← Back to News
Landlords should not seek new for old from deposits
Landlords and agents are unreasonably pushing for ‘betterment’ or ‘new for old’ at the end of tenancies and have unrealistic expectations of what they can claim against deposits, according to the Association of Independent Inventory Clerks.
The association says that whilst the tenant has a duty of care to return the property in the same condition at the end of the tenancy, as found at the start and listed on the inventory report – with allowance for wear and tear – the law does not allow landlords to claim ‘betterment’ or ‘new for old’ from the tenant deposit.
It claims that many agents and landlords are seemingly unaware of the ‘betterment’ principle which means that if an item was old at check-in, and after a two year tenancy there is some additional damage, the law will not allow a landlord to simply replace this item with a new one.
The betterment principle applies to cleaning issues as well. If a carpet was badly stained at the time of check-in, a landlord can’t expect the tenant to pay for cleaning at the check-out, no matter how long the tenancy has been, the AIIC says.
The association says it knows of one case where the landlord demanded that the tenants pay for repainting several rooms following a one year tenancy. The check-in inventory clearly stated that the walls were already well marked and the few additional scuffs and rubs were clearly a normal wear and tear issue, due to the length of the tenancy.
“The key underlying problem is that landlords, agents and tenants have different expectations when it comes to fair wear and tear issues. Obviously, there is a distinct difference between fair wear and tear and actual damage – for example carpet tread will flatten over time, where there has been foot traffic, but cigarette burns, stains or soiling will require a charge” says association chair Pat Barber.
