UK Landlord Forum / Life

Hi All

...property is rented out via a letting agent. What's happened is that a dispute has arisen between the letting agent & the tenants about the return of the deposit. 

While there are some issues to correct (which are leading to the deposit return dispute) the tennants have also made the observation that the maintenance company the letting agent company used to make good the issues are linked. The letting agent company & the maintenance company while as separate limited legal enties (as per Companie House info) are under the very same directorship.

The tennants claim this a conflict of interest, that the works have not been subject to a three quote estimation process, therefore that they're over-inflated so to speak & they say this is potentially anticompetitive practice. It's clear to me that the letting agent only did use their own maintenance company to make good.

Any comments/thoughts please regarding the 'legality' of what the letting agent is doing here.

Many thanks 
         

I don't believe there are any real legal issues here. Landlords can do the work themselves and quote what they think it was worth.

The dispute service will make a decision
on how much they think the job should cost. The agent providing more than one quote would have helped with this.

There is no legal obligation to get 3 quotes.Indeed,in my neck of the woods you would be lucky to get one person turning up to quote.Some are charging a fee to do so,and then you never hear from them again if you accept the estimate.

The claim against the deposit is for the loss beyond the wear and tear associated with any residential tenancy.
So the claim is for the loss, not the work done in putting it right (although they might be the same).
There's actually no necessity for any work to be done at all, let alone have multiple quotes.

The landlord is under a general obligation to keep the losses to a minimum, and to adjust any claim to allow for the normal amount of wear and tear that would have happened anyway.
So, as a rule, it's unlikely that any landlord claim for the full cost of work done would succeed and that's likely to be the outcome of any deposit scheme dispute resolution process (or court case - they use the same calculations).

The simplest question for the tenants to try and move it forward might be to ask them to get their own quotes for the work, because while they might be right, they need to have some evidence to support it.
The agent, for example, would be entitled to charge the landlord an admin fee to get multiple quotes and, as the local tradesmen will know they're not going to get the work because the agent own their own people, there may be a charge for getting the quotes themselves done.
If the tenans were that concerned about the cost of the corrective work, they'd have paid someone to do it before they left, so the chances are they're just being clever - but, as many landlord/agent claims are overstated they'd probably succeed in getting the deductions reduced if a third party gets involved - which will lead the landlord out of pocket (and not the tenant or the agent, neither of whom has any incentive to resolve the issue otherwise).

Quote from: jpkeates on September 18, 2022, 09:37:49 AMIf the tenans were that concerned about the cost of the corrective work, they'd have paid someone to do it before they left...

This is important. Very important. (but not important to this thread)

It is the reason why I always send a Draft Check-Out document to exiting Tenants around 1 month before the date of the Check-Out... it's not very onerous to do.. and it outlines my expectations and what I'd be looking to deduct from the Deposit if things aren't as I expect. They also have time to raise questions.

Like, ensuring the fridge is empty, cleaning the oven, and all the light bulbs are working... then I state as plainly as possible... you have plenty of time to address the things you choose to address... if they're not done and I spot something then what leg do you have to stand on when I say - "this needs attention and you did have a month to do it, so you clearly couldn't be bothered or decided not to".

It has worked well in avoiding disputes or ever disagreements. To be transparent, if I a Tenant really pushes back on something on the day, I'm likely to give way, because getting a quick agreement between the Landlord and Tenant is massively more important to me than letting them leave with any doubt (or even much bad taste). I want an agreement at that time, and a transfer from my account to their account, closing the tenancy off once and for all. Does this mean that I've been caught-out once or twice? It sure does. But I don't want some objective third party quantity surveyor sniffing around my business.

Sometimes I even explain that my assessment of the cost of repairing damage is a 'best guess'... I've not had one Tenant argue against this, ever - they want their remaining funds back as quickly as possible too. I am not getting 3 quotes for anyone, ever. What a giant waste of [my] time. If you can explain that the purpose of the exercise is not for one side to lose-out or one side to profit - but for neither side to experience that... then all my ex-Tenants have been incredibly reasonable, I suppose.

Maybe my salient point is - I bet not many Agents take this approach.

I don't, personally, agree deductions at check out, but that seems a very sensible approach.

Each deduction that I propose is explained, with the calculation laid out in full, so the tenant can see exactly how I've arrived at the figure.
When you do that, it's surprisingly difficult to argue with - because the figures are all adjusted for fair wear and tear, it's difficult for anyone to argue that what I'm claiming is just normal wear and tear.
So far, this has the effect of reducing disputes to virtually zero (and there aren't that many claims anyway) - although it could be argued that I'm not claiming as much as some landlords might want to.