PRTB and deposit withheld by landlord

Sligo1

..

ProudDUB

Have you been able to get clarification on what what your landlord spent the deposit money on, and was it specifically related to the dog? For example, did he have to replace fabric furniture or rugs & carpets due to the dog hair? While you may consider a small amount of dog hair to be trivial, the landlord may consider even one dog hair on his property to be an excessive amount, especially as he banned pets in the first place.

He may have had to get the place professionally fumigated to get rid of doggie smells that some times a pet owner would not be turned off by or even notice, but a non pet owner could smell as soon as he walks in the door. If he did things such as this and can prove it, I think he will win. If he didn't and is just chancing his arm, you could be in with a chance. However, seeing as you knowingly broke the no pet clause of the lease in the first place, the cards are stacked against you from the get go.

I know that you asked for no opinions on damage caused by dogs, but it is very hard to answer your question without trying to enter into the mindset of the landlord to see what may have prompted him to do what he did & how justified he may or may not have been in doing so.

StillWaters

It appears excessive, but was the garden destroyed? It could be costly to returf a garden. That together with new couch, table, chairs, kicker boards etc could add up to a couple of thousand which would not be considered normal wear and tear.

sReq | uTeK

If you read the OP initial post you can see he has clearly outlined the facts at hand. People need to stop assuming an atomic bomb hit the house and advise on the facts provided by the OP.

The person has no reason to withhold any information here regarding condition of property upon leaving as it would not benefit him to do so. It is obvious this person wants advise given on the facts provided, not assumptions made by other posters. No benefit to them whatsoever.

Agent J

Landlord has to prove to the PRTB costs. This means reciepts & justification.

I don't see that happening tbh.

I've been through a PRTB hearing on the tenant side. Landlord has to prove damage is above wear & tear, & must provide reciepts/costs.

StillWaters

Sligo1 wrote: »

Yes, all I want is advice on the information provided. As for replacing tables, chairs etc... Are you pulling piss??? Is this what ireland has become!!? A deposit should not be used be a landlord to refurbish a house if there has been no damage to the items! If there had been obvious damage eg. Chewed skirting boards, tables wrecked etc... Tenant would have happily replaced same and I would not be on boards.ie asking for advice on this case...

I'm not 'pulling piss'. I'm explaining where it is likely that LL has spent the money. He will I imagine claim that the furniture and garden was destroyed. You have no proof it wasn't. He has no proof either, just receipts (he would bo some fool to go to PRTB without receipts).

I think it could go either way at the hearing tbh.

the_syco

Sligo1 wrote: »

Although dog kept on property can vouch that there was no excess damage caused except a few small holes in garden and maybe small amount of dog hair.

Not think of filling them? You have a) landlord fixing the holes himself, or b) landlord uses your deposit to get a landscaper in to fix the holes. As no dogs were allowed, I doubt the the holes will be seen as "wear and tear" by the PTRB.

pawnacide

You mentioned that this is an adjudication hearing, chances are the Landlord will ignore it (as he hasn't a leg to stand on) which means it will become a judgement hearing at a later date in which case you are entitled to see his evidence before the hearing but either way the following applies.

Did the agent put it in writing that he didn't want to get involved eg mail, text etc or do you have anything in writing from him re condition of house or when you were expecting your deposit.Basically any evidence that would even imply the agent was happy with the house. If not try texting (not e-mail) the agent re the matter and try and get a text reply .. he might not fall for it but worth a shot. If you get no reply from your text send him an email asking for a letter, he'll probably ignore it but print it out the email anyway and bring it to the hearing. basically you want a reason to bring up the fact that you are genuinly surprised by not getting your deposit back and point out that the agent is refusing to engage with you or the process which is odd.

Did the Landlord ever do an inspection with you present and outline his issues to you if not this will go against him as you weren't given an opportunity to rectify the problems?

When did you find out that you weren't getting your deposit back as you should really have got it straight away .. If he only took photos 1 month later it makes no sense and you should really emphasise this and prove it if you can. Was the house re-let in the meantime, if there's anything in the photos to show its re-let he's f****d.

It's not too late to get a letter/receipt from the cleaners btw. A letter will do if there's some reason they dont want to give you a receipt.

As for the mere presence of a dog, that's irrelevent to the withholding of your deposit, it could be considered a reason to terminate the lease but not to keep your deposit.

Given the facts in your post he's taking the piss and the burden of proof is on him not you. He must not only have proof of the damage at the end of the tenancy but also the state of the property at the beginning of the lease. If photos were taken by the Agent at the beginning of the tenancy and the Landlord has them then the agent is getting involved just not on your side.

When in the hearing do not engage with the Landlord at all and speak only to the adjudicator, don't respond to slurs etc. Despite the homey idea of adjudications and judgement hearings given on the PTRB website this is not an informal chat and the adjudicator will probably be a solicitor who's heard it all before.

diceyreilly1

Im looking for some info from anyone who has had any dealing with the PRTB in relation to deposit retention by a landlord.
Are you the tenant or is below what the tenant claims and did you see the property on expiry of the tenancy. This is not doubting the claims of the tenant

These are the facts:

Stayed in property for 1 year.
Moved out at end of lease.
I presume this was a 1 year fixed term tenancy
House was cleaned and in very good condition on termination of lease.
However, tenant did keep dog on property unknown to landlord. This was against the terms of lease.
Should not have bearing on deposit retention only in the case of excessive wear and tear claimed to be directly attributable
Although dog kept on property can vouch that there was no excess damage caused except a few small holes in garden and maybe small amount of dog hair.
Was dog kept for the full tenancy and was LL aware of this
Were holes in your opinion small and in Landlords opinion large. Will LL claim landscaping required.
Also small amount of dog hair in your opinion will LL claim cleaning to remove hair/smell
House was professionally cleaned prior to leaving.
If professionally cleaned small amount of dog hairs would compromise this claim
Tenant did not take photos on leaving as did not think deposit would be withheld as house was left in good condition.
Always good idea to take photos on arrival (with LL/agent) and on exit(with LL/agent)if possible. This may deter LL from retaining monies.
Estate agent did house inspection and was happy with condition of house but will not provide letter for hearing or witness as he "does not want to get involved"... landlord obviously giving him business.
Did tenant request deposit before handing keys over and if not why
Tenant did not recieve any receipts from cleaners and has no evidence of condition of house on termination of lease.
Can tenant now ask for receipt or statement from cleaner

Currently awaiting date for Adjudication with PRTB.

Landlord is withholding deposit between 2-3K due to "excess damage" of property.
Landlord verbalises he has photos as evidence (however, these photos were not taken until 1 month after tenant moved out).
How does the tenant know these photos were taken a month after end of tenancy and has tenant requested to see these photos. Can the tenant offer any explanation as to how damage if/was done in this month after tenancy expiration.

Basically tenant has no evidence of condition he left house in.
If LL produces photos claiming this was the condition when tenant left and tenant cannot produce their own photos or other 3rd party statement (ie cleaner or estate agent).....
Does anybody know how the PRTB view pet on properties in breach of lease and also if PRTB only take evidence into account?
1st part re pet breach should not have major bearing unless LL can directly attribute excess damage to dog. 2nd part of sentence unclear.

Does this mean tenant is doomed even if house really was left in good condition?
No but evidence rather than statement/claim by tenant will be of greater assistance to tenants case and if photos from LL cannot be disproved...

Please no opinions on dogs being dirty etc and damage caused by pets. I have already stressed that there was no excess damage to the building caused by the dog.

Apologies for long post.[/QUOTE]

Sligo1

New info has come to light. Apparently LL did not register the tenancy nor any subsequent tenacies with the PRTB. Does anyone know if this will have any bearing on the case at all?

pawnacide

Sligo1 wrote: »

Thank you very much for your valued advice. Extremely appreciated!

From the words of the tenant... "We have been sent a letter stating a date we have to appear for a hearing. And that we may send evidence to PRTB if we have any."

Tenant has a reference letter from estate agent stating he was a good tenant who kept the house in excellent condition. However reference was dated a few days before landlord actually dod inspection so tenant is worried this may not be valid evidence as to condition of house after inspection. Tenant text estate agent recently
asking for letter stating that after he did inspection he found the house to be in good condition. Estate agent did not reply.

Landlord was on holiday when tenant moved out at end of lease and did not return unitl one month after tenant moved out. When landlord returned from holiday he got in contact with tenant to say he would not be getting deposit back. House was not re-let during that month as far as tenant is aware. But was re-let one month later as tenant called to house and spoke with new tenants while collecting post.



Tenant has called and text cleaners in regards to getting a receipt. However, cleaners english is not great. Said they would pass message on to the cleaner that cleaned the house that day... however tenant is scepical as to whether he will receive the letter or receipt.

From what you said about the Reference that is all the evidence you will need as you seem to be saying that the reference date is after your move out date. But still bring a copy of an e-mail requesting a letter from your agent. Bring the phone with the message from the cleaners with you also and tell the adjudicator you tried to get a receipt but none forthcoming. Basically appear to shocked and dismayed that you're not getting your deposit back and do your best to appear logical and credible.

Sligo1

pawnacide wrote: »

From what you said about the Reference that is all the evidence you will need as you seem to be saying that the reference date is after your move out date. But still bring a copy of an e-mail requesting a letter from your agent. Bring the phone with the message from the cleaners with you also and tell the adjudicator you tried to get a receipt but none forthcoming. Basically appear to shocked and dismayed that you're not getting your deposit back and do your best to appear logical and credible.

Sorry pawnacide, I meant the reference letter was emailed to the tenant a few days before the landlord actually came and inspected the house. This is why the tenant is unsure as to whether it is credible as evidence. But it has been sent to PRTB anyway. Thanks again.

Do you have any thoughts as to whether the LL failing to register the tenancy and any subsequent tenancies will have any bearing on the case?

Sligo1

Thank you Diceyreilly1. I am writing on behalf of the tenant and I am a witness to the condition of the house.

pawnacide

Sligo1 wrote: »

New info has come to light. Apparently LL did not register the tenancy nor any subsequent tenacies with the PRTB. Does anyone know if this will have any bearing on the case at all?

He will probably be fined and have to pay for the costs of the hearing which he wouldn't be if he had registered. Probably wont affect your award but I know of one case the tenant recieved 3000 over and above their deposit coz they claimed they were inconvenienced by the non return of deposit.

Cases and their decisions are listed on PTRB website .. you should have a look at a few to familiarise yourself with how they think.

If all you want is your deposit back it might be worth calling the landlord and asking for it again but personally I wouldn't.

Agent J

Sligo1 wrote: »

New info has come to light. Apparently LL did not register the tenancy nor any subsequent tenacies with the PRTB. Does anyone know if this will have any bearing on the case at all?

He's f**ked.

He'll be fined & he can't take any case aganist you. Maybe use this as a bargaining chip for your deposit back.

"Either you give it all back or i report you to the PRTB , take a case & still get the deposit back."


He'd still have to justify any costs with receipts etc but now he is exposed to a fine.

Sligo1

Thank you everyone for all your advice and comments. It is very much appreciated!