Unfair terms query in no deposit option tenancy terms

[Rebecca12345]

Good evening Beagles,

I’m desperate for clarification to some suspicious wordings we have found in our ‘no deposit option tenancy terms’. I have lots to question but have on going formal complaints in process so there’s more to share potentially as time goes on.

Background: we entered a no deposit option in late 2019 after finding a new larger property to rent and we’re told that it was the landlords preference, we were aware that we could enter the traditional scheme at a later date and didn’t as we thought nothing of the potential liabilities we are now facing since the tenancy has ended after being served a section 21.

There are some extreme claims for damages to the garden which have not been backed up with quotations and invoices and I completely disagree that any rectification is required (I won’t go into detail yet as it will be incredibly obvious if the parties involved find this and I want to keep my cards close to my chest for now).

We have signed a ‘no deposit option tenancy terms’ form by acceptance from docusign. This document, upon further inspection (hindsight and all that) states that we are responsible for the arbitration fees which I have questioned under the tenancy fees act and have had replies all varying in definition (fee then contribution and currently compensation). I have rented for 12 years and at no point have been asked to pay, contribute or compensate for these costs so am unsure as to why I am now liable (I actually have never had any deductions from previous tenancies requested).

The NDO tenancy terms state that
“the tenant acknowledges that notwithstanding the terms of this agreement and/or the payment of the NDO, they will leave the property in a condition consistent with all their obligations as contained in their tenancy agreement and remain fully responsible and liable for any dilapidations, damage and discrepancies over and above fair wear and tear as per the terms and conditions of that agreement”.

I am concerned that we have signed a document that seemingly to me entitles the landlord to a brand new house! I’m not sure where the current requests will stop for what is deemed with a ‘normal’ deposit scheme as betterment.

I would like to challenge it as it unfair terms (potentially under The Consumer Rights Act 2015).

any thoughts gratefully received!

[EnglandPi]

When you started the tenancy did you read and understand what you were signing up to?

Did you take out insurance to cover the cost of any landlord claims?

Was there an inventory done prior to you moving in?

Are there any photographs of the property from when you moved in?

[Rebecca12345]

Thank you for the reply,

I did read the tenancy documents but honestly did not understand the extent of the ‘over and above’ statement until now.

I am not aware that I could have have taken out an insurance against claims. I will google that now to see what we could have done.

Yes there was an inventory with photos of all rooms and the garden but not the areas of the photos that have been used for the claims against us (the front and rear gardens were in excess of 100m each with a vast amount of trees and shrubs)

[EnglandPi]

What is the landlord claiming?

[islandgirl]

The LL will have to prove the condition when you arrived as opposed to when you left as I understand it. Without evidence this will be very difficult. Fair wear and tear cannot be charged for. I doubt you could have had insurance against claims but may be wrong. It may be worth a look at the Landlordzone forum and perhaps get some views there -it helps tenants and LLs.

[Rebecca12345]

The landlord is claiming for thread bare patches in curtains.
A large amount for over pruning of trees which they feel will not recover (they employed a gardener during the middle of our tenancy to tidied the trees and shrubs and did not inspect the work afterwards. We haven’t touched the trees and shrubs but they are refusing to believe it wasn’t me as they didn’t ask the gardener apparently to touch the trees in questions).
Compensation for a carpet stain that is not noted on the check out inventory
costs for hooks that are noted in situ on the check in inventory.

mall liaison has been done so far through the agent and we have to submit our evidence to the agent to pass on to the arbitrators

[islandgirl]

key question - who are the arbitrators? What payment are they going to ask for? Thread bare patches wear and tear in my view. Carpet stain not noted so should not be paid for. If hooks are there at the beginning then what are they claiming - that you put them up? The only issue for me is the garden and you have a strong case - do you have evidence a gardener came?

[Rebecca12345]

Yes, I have an email from the agents stating when the gardener would be arriving and on that date I took a picture of the garden through my window of the pile of branches they were taking away (I took it to send to my partner with the caption of ‘they’ve done a lot today’ for context)

[islandgirl]

perfect! That should be provided as evidence.