babnye

I am a Solicitor but this is in no way my field which is human rights. I had never heard of betterment and the like! You would not want a dermatologist performing heart surgery on you - silly example but you get my drift! There is a wealth of knowledge and experience on this site and I was interested in getting people's views and hearing about their experiences to see if it confirmed my reading of the legal situation. I trust that explains it.

That's interesting to hear but not unsurprising in view of limitations on resources etc. I suppose though that the more tenants complain, the more statistical information OFT gain about the prevalence of these terms As a lawyer, I am very disappointed to see other lawyers draft these unnecessary charges (e.g. compulsory insurance) in view of the clear guidance against their use. It borders on the unethical as if a client is advised to stick such a clause in and is later unable to rely on it to their deteriment, in view of this guidance, there could be a clear claim for negligent advice

I should also add that there at least are two separate legal contexts in which these would apply: (a) you might be disputing the landlord's/LA's ability to rely on a particular clause and you might want to argue it is an unfair clause and therefore void - a court will decide but will take this guidance (based on the law) into account ( the OFT has its own separate enforcement powers based on a variety of Acts and if the OFT feel clauses are unfair, they can advise a LA to make appropriate amendments under threat of enforcement action. Tenants can, and should, make the OFT aware of clauses which clearly go against their guidance

No, they are not the law but they are persuasive 'soft law' i.e. statutory guidance. As a lawyer, I cannot see judges (especially district judges who are only part-time practising lawyers) ignoring these easily.

Just to be clear this checklists which demands that tenants comply with it or lose their deposit states: “although the condition of the property at the move in will be taken into account, as will a degree of fair wear and tear, the expected standard at move out is set out below”. It then goes on to give detailed explanations of how every thing should be left - lightbulbs, no weeds in grass etc etc It is, therefore, attempting to impose additional obligations over and above those in the contract. This cannot be lawful or enforceable

Don't be daft! This checklist requires the return of a near new property. The landlords are not entitled to have a property returned in a state better than it was at the commencement of the tenancy and they are not entitled to request the property is restored precisely to the condition it was at the start of the lease as fair wear and tear is allowed. So a 15 year old property which has been used as a family home for the last six years and rented out for two years before that will never be a show home!

This link is mentioned on this site somewhere but it really is great for checking tenancy terms such as extra charges http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/reports/u...erms/oft356.pdf Honestly how do these letting agent bast**ds get away with it when the law is spelt out in this way?

After looking at this further, I think this document has actually been sent in error and is meant for an independent guarantor of the lease which is not relevant to us. Sorry for confusion

We are moving into a new property on Wednesday. I have only just got around to looking at the new lease. It is pages long and includes at the front a 'contractual guarantee' which attempts to provide the landlords with a guarantee against all loss or damage either directly or indirectly occured as the result of a breach of the tenancy agreement. This is not part of the tenancy and it appears to me to be an attempt to widen the legal liabilities of the tenant as there is no obligation that such loss be reasonably or properly incurred. It has surely got be an unfair contract term Any of experience of this?

Thanks. I have written a letter, without prejudice, setting out that I think their checklist is not a contractual obligation and that, if it were, it would be unreasonable as it involves excessive discretion on the LA's part and an element of betterment. I am not having every little thing argued about as we leave and I will inform the landlords of the nature of my complaint. These people are charlatans and this is bullying practice!

The thing is, I did mark things down on the inventory but the inventory doesn't even mention things like the state of the extractor fan or light bulbs and I think that cuts both ways. How can I be obliged to replace either if they can't prove the state of the property at entrance? They will certainly not have gone through a checklist for our move in which was like this

Well, I had the woman who the LA employ to clean for them around today to quote for a clean and she told me how they do their inspections. They are clearly looking to find fault. Yes, they expect you to clean the extractor fan and replace the filter. Yes, they expect you to clean all the window frames, remove every sign of mildew. Yes, they expect you to remove all signs of water reisdue from sinks etc! She showed me how the inventory clerk comes in and runs his/her hand over the front of cupboards to check for any sign of grease and how they run their hands over the tops of door frames to check for dust. I spent all last night scrubbing and cleaning and today and the woman was still able to point out bits and pieces which would make the inventory clerk say - call in the cleaners! This is why I'm getting annoyed/upset. This bears no relation to the visual checks which were done in other properties I have rented. They are clearly looking to get some money off the tenant. It is also outrageous when we were not exposed to the same rigorous checking before we moved in. I reckon this is all to do with a new system of deposit taking which does not benefit us as it was after we signed the lease. This seems absolutely draconian and my view is that we cannot be held to standards of cleanliness imposed unilaterally by their check in list which formed no part of the contact. it has crap in it like replacing all the lightbulbs or they will gte a contractor in to do it and charge you! I'm outraged :angry:

We move next week. I've already paid until end of month!

We're about to move out of our property after six and a half years - got Notice to Quit with minimum notice. The landlords have told me they are recarpeting and repainting so I assumed that apart from ensuring the kitchen and bathrooms and garden were tidy (and hoovering and a quick wipe around) nothing else would be required. I spoke to the LA yesterday to try and clarify and he was quite difficult. He told me that things like the extractor fan would need cleaning (inside and out) and the walls all washed down. He suggested we use their professional cleaner to esnure we got our deposit back - spend money to get money back? He said that the landlords were moving back in and although they were painting, they would need the walls cleaned. Mmmm, they offered to sell the house to us behind their back so not sure about the moving back in. He referred me to the checklist they send out which I hadn't looked at. I have now and it is outrageous. I am a really tidy and clean person but there is no way someone had cleaned the bath 'free of mildew and water residue' before we moved in. Nor had they 'thoroughly cleaned the oven hood and extractor inside and out'. Nor had they checked and replaced all the lightbulbs!! I looked at my original contract which simply says that we should return the property 'in the same clean state or condition as they shall be at the commencement of the tenancy'. Although, our tenancy is now a statutory periodic tenancy, I understand that the provisions of the initial lease are applied to it. For the condition of the premises, we must refer to Inventory/Schedule of Plight and Conditions. The checklist seems to attempt to impose unilaterally definitions of cleanliness and a new standard altogether for departure as it says “although the condition of the property at the move in will be taken into account, as will a degree of fair for wear and tear , the expected standard at move out is set out below”. :angry: I'm annoyed about this as it seems to me that they are wanting us to meet higher standards than were applied to our move in. I think these checklists after the TDS which does not apply to us.So, I would like to hear what people would advise regarding: 1. Is it right to say our statutory periodic tenancy is till governed by the original lease 2. Do you agree that it is the lease and inventory and not this new checklist which determine the standard departure? Thanks

Thanks for this. Very helpful. I'm probably just fretting. Two kids at home with chicken pox and a move on my hands! No the garden isn't bad. We have looked after it. It just needs a tidy up and we had been employing a gardener. I last cut the grass three weeks ago. they have seen it recently too as I let them in to do some jobs I was just hoping they'd say don't worry about the garden you've enough on your hands! I was a bit worried by the reaction!

Hi We were given notice to quit out of the blue after 6 and a half years in a property. We managed to find a new house to rent and are moving next week. This is two weeks before the notice to quit expires but with the LL consent. The LL offered to sell the property to us behind the LA's back as they didn't want them to be involved in the sale. For a variety of reasons we chose not to buy. But this has meant that, at their instigation, there has been correspondence passing between us about the move. The LL want to move back into the property and are going to re-carpet, re-paint and re-floor kitchens and bathrooms. They don't want us to put curtains and blinds back. I rang the LA yesterday about handover arrangements. They knew nothing about this and said that after we move out an 'inventory clerk' would come round to check the place. I have asked they speak to the LL about the arrangements about carpets/paint etc as I am not going to the expense of doing stuff for no reason. I've also asked about the garden. It's a bit overgrown and we have employed a gardener ourselves but we can't get him to do anything before we move out so I've offered to cut the grass and tidy up. The LL don't move in for another 6 weeks so even that seems pointless as it's going to have grown back again after that. The LL now says she's 'taking advice' on the garden. FFS! I really don't want to lose our deposit. The LL have really done nothing to the place for 6 years. We have two small kids so I've never chased them to update but I have always made the LA aware of the condition of the property. I have tried really hard to accomodate the LL and be amicable over the last few weeks. I'd like to think if it was me I would be quite happy to return the deposit and wouldn't be bothering about the state of the grass but not everyone is the same! Any advice for keeping this civil and ensuring our deposit is returned?

Thanks. We have found a nice local house to rent and that particular seller has now taken his house off the market. Apparently, they were offered 275 for it 6 months ago and said no because they wanted full asking price!

It will be interesting to see if the continued bad news about house prices has an effect. Someone I know has just had an offer accepted on a property at about 40k less than its 2007 peak. However, I know others, so desperate to get on the 'ladder' that they are talking of interest only, government subsidised loans and mortgages and borrowing money from anyone who will give it to them. The idea of home ownership still seems to have a strong emotional pull...put Salisbury is starting to wake up to reality and vey little is selling!

Hi We are having to move from the rented property we have been in for the last six years. We have found a place and the letting agent wants a fee of £75 each for confirming references - that's £150. They also want a further £95 for the tenancy agreement. On top of that, they are asking for a reservation fee of £100 (which will be taken off the amount outstanding for deposit etc). This all seems a bit excessive - is that usual in today's market? Thanks

Does anyone know about this housebuyers' scheme - Homebuy? A friend was talking about it and wanted to get some information on it. I thought this would be a good place to find the real score on it

You have to do what you feel is right for you and your family. I have two little ones - 6 and 3 - and I would like to get them settled somewhere. The time is not right for us, but I can understand why you would want to buy! Good luck and happy new home to you!

That's the conclusion I've come to as well but for a moment I did consider.......having kids and having to move is hard. But it does them no good if we lumber ourselves with tons of debt in a falling market

We are talking about two different properties here. First property is the current rented property which the landlords offered to sell privately for 280. The landlords are moving back in if we don't buy - that's their story anyway. The second is a property on for 285. At present, offers at 250 with a desperate seller might work but I don't think the psychology of the market has changed here sufficiently for lower offers to be considered unless seller is completely desperate. I think a dead summer and a few low prices on rightmove sold section might start to change things. Sellers are still too cocky although EAs talk a different story. To be honest, I wouldn't see either house as being what I'd chose for myself in a perfect world so why bother with the debt? It's not like prices will be shooting up any time soon

Thanks. Do these sort of leases usually have break clauses though?

Mmmm, I've thought about the point 2 bit.Have to admit I am a solicitor but this is far from my field! I think the question of the charge over the property and any deception to get the mortgage does not vitiate title, otherwise it wipes out the lease and the subsequent notice to quit. I think the lease stands and can be enforced but that this could be a case of mortgage fraud if they get a residential mortgage at a better rate than a BTL mortgage. But what can you do about it? I am thinking of writing, once we've moved out, to HMRC and building society just to ensure they know.