Landlord won't return deposit

ajk24

Hi all,

I realise that I will have to go to PRTB but before that can anyone provide advice.

Myself and my friends vacated a property the the end of August. We have been making repeated requests via the estate agents for the landlord to contact us with a view to returning the deposit. It was only after threatening to contact the PRTB that we received an e-mail stating that:
"the damage done to this house far exceeds the deposit paid so it is impossible for me to return the deposit to you. I have photographs which visually illustrate in no uncertain term the nature of the damage as well as valuation for replacement furniture and household equipment."

We would contend that there was no material damage (and we also have photos of each room taken after we cleaned and tidied the property).
The deposit was for €1050 - we would have had to smash the place to pieces for that level of spending to be required.
The fact that he refers to "valuation" rather than receipts for replacement indicates to me that no money was spent.

Question: Should I ask him to provide all photos and "valuations" before going to the PRTB or contact them before engaging further with the landlord?

Many thanks,

Andrew

Paulw

Since you have your own photos after cleaning the place, I think you should go direct to the PRTB and lodge a complaint.

Lollymcd

Would the "damage" your landlord is talking about constitute "wear and tear"? Did you replace anything that was broken? Even plates, mugs etc?

pvt.joker

and landlords wonder why people withold the last months rent instead of the deposit. because of practices like this by landlords thats why.

ajk24

Lollymcd wrote: »

Would the "damage" your landlord is talking about constitute "wear and tear"? Did you replace anything that was broken? Even plates, mugs etc?

I don't know what the damage refers to. "Wear and tear" would be the extent of any damage - i.e. maybe carpets might have needed cleaning but they were of the cheaper hard wearing type. I think if there was actual damage he would have pursued us as soon as he had inspected the place. We left a forwarding address.

We had an itinerary and everything was accounted for.

stepbar

ajk24 wrote: »

I don't know what the damage refers to. "Wear and tear" would be the extent of any damage - i.e. maybe carpets might have needed cleaning but they were of the cheaper hard wearing type. I think if there was actual damage he would have pursued us as soon as he had inspected the place. We left a forwarding address.

We had an itinerary and everything was accounted for.

You might politely remind him of his obligations. Make sure that he knows you are going to the PTRB and that he would be advised to make sure he's registered, otherwise you will report him to the revenue for tax evasion.

athtrasna

pvt.joker wrote: »

and landlords wonder why people withold the last months rent instead of the deposit. because of practices like this by landlords thats why.

I don't know of any landlord that would permit it...it would be stupid of them to agree to the risk. Tenants don't always leave the place in good condition. Not saying the OP would fall into that category but it does happen, a lot!

ajk24

stepbar wrote: »

You might politely remind him of his obligations. Make sure that he knows you are going to the PTRB and that he would be advised to make sure he's registered, otherwise you will report him to the revenue for tax evasion.

would I be right in thinking that if he intended to spend any money on repairs/replacements then he had to give us the opportunity to get a better quotation etc. e.g. right of reply/resonse ( I don't have a copy of the lease to hand ) -

The property does not appear on the PRTBs listing.

Lollymcd

ajk24 wrote: »

I don't know what the damage refers to. "Wear and tear" would be the extent of any damage - i.e. maybe carpets might have needed cleaning but they were of the cheaper hard wearing type. I think if there was actual damage he would have pursued us as soon as he had inspected the place. We left a forwarding address.

We had an itinerary and everything was accounted for.

It sounds like you have a good chance then, maybe your landlord is just chancing his arm hoping you will let the matter drop. I'd be straight on to the PRTB.

Best of luck, let us know how you get on.

dingding

If the tennancy was registered with the PRTB you would have got a letter from them. It should have arrived within a couple of months of renting.

Dotsie~tmp

ajk24 wrote: »

The deposit was for €1050 - we would have had to smash the place to pieces for that level of spending to be required.
Andrew

Wrong. A thousand quid doesnt go a long way in a house. Sounds like you are admitting you did do some damage but you just dont think its worth the deposit.

stepbar

ajk24 wrote: »

would I be right in thinking that if he intended to spend any money on repairs/replacements then he had to give us the opportunity to get a better quotation etc. e.g. right of reply/resonse ( I don't have a copy of the lease to hand ) -

The property does not appear on the PRTBs listing.

That is not the issue. The real issue is whether he is registered with the PTRB. Tax evasion is a very serious matter. He cannot claim interest relief (maybe for wear and tear too?) on the house if he's not registered with the PTRB (assuming a mortgage is registered against it).

ajk24

Dotsie~tmp wrote: »

Wrong. A thousand quid doesnt go a long way in a house. Sounds like you are admitting you did do some damage but you just dont think its worth the deposit.

No - what i'm getting at is that any damage amounting to that would be quite obvious and would not be made up of him referring to general wear and tear as damage.

The_Conductor

Seriously- you're not going to get anywhere going to and fro with him- contact the PRTB and launch a complaint. Its the only way you're going to get anywhere. I wouldn't even contact the landlord further- you're not going to have any satisfaction from him.......

quiche

i could be wrong - but i thought the whole point of estate agents and deposits, and why you cant not pay your last months rent and use the deposit for that yada yada yada - is that the deposit money is held by the estate agent for the duration of the contract, and is never given back to the landlord?

as an estate agent is mentioned - i'm assuming that the lease is through the estate agent, and not a private letting.

then again i could be completely wrong and this - and more discerning minds will clarify.

The_Conductor

We need an independent body where deposits would be lodged, and refunded in due course as appropriate at the end of tenancies.

You cannot legally use your deposit as your last month's rent under the 2004 Residential Tenancies Act- unless the landlord specifically allows you to do so.

The case above notwithstanding- tenancy law in Ireland is vastly in favour of tenants- and not landlords, as many people seem to believe........

Captain Corelli

The PRTB has a rule that you lodge a complaint within a period of time after tenancy ends (from what I remember the limit is 3 months). I would recommend that you lodge a complaint immediately as you have exceeded this limit, but I would expect they would waive this limit under your circumstances.

FYI I am coming to the end of a adjudication (bypassing mediation step) dispute lodged in May. I have been awarded circa EUR300 damages (plus deposit back) after over EUR300 was withheld on my deposit. The damages awarded make it well worth pursuing this.

All in all; lodge a complaint immediately.

stepbar

quiche wrote: »

i could be wrong - but i thought the whole point of estate agents and deposits, and why you cant not pay your last months rent and use the deposit for that yada yada yada - is that the deposit money is held by the estate agent for the duration of the contract, and is never given back to the landlord?

as an estate agent is mentioned - i'm assuming that the lease is through the estate agent, and not a private letting.

then again i could be completely wrong and this - and more discerning minds will clarify.

The estate agent doesn't own the property now does it? Your post makes no sense.

quiche

The agent acts as a broker of the contract. I don't see how it dosn't make sense, if it isn't the case.

In any case it turns out there there is a distinction if the property is a managed property or not:

http://www.letonline.ie/users/renting-info.asp

So apparently it does make sense in some circumstances. If the property was a managed property by the estate agent, then the estate agent will *usually* hold the deposit.

ajk24

I haven't actually contact the PRTB yet - too busy last week with exams but I felt I should call over to the property to give the current tenants a heads up. They allowed me in to have a quick look around.
The place is exactly as we left it with the exception of the carpets having been cleaned which if I am right he is not entitled to charge us for.

I didn't look at the bedrooms but the guy who let me in says there was no sign of any fresh paint or new furniture when they moved in.

Will be phoning the PRTB tomorrow. Will update at a later stage.

Agent J

Been there, done that.

Unless the carpets were damaged beyond normal wear and tear the landlord cannot charge for it.

If you dont know if you are registered with the PRTB then you are probably not.
You should be able to check with them as well. They have a limited list available here.

http://www.prtb.ie/pubregister.htm

You have photos? Excellent work. This is what will seal your case to the PRTB.

If i could give one tip to anyone leaving a property is to take photos.

I'd make contact with the landlord one more time.

Id tell them that if they do not return the deposit in full and immediatly you will be taking a case to the PRTB. If they want to risk a 5k fine for not registering their tenancy then that is their choice. They have 24 hours to respond.

I will warn you that the PRTB takes frakking forever though. From start to end of the procedure to money given back to me it was nearly 18 months.
However it wasnt the money, it was the principle of the matter at that point.
The landlord was a bad landlord and having him trying to justify his position to a PRTB artribration hearing was worth the wait.