# Wear and tear or damage?



## money man (25 May 2007)

Hello, I hope someone can help with a query on behalf of a tenant who is in need of advice.  They are renting a house with 8 other people (!)and the door has broken off the drier. The same thing happened before last year when there were different tenants in the house. The landlord is now going to great expence to replace the door (about 150) and is witholding their deposit to pay for this (enough to cover it). I would have assumed that this was reasonable wear and tear given that there are nine people using it and that it is part of her responsabilities to maintain things like this. The landlord has not registered with the PRTB and is making about 24k per annum from the house.


----------



## sheena1 (25 May 2007)

Personally I would get everybody in the house to claim their rent relief! This might make the Landlord sit up and take notice of his responsibilities re registering with PRTB. On the deposit issue, I would consider it wear and tear and if the drier door was already broken when the tenant moved in then imo he has no right to take it from the depost. Give threshold a ring.


----------



## Howitzer (25 May 2007)

I have no sympathy for your friend. If they're not prepared to stand up for their own rights what can anyone else do? The PRTB and Threshold can only exercise their authority when the tenant (or landlord) makes them aware of abuses in the rental market. The landlord does not need to have registered the property for the tenant to take a case to their dispute resolution process. Your friend should take this route. Don't get emotional, just follow the process and accept the outcome.


----------



## money man (25 May 2007)

I appreciate your comments howizer however they are fine in theory but in practice the burden of proof and the difficulty in finding out your rights and understanding them (especially when you may be vulnerable) and how to benefit from those rights can be too much for some people.  Not many foreign nationals/students/low income earners know of the PRTB or threshold ! My partner told me of this situation and i was unsure about whether this would be classified as wear and tear or damage.  I was of the opinion that it is wear and tear and the landlord has no right to deduct money from their deposit.  But i will not have to live with the consequences so i wanted to do a bit of research before i do anymore. I think that i will approach the landlord on their behalf and request that they not deduct the money from the deposit (nicely) reminding them of their responsiblitites.


----------



## Cityliving (25 May 2007)

As the door was broken previously from wear and tear and the same seems to have happened again they certainly should not be able to take it from your deposit. If it was broken by someone not taking due care (couldnt in truth be proven) then you would have to pay. However the landlord is not required to provide you with clothes washing facilities by law so if they really are not nice they could just refuse to fix it (unless it was stated in your contract that you would have use of it).

Not registed with PRTB? How do you know? Dont take the PTRB site list as a guarantee that they are not as it can take months for your name to appear. They should be registered however although as correctly pointed out they dont need to be registered to be complained about! 

24K a year from 9 tenants? Just over 220 a month!!!! Its very cheap so careful what they wish for, they may not find anything cheaper.


----------



## dereko1969 (25 May 2007)

Cityliving said:


> 24K a year from 9 tenants? Just over 220 a month!!!! Its very cheap so careful what they wish for, they may not find anything cheaper.


surely that sort of comment just allows landlords to get away with blue murder? we can't get anything cheaper so we'll allow them come in at any time night or day, not bother to fix things and then kick us out when they feel like it? there is no way the landlord can prove that the door of the washing machine was 'damaged' by the tenants, it's a pure 'wear and tear' issue, though having been on the receiving end of landlords decisions like that before I know it's very difficult to fight but they should.


----------



## Cityliving (25 May 2007)

dereko1969 said:


> surely that sort of comment just allows landlords to get away with blue murder? we can't get anything cheaper so we'll allow them come in at any time night or day, not bother to fix things and then kick us out when they feel like it? there is no way the landlord can prove that the door of the washing machine was 'damaged' by the tenants, it's a pure 'wear and tear' issue, though having been on the receiving end of landlords decisions like that before I know it's very difficult to fight but they should.


 
You misinterpreted my meaning, it was that if you want to stay or if some of the existing parties want to stay there dont start to threaten the landlord with PRTB reporting etc. Its actually not an offence in law in any case you simply cant apply for interest relief on the income. Landlords should obviously not be allowed to get away with murder but if you pay peanuts you get monkeys and that applies for landlords too. If they dont mind 9 people living in one place assuming its 4-5 bed place not 9 bed then I would be worried about the landlord. 

There must be balance too, landlords are vilified so easily. In gerenal (not specific to this case so not trying to cause offence!) - Is he/she aware that there are 9 people there???? This happens all time, rent ot 4 then get 6. Did any members change throughout the length of the contract without telling landlord???? Have they done things at any stage that are outside the contract- eg.g smoking in house, pets??? 

This OP sounds very reasonable (and concerned!!) but tenants break the rules all the time and I think that landlords who have invested so much money, worry and effort should get some positive understanding in issues of apt conditions.  

I have been both a tenant and landlord and I know both sides.


----------



## Cityliving (25 May 2007)

Well it is an offence sorry but what I meant was that it is not an offence that the tenants can gain advantage from and to quote the PRTB themselves and it is difficult -
"successful conviction of the landlord or tenants of criminal offences under sections 144 or 145 respectively requires a high standard of proof."


----------



## ClubMan (25 May 2007)

Cityliving said:


> 24K a year from 9 tenants? Just over 220 a month!!!! Its very cheap so careful what they wish for, they may not find anything cheaper.


Not necessarily - "making €24K" could mean that he is taking that amount or it could just be his profit after deduction of expenses etc. Hopefully the taxpayer isn't subsidising any profits here though...


----------



## Cityliving (25 May 2007)

That is a serious issue actually I would be worried that the taxman is not hearing too much from this landlord


----------



## sheena1 (25 May 2007)

"if you want to stay or if some of the existing parties want to stay there dont start to threaten the landlord with PRTB reporting etc. Its actually not an offence in law in any case you simply cant apply for interest relief on the income. Landlords should obviously not be allowed to get away with murder but if you pay peanuts you get monkeys and that applies for landlords too." 


It is an offence in law. It is not a threat to insist on your rights as a tenant. The Landlord is obliged to register with PRTB. The rent paid or number of tenants is irrelevant to the OP's post.


----------



## kellysayers (25 May 2007)

As a landlord we always fix dryers, washers etc. Luckily our flat is attached to the house so we can keep a good eye on it so we would know if there were extra people in it. We came home form hols to find four extra people had moved into a one bed flat!!! luckily the tenancy agreement stated no subletting and that only those on the lease could stay for more than two nights!!. Then lots of PPS numbers started arriving for people not living in the flat - we marked them not known at this address and sent them back. You get good and bad tennants and you will be nice to those who look after your property and treat it with respect. If the landlord in question has had problems with the tenants before he may be reluctant to fix the dryer but otherwise I think he should fix it. We are only hearing one side of the story here.


----------



## Cityliving (25 May 2007)

sheena1 said:


> "if you want to stay or if some of the existing parties want to stay there dont start to threaten the landlord with PRTB reporting etc. Its actually not an offence in law in any case you simply cant apply for interest relief on the income. Landlords should obviously not be allowed to get away with murder but if you pay peanuts you get monkeys and that applies for landlords too."
> 
> 
> It is an offence in law. It is not a threat to insist on your rights as a tenant. The Landlord is obliged to register with PRTB. The rent paid or number of tenants is irrelevant to the OP's post.


 
I amended my comments accordingly already. What I actually meant was that it is not an offence you can pursue (as a tenant) for damages etc, it is an offence not to register and a fine system is in place to address this issue although it is irrelevent in terms of the tenants financial situation for the tenanct save for PRTB involvement in disputes which is precluded if the landlord is not registered as I understand it. 

Logically if you say to your landlord "I reckon you`re not paying tax" or " you`re not registered etc" that you will not be staying there much longer even though this isnt right. 

"The rent paid or number of tenants is irrelevant to the OP's post" The number of tenants is absolutely vital to this post. IF there are lots of tenants in the flat other than those on the lease than the landlord can reasonable in saying that the "wear and tear" element has been unfairly enhanced. Without full information its hard to say but you need to hear both sides. 

Tenants deserve the rights they have under the law obviously.


----------



## rmelly (27 May 2007)

150/9 = 16.66...or does the landlord even know there are 9 tenants?


----------



## money man (28 May 2007)

I have gained further information from the person concerned over the weekend which i was not privy to at the time of posting. I dont want to be too specific here (for obvious reasons) but here is some further information.

The landlord has an individual signed lease with all 9 tenants. the rental amount is left blank in the contract.
It is a 5 bed property.
It is rented furnished.
The dryer broke (same problem) last year and was replaced with a new one paid for (receipt provided then) by the tenants. I have suggested that they call the landlord and tell the landlord that she should pursue the manufacturer/vendor for repairs as it is under guarantee. I am of the opinion that they will give them a ficticous (unsure of spelling!!) invoice for repair and have it done under warranty. 
Some of the tenants received a letter which they did not keep which they believe was from the PRTB (only about half) 
They pay cash and have been given no receipts.(disaster i know)
They have been excellent tenants . the last time i visited the property was clean and tidy. none have arrears and when the door fell of the dryer they phoned the landlord (more naive than anything if you ask me). the landlord said that they would take the cost of repair from the tenant that phoned her to say what had happened. they felt this was unfair and said that a few of them would share the burden as they had all used it and it could have fallen off on anyone.I told them they were mad and to phone and insist on the following

1 this was wear and tear and not their responsability and that opening and closing of the door of the machine should be a part of its function
2 that the landlord should pursue the manufacturer and not them
3 if she witheld money from their deposit they would take it up with the PRTB.


----------



## liteweight (28 May 2007)

How do they know the door fell off before? I wouldn't consider breaking the door of a dryer as normal wear and tear. I've had numerous dryers over the years and this has never happened simply by opening and closing it. However, when a young nephew swung on the door while chatting, it strained the door so that it wouldn't close properly. Any tumble dryer I've bought has only had a one year warranty. Really, 17 euro each is not a great deal of money. Most landlords I know hate the fact that they've to organise the repairs etc. and would much prefer that accidents did not occur.


----------



## money man (28 May 2007)

nice to get both sides of the coin!! Some of them are there two years. The cost will not be 17 euro each as only two others have agreed to share the burden with the person who rang out of sympathy.  There is the matter of principles also.  What if the landlord decides to replace the carpets downstairs ? sure that might only be 70 euro by 9 people. thats not much for nice new carpets?!! And all they have to do is just keep it out of the deposit and sure send on the receipt!!


----------



## liteweight (28 May 2007)

Why did the person ring out of sympathy? Surely the tenants needed the dryer and wanted it fixed? A landlord can't just decide to change the carpet and charge the tenants for this luxury. However, if tenants had burned holes in it, and it couldn't be repaired, then s/he is entitled to change and charge! 

I'd be much more concerned about the fact that this landlord takes cash and issues no receipts for same. The rental on this property seems far too low for a five bed house so I suspect it's not in great condition. If it is, then the tenants have a bargain. Are you sure they're not just disgruntled with the whole situation i.e. s/he pays no tax and expects us to pay for his/her repairs, type of thing?


----------



## money man (28 May 2007)

When the door broke off a tenant phoned the landlord. He was told that the money would be taken from his deposit. Other 2 ppl thought this was unfair as the door could have come off on anyone while using it and it was his bad luck it happened to be him.

As with the carpet example and with the thread title ...who has to pay for its replacement would depend on whether it was holes burnt in the carpet (damage) or a path worn from walking on it(wear and tear) ...this is why i posted a title of wear and tear or damage? Im really looking for an answer to that question not a personal view if they are disgruntled or not which they clearly will be if they are paying for the upkeep of the landlords house?   

The question is ..... is it wear and tear or damage?


----------



## Bronte (29 May 2007)

I am a landlord and have been a tenant.  Don't understand why the tenants had to pay for a new machine.  If I was still a tenant and had paid for a machine I could consider it my property and my responsibility.  Also amazing coincidence that a door fell off two different machines.  Were they the same brand and is this a fault in this brand.  If it's under guarantee then it will cost nothing to repair.  Could everybody stop jumping on the bash the landlord bandwagon and issuing threats.   A chat with the landlord might clear it up from his point of view.  But I'm highly skeptical of a landlord who charges his tenants for the purchase of a machine. 

Not sure if 50 Euro a week is cheap when it's two to a room in a 5 bed, depends where and amount of tenants in house surely. Sounds cramped to me.  Re non nationals I was renting  a one bed apartment to two non nationals (and said 2 only) and they had a 9 year old as well which they never told me about.  I didn't want 3 as it wasn't big enough but they told me that it was the best apartment in the area and what could I do.  I had a different one bed flat which was in my opinion only suitable for 1 and tenants moving from a house of mine begged me for the flat and she was pregnant I only let them rent it for a month to give them time to find somewhere more suitable - which I found for them.  But really they wanted to stay in my flat as I only charged rent for one person and they were desperate to save money but I couldn't in all honesty rent a place suitable for 1 to 2 with one pregnant.   All that said years ago I rented a one bed in London for the summer ..... and there were 10 of us.  We used to hide when the Irish landlord came to collect the rent.


----------



## liteweight (29 May 2007)

money man said:


> When the door broke off a tenant phoned the landlord. He was told that the money would be taken from his deposit. Other 2 ppl thought this was unfair as the door could have come off on anyone while using it and it was his bad luck it happened to be him.



I don't think the landlord has the right to deduct the cost from one person's deposit as it's a shared dryer, unless he was swinging from it or abusing it in some way. In that case, which is doubtful, the other tenants would be right to leave payment up to him/her.



> As with the carpet example and with the thread title ...who has to pay for its replacement would depend on whether it was holes burnt in the carpet (damage) or a path worn from walking on it(wear and tear) ...this is why i posted a title of wear and tear or damage? Im really looking for an answer to that question not a personal view if they are disgruntled or not which they clearly will be if they are paying for the upkeep of the landlords house?



You did pose the question...what's to prevent the landlord coming in and deciding to change the carpets. My reply was to the effect that it would depend on whether said carpets had been damaged or not. In the case of the tumble dryer, it's very unusual for the door to fall off on opening it, especially on two different tumble dryers within two years. So unless the landlord is buying very cheap equipment, I would feel the door was damaged. Having said that, I would chat to the landlord and see if the machine is still under warranty. If it is, a technician will be sent out who will immediately know whether the door is faulty or has been damaged in some way. If the latter is the case, the warranty will not cover it and there may be an additional charge for the call out.


----------

