouldn’t have to get a cleaner in. Tbh most people I know will give it a once over clean anyway when they move in anyway. Cleaners aren’t too expensive however costs in between tenants can be expensive if you painting the entire house bla bla bla so every little cent helps when your trying to keep the boat floating

Fol20

Iwouldinmesack wrote: »

Eh , the landlord should make sure the walls and carpets are clean, that all appliances are working and furniture isnt from the 1950s before they even think of renting the house out especially with the extortionate rent they are charging nowadays. Some absolute chancers out there and should be ashamed of themselves.

Supply and demand my friend. You should take a looks at basic economics. You should take a look at how you command a price for your salary in your own job.On top of it if you knew how much they net at the end of the year, once you take out all mortgage fees,expenses and more importantly tax, you should be ashamed for saying that

Fol20

Sleeper12 wrote: »

It's definitely not the tenants responsibility in a place they haven't even moved into.



Is the carpet dirty?

If so it's not good practice to rent out a dirty property. You should have deducted the cost of cleaning from the last tenant deposit.

If the carpet isn't dirty tell them no

Sometimes it can just be general wear and tear or it might be the last tenants. Hygene can be subjective sometimes where I had a dispute with one tenant as they wanted me to professional clean it however it was so clean I was willing to kiss the ground

Fol20

Iwouldinmesack wrote: »

I remember viewing a house. We were stuck badly due to the housing shortage. It was a nice house in an affluent enough area but needed painting and carpets cleaned due to previous tenants. Requested to estate agents and landlord ( as we would be dealing with him) to paint etc before we moved in. Yeah yeah no problem. Gave deposit n first months rent (wasnt cheap). About a week later went to get keys off agent and move in. Were the carpets cleaned or house painted? Was it fxxk. Took ages to sort out and all, yet they were happy to take my money as they knew i was stuck.

Yea if you view a place and they agree to do something up front, then that’s a bad job by the ea or ll

Fol20

KevinCavan wrote: »

In the current market you should feel priveleged to pay a premium for your substandard property. Nobody cares about a tenants rights anyway. The R.T.B.I. couldn’t give a fiddler’s about tenants.

Are you talking from experience or just blowing wind up something. Tenants have all the rights, ll have very little rights and benefits as it’s all geared one way for political reasons

Fol20

Sleeper12 wrote: »

This is my experience too.

OP still hasn't confirmed if the carpet is actually dirty but if it is it should be cleaned.

A taxi that you only spend 20 minutes in to get from A to B has to be neat and clean by law. They even have random inspections & fines for the driver if they are dirty. Yet there is no law stopping a landlord taking a mattress out of a skip and putting it in rented accommodation.

I'll never understand how we have minimum standards for taxis and none for a property you will be living in for a year or more.

We do have minimum standards for stuff. Tbh if you wanted to be fully clean with beds. It should be mandatory that tenants provide their own bed. People swet so much when they sleep so if you had a few people sleeping in that bed before you moved in, it wouldn’t be the most hygienic. As I said before I wish we went the Continental way of unfurnished so then there would be much less messing about with oh you damaged this, I will keep your deposit or my couch isn’t comfy, get me a new one.

Fol20

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Passengers get out of a taxi & run or worst still mug the taxi however the taxi still must meet minimum standards and be clean

You are trying to suggest that because there is a risk of getting a bad tenant that you should rent a dirty property?

I don't get your logic at all. Fortunately most landlords don't think this way

he Didn’t say it’s ok to be dirty, your assuming and putting your own words into the mix to spin it. He just pointed at a blaring example that isn’t fair to landlords

Fol20

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Actually I own quite a lot of property myself so I know exactly what I am talking about.

The point I was making is that a taxi that you spend 20 to 30 minutes in has real minimum standards. It has to be clean, seats comfortable and in good order with no springs sticking into tour bum or missing springs. Meanwhile a slumlord can take a 20 year old mouldy mattress with broken springs out of a skip and put it in his rental property without breaking the law.

The fact that OP even had to ask the original question says how lax the standards are. Can I rent out a property without ensuring that its clean first? The answer should be no. Sadly the minimum standard for rental property does not say that the property should be clean, have a decent standard of carpet or even have to be painted regularly.

In a commercial property where no one lives will have in the lease that it must be painted every 5 years minimum. In rental accommodation you can go 20 years without painting and you meet minimum standards.

How are you still in the business if you are trying to enforce more mandatory costs on ll. Tbh why would painting even come into the minimum standards. I can understand hygene because of health and safety and all that Jazz however painting a place is purely just for aesthetics. You could have a place that has never been painted in 100 years or another place that was painted back in the 50’s and although it may not “look” nice. It wouldn’t impede someone living there. If anything painting a house would be the very last thing that should come into it

Christine LaDuchesse

10pennymixup wrote: »

Are you serious? Surely you don't really believe this. The legislation is mostly pro tenant and the RTB's interpretation of it is pure anti LL. Any excuse to come down on the LL they will take it.

In my opinion that is absolutely brilliant, and I am speaking of experience. Have been renting houses in Ireland for 7 years, and every single time there were issues with the LL. Every single time they did not want to return the deposit with some made up excuse. This happened in 4 of the 6 houses I rented. Issues I encountered:

• Landlord did not clean house before moving in, despite promises (in 4 of the 6 houses)
• appliances not working ( in 3 of the 6 houses)
• heating not working (left in cold for 3 weeks before it was finally fixed)
• Landlord not sticking to agreement in contract of maintaining the laws. so the grass ended up thigh-high. And I refused to buy a lawnmower myself
• Landlord giving notice mid term cause they were selling their house (even when we got confirmation in writing that we could live there for at least 2 years

I have found the PRTB very helpful and have won all of the cases I had to file against the LL that thought they could withhold the deposit (one even for charges to fix the landscaped garden that HE was supposed to maintain!!). I have taken detailed pictures of all houses before we moved in, and during the term of the tenancy, so all was recorded. Only thing it cost me was a lot of time and effort. In my opinion Irish LL are the worst LL in Europe, ripping off tenants, as they know tenants are limited in choice of house, and will put up with all their cr*p.

After the last horrific experience we bought a house. Never renting in Ireland again.

Fol20

Captain Flaps wrote: »

Aggressive, tenant-hating landlords with a massive chip on their shoulder you mean. I'm glad I've bought a house and can be well rid of such individuals.

Not really related, but when we viewed our last apartment, walls badly needed painting (not just usual wear and tear) and the landlord told me they'd be withholding the cost of getting that done from the last people's deposit and it would be completed by the time we moved in. That wasn't done, but it didn't bother me so much. What I did do was take photos of every single wall and email them to myself. We paid our rent on time every month and never asked for anything, other than replacing a broken washing machine the landlord didn't have to do a thing for us the whole time we were there.

30 months later we're moving out and the landlord says he's really not happy with the state of the walls and feels it's only fair that we pay to have the place painted from our deposit as he can't very well show it in its current state. Out comes the phone with the dated pictures, landlord isn't best pleased at all and wants to see the date on the email etc but eventually agrees to return full deposit. What do you think the chances are that the apartment is back on the market unpainted?

Personally, I would still report the ll to RTB as these type of people give all us ll a bad name. Nb, it’s not to try and get compo, but more along the lines of bringing to to RTB attention so that the next “victim” if ever needing to dispute it can allow RTB to see a pattern. What you did is the best possible thing you can do, document and date it by sending it to yourself or emailing it to ll covering all bases. I wish the RTB or threshold gave out advice like this as speaking from a ll point of view I have talked to a few friends who had part of their deposit withheld due to cronies like that.