jeśli ktoś będzie wynajmował to samo mieszkanie 10 lat to nie ma bata - ściany się zabrudzą, wykładzina zniszczy, cos tam poodpada - nie ma sensu się wyprowadzać, żeby mieć czyste ściany...gdzies w międzyczasie landlord powinien odświezyć sciany i wymienić wykładzinę - pytanie tylko kiedy?
dla landlorda wynajem mieszkania to interes i bedzie sie kierowal ekonomicznym interesem. wymiana wykladziny przez fachowca (lacznie z materialami) to 250-400f za pokoj (glownie zalezy od jakosci wykladziny). panele sporo drozsze. malowanie ze 150-200 za pokoj. jakby tak odnowic cale 2-pokojowe mieszkanie to wyjdzie z 1500-2000 czyli bedzie sie zwracalo okolo roku! o ile panele wytrzymaja dluzej, to juz wykladzina niekoniecznie. tanie juz po 1-2 wygladaja beznadziejnie.
Mazio, czyli wynosisz sie, wynajmujesz kolejne lokum, tylko dlatego, ze landlord odmowi ci malowania scian i wymiany wykladzin?Czyli wypier...asz kolejne 1500f?To nie lepiej kupic najtansza farbe, odswiezyc mieszkanie...wyprac wykladzine?Ja mysle, ze nie bedzie to kosztowac mniej, niz 150-200f, jesli pomalujesz sciany sam.Raz na kilka lat inwestycja w mieszkanie, ktore ty zajmujesz, nie landlord jest zbrodnia, ujama na honorze?Bo nie moje?Ludzie w Councilach musza tynki klasc na swoj koszt, tez nie robi tego landlord.To jest dopiero wydatek...25f, za m2 plastering kosztuje.Nie rozumiem tez tego porownania z milazem wypozyczonego auta?
Nie masz racji, mowiac, ze landlord nie potraca z depozytu za brudne sciany, wykladziny.Otrzymujesz cos nowego, czystego, to dbaj o to.Potracilabym lokatorowi za zniszczone wykladziny, nawet po 3 latach, gdybym mu zapewnila nowe, swieze na starcie.Za brudne nie, bo brudne wykladziny moge juz wyprac-no chyba, zeby byly tak upierdolone, ze pranie nie mialoby sensu...Przez 3 lata trzeba byloby latac po mieszkaniu, zeby nie wybrudzic, ale zorac do zera, przypalic, czy porwac sie nie da w tym czasie.
Konrad, dupa a nie bedzie sie zwracalo rok...Co bedzie sie zwracalo?Jak lokator, ten, lub nastepny znow upieprzy sciany, zniszczy wykladzine?Zwroci sie, i znow trzeba bedzie wymienic..., bo ludzie nie chca po sobie sprzatac.
kama
no wlasnie o to mi chodzi. landlord ma wydac kupe kasy, zeby lokator byl szczesliwy a po paru miesiacach sobie pojdzie, zanim landlordowi zwroci sie koszt wymiany. i co teraz? nowy przyjdzie i powie, ze wykladziny i farba nie sa nowe i albo pomalujesz albo obniz czynsz?? to by bylo ciagle dokladanie to interesu.....
moze sie komus przyda :
http://www.landlordlawblog.co.uk/20...
http://www.chrisulph.co.uk/en/blog/...
Tenancy deposit arbitrations – why landlords keep losing
Written on September 3, 2009 by Tessa Shepperson in FLW Article, Tips and How to 6 Comments - Leave a comment!
Reading through the excellent ‘Landlord & Buy-to-Let Magazine’ today (September/October 2009 issue), I particularly enjoyed reading the landlords diary at the back by Barry Brunton. This gave some interesting background information on tenancy deposit arbitration’s, which I thought I would share with you.
I was especially interested as a number of readers of this blog have posted their complaints about too tenant friendly arbitrators, for example here. In the context of this, Barrys article is quite enlightening.
He makes the point first that the tenancy deposit belongs to the tenant, and the landlord, if he wants to make deductions, is making a claim which he will have to prove by evidence. And if you do not provide this, you will lose your claim, the arbitrator is unlikely to write and ask you for it. For example:
Inventories – these need to be a detailed condition report on the property not just a list of the furniture in it. To make a claim for damage to furniture (for example) you are going to have to prove that it was in good condition at the start of the tenancy. It is best that this is done by an independent firm of inventory clerks
You will also need a check out report, again this should be done by the independent inventory clerks
Photos are generally of no value as they could be of anywhere. Presumably if they are signed by the tenant and inventory clerk on the reverse and dated they should be acceptable. If used they should be clear and have something (such as a ruler) to show scale.
Barry then explains how an adjudicator would approach a claim for a damaged carpet.
He would want to know the condition of the carpet both at the start and at the end of the tenancy
Evidence of when it was purchased
The cost of replacement
And the normal life of such a carpet
He would consider whether it could instead have been cleaned
Or whether any stain is relatively insignificant and can be left
In his award he will consider fair wear and tear
And base his award on the cost of replacement carpet but not underlay
For a ruined 3 year old carpet, the landlord (he says) will be lucky to get 40%, even if he can prove everything, as a tenants deposit is not a ‘new for old’ insurance policy
This is a bit different from in the old days, when the landlord would just deduct the cost of a new carpet leaving the tenants to sue him at the county court if they disagreed.
It seems that adjudicators also expect landlords to post notices explaining how things work and will accept a tenants excuse that he did not know (and therefore is not responsible for damage through misuse) even if the landlord has provided manuals. For example in one case, a tenant ruined a lawnmower by not putting oil in, but he successfully argued that he should not be held responsible as there was no ‘check oil before use’ notice on the mower, even though this was set out the manual he had been given.
I am beginning to see why landlords are often so incensed at arbitration results. I agree that the landlord should have to prove his case, but this seems a bit too much. I wonder whether a Judge in a County Court case would have come to the same decision.
In the scope of deposit deductions, apportionment means the depreciated value that the landlord has lost owing to the actions (or non-actions) of a tenant.
The apportionment should come on the consideration that all lifespans of a property are subject to an expected lifespan before replacement should become an issue for the landlord. This is what is called a fair wear and tear lifespan.
Please note that this information is provided as general advice gained from my industry experience, and in no way should be considered expert. This following information should not be wholly relied upon for any matter regarding your deposit or tenancy whatsoever without consulting professional legal advice or the Citizen’s Advice Bureau.
Decoration lifespans
Carpet lifespans
White Goods’ Lifespans
Furniture Lifespans
The apportionment formula
Case Study 1
Case Study 2
Case Study 3
TDS Stats
There are also rules of thumb regarding small areas of damage where a landlord would probably use a nominal deduction, for example a small (less than 2 cm diameter) stain on a carpet could attract a deduction of between �20 and �50; a small chip, burn or scratch on a work surface could attract a deduction of around �15 to �25. Again these are rules of thumb and the experience of the checkout clerk or landlord would be drawn upon to make a judgement.
It is important to note though that all tenants to have the right to appeal any deduction proposals, but they would have to file a complaint and subsequent defence to the TDS stating why they believe the deduction is unfairly disproportionate.
The most important evidence that can be given to the TDS is a tenant-checked inventory at the beginning of the tenancy as well as any supporting photographs. The inventory should not include catch all phrases like �grubby� and �some scuff marks� they should identify the size, location and colour of all of them. A tenant should not overlook any item and should write it down even if the inventory clerk says that it does not matter, remember the inventory is your legal safety net. Landlords should also keep records of work completed at the property and the dates that they have occurred which can be also submitted as evidence of age.
Please find below a rough guide to lifespans for commonly damaged items in a property:
Decoration lifespans
Hall landing and stairs 3 years
Living rooms 4 years
Dining rooms 6 years
Kitchens and bathrooms 3 years
Bedrooms 5 years
(Although it is worth noting that this value will be different for different size bedrooms � a large double bedroom affords more space to move around without touching the walls whereas in a small single brushing walls is an inevitability and so will shorten their expected lifespan)
Carpet lifespans
Budget Quality (Poor quality synthetics and up to 50/50 Wool Mix) between 3 to 5 Years
Medium Quality (Better quality 50/50 Wool Mix up to 80/20) between 5 to 10 Years
Top Quality can be up to 20 Years
White Goods’ Lifespans
Washing Machines between 3 to 5 years
Cookers, ovens and hobs between 4 to 6 years
Refrigerators between 5 to 8 years
Dishwashers between 3 to 5 years
(Please note that brand quality is a factor and for example a value Beko fridge should not be expected to last as long as a high quality Maytag refrigerator)
Furniture Lifespans
Flat pack (i.e. Ikea and Argos bought) 3 years
Soft wood 5 years
Hard wood 10 years
Antiques specialist repair*
Low quality sofas 3 years
Good quality sofas 7 years
Low quality mattresses 3 years
Good quality mattresses 6 years
*Antiques are not subject to the same guidelines as standard furniture due to their nature, and it is very difficult to apportion costs using standard depreciation and so the cost of a specialist to bring the item back to the standard it was at in the beginning of the tenancy would be fully borne by the tenant.
THE APPORTIONMENT FORMULA
The apportionment method of calculating a deposit deduction takes into account both the age of the item, the expected age of the item and the replacement cost (not the original purchase cost) and uses the accepted accountancy practice of linear depreciation.
The formula that is used to calculate deductions is:
CASE STUDY 1
Damage consists of a 1 foot diameter dark black stain located on a living room carpet that has a threshold bar between the living room and hallway, the stain is located in the centre of the carpet, the carpet is a beige 50/50 wool mix carpet that is 3 years old, the tenants have been in the property for 2 years. The agents have a quote from a local carpet fitter to replace the carpet for �250 (Inc. VAT).
The first remedy according to accepted TDS recommendations is to try to repair the problem; in this case the repair would consist of professional cleaning using a National Carpet Cleaners Association (NCCA) approved contractor that uses a hot water, deep cleaning extraction method. For a carpet of this size a charge of up to �120 outside of London and up to �180 in London would not be beyond reasonable.
Should the stain be removed then it would only be this charge that stood, if the stain remains then the landlord would move on to making a deduction (in addition to the cleaning costs):
According to industry accepted methods the landlord would be able to propose a deduction of:
This calculation takes into account that the stain is large, prominent and also in the centre of the carpet. This deduction would normally be used to contribute to the replacement cost of the carpet however should the landlord decide not to replace the carpet they are still well within their rights to make the deduction as the �100 is a payment in lieu of the damage, i.e. the loss felt by the landlord and also �120 for the carpet cleaning.
CASE STUDY 2
Damage consists of a three small chips to the edge of a laminate kitchen work surface in the kitchen, the work surface is 7 years old. Two of the small chips have been noted on the inventory and are clearly described. The tenant states that all three chips were present when they took up residence.
Whilst it may in fact be the case that the chips could have been present in the beginning a tenant has a reasonable amount of time to submit to the landlord any additional defects with the property either on a signed and dated inventory or as an additional communication. The importance of a paper trail is paramount in these situations.
The TDS uses only the evidence presented to it such as the Assured Shorthold Tenancy Agreement and Inventory as well as all other emails and check in notes. As this chip was not noted by either the landlord or tenant then a nominal charge of around �15 owing to the age and quality of the work surface would probably be reasonable.
Whilst the landlord could insist on a repair he should consider that it could be deemed as unfair to the tenant because there is a cheaper option available to provide an equitable outcome.
CASE STUDY 3
Damage consists of a small cigarette burn on a three year old 50/50 wool mix carpet and is in the corner by a wall; there are three chip marks on a laminate work surface, the work surface is also three years old but two of the chip marks were identified on the inventory at the start of the tenancy however the tenant states that they were all present at the check in. The tenant redecorated the living room in a different colour during the tenancy and states that it is more aesthetically pleasing than the existing magnolia and is betterment of the property � no permission was gained for this though.
The landlord would be entitled to a small nominal deduction for the cigarette burn. The burn mark is in the corner of the room and does not adversely affect the future letting of the property and the carpet is still fit for purpose. Deduction: Nominal �25
The landlord would be able to claim for one of the chip marks unless the tenant could prove that all three existed at the start of the tenancy either by amending the inventory or providing a paper trail that showed they had noticed the damage at the start of the tenancy, in the absence of an amended inventory, photographs emailed to a landlord at the start of a tenancy provide the best evidence and paper trail. Deduction: Nominal �15
Whilst subjectively there could be more aesthetically pleasing the walls are not commensurate to the condition that they were given to the tenant in. The cost of making good should cover the whole cost of the redecoration back to their original condition rather than using a depreciated apportionment.
———————————————————–
A few interesting stats on the TDS (a little out of date � mid-2009):
Of all deposit dispute claims the following subjects were included:
52% Cleaning
48% Damage to property
23% D�cor
16% Gardening
14% Rent arrears
34% other issues, such as changing locks etc.
The TDS had registered �692,552,000 in deposits.
Further TDS Case studies that have been adjudicated on can be found here
Jasne, że prawidłowo. Nie wiem, czemu niektórzy się tak unosili, bo ja mam np. w umowie napisane, że agencja zapewnia remont po 3 latach. No i skoro Papajowi wymienili i odmalowali tzn. że się należało. I nie porównujmy tutaj mycia okien do malowania ścian - to jednak delikatna różnica
Konrad
jednak chyba jemu akurat się należało, skoro mu to zrobili. I nie wątpię, że wcześniej ładnie o to poprosił ;) Jak już pisałam, ja mam np. zawarte w umowie, że agencja po 3 latach zobowiązuje się zrobić remont. Mieszkam już 5 i pół i podpisalam umowę na kolejne pół roku, ale malowanie zrobiłam sobie sama. Ale to już inna para kaloszy, bo moja agencja i landlady są tak mili, że mnie nie wyrzucają mimo, że kiepsko płacę, więc proszenie o remont byłoby lekkim nietaktem
mam pytanie dotyczace wynajmu mieszkania,otoz ktos mi powiedzial ze jesli wynajmujemy mieszkanie dluzej niz 3 lata to nalezy nam sie od landlorda ,oczywiscie po upomnieniu malowanie mieszkania ,oraz wymiana wykladziny...ktos wie czy to prawda?