Deposit Protection Service > Disputes > What makes a reasonable deposit claim
Landlords and letting agents have a duty to act reasonably and not claim more than is necessary to make good any loss. Options adjudicators may consider include:
The claim should not leave the landlord in a better position than they would have been at the end of the tenancy having allowed for fair wear and tear as this would be considered betterment.
To avoid allegations of betterment by the tenant, when making any award for damages, the adjudicator must consider:
The House of Lords defines fair wear and tear as “reasonable use of the premises by the tenant and the ordinary operation of natural forces”. What’s considered ‘reasonable’ is open to interpretation so strict guidance on accounting for fair wear and tear isn’t available. Landlords should take into consideration the following factors during the check-out process. Adjudicators are likely to use similar guidelines when assessing the evidence:
The longer the tenancy, the more natural wear and tear there will be. How long items have been in use and through how many tenancies should also be considered.
Higher wear and tear can be expected in a tenancy with more bedrooms and occupants, in particular if letting to a family with children. Scuffs and scrapes are unavoidable in normal family life. A property occupied by a single person should see far less wear than a family of four, so this should be taken into account at tenancy end.
Consider the original cost and quality of the item at the start of the tenancy. It wouldn’t be reasonable for a landlord to provide lower-budget items and then blame the tenant if they’re damaged through normal use. Adjudicators may expect to see receipts or other evidence to confirm an item’s age, or its cost and quality when new. Another consideration is the quality of the property itself. Newer builds are sometimes constructed with less durable materials than older properties or conversions (thinner walls, partitions, etc.), so there may be a greater need for redecoration at the end of the tenancy period. Adjudicators may therefore consider more than a simple contribution to the cost of redecoration from the tenant to be unreasonable.
Wear and tear refers to items that have been worn out through natural use, while actual damage refers to items that have been negligently broken or marred. For example, light marks on a carpet might have to be viewed as normal wear and unavoidable. On the other hand, damage such as nail varnish spills on the floor or iron burns that have occurred due to negligence could see the tenant liable for repair. Consider whether the item has been damaged or worn out through natural use versus negligence when making a judgement call.