|
|
Question Title: Dilapidation Deposit
| Question: 72 |
| At a pre-termination inspection on one of my properties let to five girls I found that two of the five bedrooms had been redecorated in bright colours and were in a bit of a state. I informed the tenants that the bedrooms would need to be re-painted in a neutral colour before the final check out and return of the deposit. On re-inspection on the check out day, I found that in trying to redecorate, the tenants had made even more of a mess - not only were the attempts at covering the purple and red paint unsuccessful but the carpet now had paint marks. I had to arrange for a contractor to redecorate and to remove the paint from the carpets. At the start of the tenancy each of the five tenants paid a portion of the dilapidation deposit on signing the agreement (they all signed one agreement). Although the deposit taken as a whole is more than enough to pay the contractor's bill to restore the rooms, the amount is more than that contributed by the two tenants who damaged their rooms. Am I within my rights to deduct the full amount from the deposit ?
|
| Answer: |
| Yes, providing the tenants were jointly and severally liable and each person was merely contributing their portion of the deposit with no special conditions attached. There is usually a clause in the tenancy agreement making the tenants jointly and severally liable. This means that each tenant is responsible for their own and each others' behaviour, damage, rent etc. It would be up to the tenants who did not cause damage to seek recompense from the defaulting tenants. Even if the tenancy agreement does not contain a clause expressly making the tenants jointly and severally liable, as joint tenants to an agreement they would be jointly liable. Whether or not they are all liable would depend on the facts. For example, if the tenants had individual locks on the bedroom doors or if they did not come together as group they would be less likely to be considered severally liable. The difference between joint and joint and several liability is that in the case of the former, each can only be called upon for a proportionate share of the debt. Whereas, in the latter, at the option of the landlord, each is liable for the whole debt.
|
|
References:
|
Pages:
|
Hyperlinks:
|
|
Letting Update Journal |
Jan 2001 page 25 |
letting-update-journal.html
|
|
Letting Handbook |
Chapter 9 |
letting-handbook-and-factsheets.html
|
For more information, discuss on the Forum
|
|
