Landlord might keep part of the deposit for damage caused by previous tenants

SwissK

Hello,

My friend has been a tenant is a shared accommodations where there are 3 bedrooms being rented out. She has been living there the longest (several years). The tenancy of the other 2 bedrooms seems to change often. Sometimes people stay there for 3 months sometimes for a year.
The way it worked was simply than when someone wanted to move out, they had to look for a new tenant. The deposit was then paid from the new tenant to the previous one.

The landlord would then send out a new contract for the new tenant as well as sign them up with PRTB.

Now the landlord has decided to sell the apartment and sent an email with the notice, stating the notice period for each person (28, 42 and 112 days), which seems legit. Everyone has found something new now.

Today they asked the landlord how it works with the deposit. He then replied, saying that it's important that every vacates the apartment at the same time (?!). Which is strange because we all have different periods of notice to leave. Not sure what the logic behind that is, but obviously this is not possible and won't be happening.

He also said that once the apartment is empty, he will inspect it and if some serious damage is noticeable, he will keep the full or part of the deposit.
The thing is, that the floor in the kitchen has 3 tiles which have cracks and he knows about that, which have been like that for probably 5 years or longer, long before any of the current tenants. Also because those tiles never got fixed, the crack just got bigger, apart from that.

Second issue is. One of the girls living here, said she is moving out by the middle of the month already and will therefore only pay half the rent.
The landlord sent an email to everyone saying we all have to pay full rent for the last month, or NO ONE will get their deposit back. I understand the landlord, but the girl is stubborn.

Can the landlord keep the deposit of all current tenants for damages previous tenants have caused and the landlord never felt like fixing?
Also, can the landlord keep the deposit of all tenants because another one is not paying the full rent?

Every time someone new moved in, they received new contracts with the landlord as well as PRTB. Each one has their own individual contract. It's simply the deposit that has been moved directly from tenant to tenant (as suggested by the landlord himself).

SwissK

In simple terms, my girlfriend is freaking out that she might not get her 700 Euro deposit back, because of the issues the housemates are causing and/or damages caused by previous tenants.
My point would simply be that she has her own contract for that specific room she is renting and is not reliable for other tenants to pay their rent. If the landlord does indeed refuse to pay based on the other tenants not paying the last month or about the cracks in the kitchen tiles, I suggested to call PRTB and Threshold, as I believe she is entitled to her full deposit.

Marcusm

Inter alia, he's only allowed to retain the deposit to defray third party costs arising from damage in excess of normal wear and tear. Has anything been identified which he is likely to change before selling? Is it credible that he would change 3 tiles?

SwissK

davo10 wrote: »

Unless each new tenent signed a sperate contract and each tenent who left gave written and accepted notice.

That is exactly what I have written several times above. Each tenant has their OWN contract, NO SHARED contract. Each time someone moved out, a notice was given and the new tenant who moved in, received a new contract by the Landlord as well as a new PRTB contract. Everyone has their own individual contracts.

The landlord called 13th September, saying he is selling the flat and they have to move out. Everyone now has a new place. One girl will be moving out middle of October and that is why she is insisting that she only wants to pay half the rent, since she has received notice to move out within 42 days.

SwissK

Marcusm wrote: »

Inter alia, he's only allowed to retain the deposit to defray third party costs arising from damage in excess of normal wear and tear. Has anything been identified which he is likely to change before selling? Is it credible that he would change 3 tiles?

The apartment was apparently purchased 10 years ago (Smithfield Market) when it was brand new. My girlfriend has been in this place for several years now. The apartment is in very good condition. Nothing broken, everything works. She even hired cleaners to clean the common areas every week.
The only noticeable thing are those cracks in 3 of the tiles in the kitchen, which definitely look like they are years old. Some might argue that this is not normal wear and tear. Apart from that, it's in top condition. I had a look and I would have never guessed it's 10 years old, nor that there were probably 20 different people living in there during that period.