A landlord has sparked outrage for keeping a tenant’s $825 bond over a bizarre list of charges – including $80 for limescale in a kettle and $44 for dust behind a fridge.
The renter was furious after receiving a detailed breakdown from the landlord, itemising why almost half of the bond was being withheld at the end of the lease.
In a heated text exchange, the British tenant demanded to know what the £412 ($A825) actually covered.
‘I’m looking at it now and I genuinely cannot believe what I’m reading,’ the tenant said, to which the landlord replied: ‘It is standard end of tenancy deductions. Very normal.’
Struggling to wrap their head around it, the renter responded: ‘£85 ($A170) for “flattened carpet fibres.” I lived there two years. Of course the carpet looks lived on. That is what carpets are for.’
However, the property owner was adamant that ‘wear has a cost’.
Refusing to back down, the tenant pointed out the exorbitant charges.
‘You’ve charged me £60 ($A120) for a loose light switch, £40 ($A80) for limescale in the kettle, £55 ($A110) to repaint a scuffed wall, and £22 ($A44) for dust behind the fridge. That is not cleaning, that is daylight robbery,’ the tenant said.
A landlord has sparked outrage for keeping a tenant’s $825 bond over a bizarre list of charges – including $80 for limescale in a kettle and $44 for dust behind a fridge
The landlord explained that ‘under the condition of return, the property must be returned as close to original as possible’.
The tenant replied: ‘The wall was already marked when I moved in. I sent you photos. You even replied “noted”. I still have that message.’
The owner suggested the condition of the property now ‘appears worse’.
Standing their ground, the renter responded: ‘Because time exists. Because paint ages. Because human beings live in homes. That is not damage.’
The landlord said the tenant had signed an inventory at check-in so they were required to adhere to the ‘legal record’.
‘Yes and I have it right in front of me. It literally says “carpet already worn”. And you still charged me for carpet wear,’ the tenant fired back.
The landlord replied: ‘It is more worn now than before.’
Furious, the tenant responded: ‘No s*** I lived on it. That is how time works.’
The renter was furious after receiving a detailed breakdown from the landlord, with everything itemised to explain why he was taking almost half of their bond at the end of the lease
The property owner then said the tenant was acting ‘rude’.
However, the renter replied: ‘I am becoming angry because you have just helped yourself to hundreds of pounds for things that already existed before I even moved in.’
The landlord then suggested the tenant was ‘free to raise a dispute through the deposit scheme.’
‘I already am. And I am uploading every photo, every check-in note, and every message you ever sent acknowledging existing damage,’ the renter replied.
‘It’s funny how calm you are when it’s my money being held and not yours.’
The landlord said he was ‘calm’ because he was ‘following procedure’, to which the tenant responded: ‘No, you are hiding behind procedure.’
The bitter exchange escalated – with the tenant furious with the landlord’s decision
According to the NSW Government, the tenant is responsible for leaving the property as close as possible to the same condition as when they started living in it.
The tenant is responsible for negligent, irresponsible or intentional actions that cause damage to the property. However, the tenant is not responsible for ‘fair wear and tear’.
The text exchange was re-shared via a video on social media by British property strategist Jack Rooke.
‘Yeah, he can’t charge for that. It’s scary how many people do this,’ Jack said.
His video prompted a discussion, with many sharing their own experiences after their landlords tried to charge them for unreasonable things.
‘Mine once tried charging me £200 ($A400) for a broken shelf in my own fridge/freezer that I bought for £90 ($A180),’ one shared.
‘They tried to charge me £30 ($A60) for cobwebs… when they inspected the house three weeks after I left,’ another revealed.
‘My previous landlord wanted to keep all my deposit because of condensation trapped between the double glazing (old windows, sealing knackered). Needless to say it took three months of dispute but I got the full amount back. The report clearly stated it was bad time the flat I rented needed new windows,’ one added.
