Be the adjudicator: live!

Clear, dated, comparable check-in and check-out photographs can be sufficient and will be considered by the adjudicator. However, photographs alone don't always give the kind of narrative, commentary information that is needed (like "cleaned to a professional standard" etc.)

They are not essential - a landlord can decide not to do any at all. However, if they don't have that kind of evidence they are not likely to be able to prove any claim and recover any sums from the deposit if the tenant disputes it.

As a landlord I thought claims to deposit need to be dealt with quickly, ideally within 10 working days after check out. If it goes to dispute, are delays on landlords side taken into account in favour of the tenant?

We can't advise on specific cases as we're required to remain impartial. General guidance is provided on our website, www.depositprotection.com.

As the capacity and potential of AI continues to develop and grow, The DPS is constantly reviewing potential uses within the area of dispute resolution.

No. It's more common for check-in inventories to be signed. Often tenants won't sign a check-out report if they disagree with it. It's usually important for the adjudicator to see that the documents have been provided to the tenant, and that they have had a fair chance to note any amendments if they feel that the content is not correct.

These can still be provided. Photos should be dated, and it may be helpful to give a bit of explanation to the adjudicator about why there isn't a formal check in/out report

There would probably be a small apportionment to account for nine months of use, but it's likely that the majority of that claim would be awarded.

We'll send you an email when we're ready for you to provide evidence. When you login to your account and view your deposit, there will then be an option showing to upload evidence.

It depends on the format of the photographs. Often they're embedded within a check-in/out report. Sometimes they'll show a date stamp on the photograph themselves. Sometimes we'll check the metadata of the digital photographs uploaded as evidence.

If the evidence is not sufficient to allow the adjudicator to compare the condition at check in and check out, then it's likely that the adjudicator will conclude that the landlord has not evidenced their claim on a balance of probabilities. Therefore the disputed sum is likely to be paid back to the tenant.

In general, a query such as this might be seen as "assisting" one party, but helping them to provide better quality evidence. Evidence should be provided by the parties in the best quality format that they can.

These will still be considered by the adjudicator. They may not be as persuasive as a full written check-in report, but much will depend on what you are claiming for, and how the tenant frames their response.

The adjudicator will consider any evidence which is provided - this may include the items you have described. If , when considered all together, they are sufficient to persuade the adjudicator that a tenant was liable, then an award could be made.

The adjudicator is quite limited into what investigation they can do about the authenticity of photographs etc. They would look to compare differences between photos submitted by the landlord and those from the tenant.

The adjudicator will look for comparable check-in and check-out evidence to show that any damage has occurred which exceeds wear and tear, or that any items that were present at check in were missing at check out, or that the property was less clean at check out than at check in.

It is - the best way to provide long videos to us is to upload them to YouTube and send us a link. However, in general I would say that photographs are often more useful to an adjudicator. A video is usually most useful when the nature of the damage needs to show "movement" (for example a broken toilet seat, or a drawer that won't close properly etc).

The sort of evidence you have described here is what the adjudicator would need to see. They need to be satisfied that the mould build up was definitely a tenant liability and not an issue with the property itself.

Best practice would be to have completed an interim inventory at the point that you took over the tenancy to protect your position. In reality, without good evidence to show the condition of the property at the tenancy start, it will be difficult to evidence a claim.

It may well be - the adjudicator may well want to see clear evidence that the inventory has been sent to the tenant and that they have had a clear opportunity to note any amendments that they wish to make.

It's unlikely this will change - the best way to provide long videos to us is to upload them to YouTube and send us a link.

That is standard and good practice, yes.

They can be - but they are more likely to be subject to challenge by the tenant. For example, if the landlord submits check-in evidence that the tenant can establish they have never been provided with, or if they have their own contrasting dated photographs.

Neither party is obliged to agree to dispute resolution to resolve the dispute. If the landlord wishes to go to court, they should simply select "no" to the option to agree to DR on The DPS portal.

We don't provide templates as we need to be independent, however, there are many good templates available online.

If the inventory does not mention the damage, the adjudicator would need to be provided with other persuasive evidence that the damage was present (i.e. dated photographs).

Much will depend on how persuasive the evidence is, but if there is a photograph showing clear damage which is unlikely to have been caused by fair wear and tear, the adjudicator may be persuaded to make an award. They would then apportion the likely replacement cost on the basis of the likely remaining lifespan of the table.

Check-in and check-out photos will be considered as evidence. They should be dated, and taken as close to the move in/out dates as possible.

We will consider whatever evidence is provided - but the "best" evidence will be a check in/out report, preferably by an independent third party

If the tenant provides evidence within the 14 day evidence window, it will be passed to the adjudicator. It does not matter whether it was provided on the first or last day of that period.

We have guidance on compiling check-in and check-out evidence in our previous videos which are available on our YouTube channel.

It is usually important for the adjudicator to see that the documents have been provided to the tenant, and that they have had a fair chance to note any amendments if they feel that the content is not correct.

A clause requiring a tenant to return the property or items in a professionally cleaned, professionally decorated, or otherwise better condition than at the start of the tenancy is unlikely to be enforceable in England and would sit uncomfortably with both the Tenant Fees Act 2019 and established deposit adjudication principles.

That would be possible if you wished to present your claim in that way.

We do consider regional variations in respect of contractors costs, particularly in more expensive areas like London.

It does not have to be registered - but if the adjudicator is not persuaded that the sum being claimed has actually been paid, or that it is a reasonable likely cost for the work, they may not find the evidence persuasive. A full invoice from a registered company (particularly where the contractor's identity can be verified via their website) is likely to be more persuasive.

It's likely that a "diminution in value" award would be made, as it's unlikely that a single area of damage is going to be so bad that the whole carpet has to be replaced (unless this is a particularly high end property where such damage may impact the re-letting or rental value). Depending on the age/quality of the carpet we'd award an appropriate value.

You could take this approach - you could argue that you were trying to seek the most cost effective option to remedy the issue (i.e. cleaning) but that if that was not successful it was then necessary to replace the mattress.

That doesn't sound good! Certainly we can consider that. We would look at what cleaning is "reasonable". If we have good evidence showing that this requirement goes beyond "usual" dirt/dust etc, then we can consider that. I would say that it would be best to give a clear explanation and supporting evidence to the adjudicator so they can see this goes way beyond what a usual cleaning claim would involve.

The adjudicator will look at the standard of cleaning of the property, rather than who carried out the cleaning. It's possible that a tenant can clean the property to the same standard as a professional cleaner. Sometimes a professional cleaner may not carry out the cleaning to the necessary standard.

A landlord can claim a reasonable hourly rate - but the adjudicator will consider the overall total cost. So for example a landlord might charge half as much on an hourly basis that a professional cleaner, but take twice as long to do it. So the overall "reasonable cost" works out the same.

Not a limit as such - the adjudicator would want to be satisfied that the total sum being claimed (in terms of the number of hours and the hourly rate) equate to a reasonable overall cost for the work required.

This depends on the quality of the carpet - a budget carpet may only last around five years. A top quality carpet may last around 20 years.

With sufficient supporting evidence, this is something the adjudicator may be persuaded to make an award for.

This is unlikely to be considered fair wear and tear.

Some tenancy agreements include a clause requiring the tenant to have the property professionally cleaned. In line with the Tenant Fees Act 2019, the tenant cannot be charged for the services of a third party. This type of clause therefore will only be valid if the evidence shows that the property needs further cleaning. The adjudicator will look at the standard of cleaning of the property, rather than who carried out the cleaning. It's possible that a tenant can clean the property to the same standard as a professional cleaner. Sometimes a professional cleaner may not carry out the cleaning to the necessary standard.

Tenant Fees Act states that a landlord can require a property to be returned to the same standard of cleanliness as at the start, but generally cannot insist on a professional cleaning service regardless of condition.

I believe we answered this in the webinar. This relates to the principal of betterment. If the property was not fully clean at check in, it would lead to betterment if they were required to pay 100% of a professional cleaning cost at check out, as it would clean the property to a better (or higher) standard.

In general, cleaning claims will be considered on the basis of the comparable cleanliness at check out and check in.

Yes, they could.

This would be a useful piece of evidence to provide to show the standard of cleanliness at check in. However, the adjudicator will also consider the remainder of the check in evidence - I have seen inventories where comments like this are made in the summary, but the remainder of the document and photographs show that the cleanliness was poor. In that scenario, the remainder of the document/photographs would be more persuasive.

No, the LL would need to pay the contractor the full invoice amount. But they can only claim back part of that invoice from the tenant.

An invoice, estimate or quotation should probably be provided.

Odours are tricky - generally we see persuasive commentary from an independent check out clerk. Or sometimes I have seen emails submitted from prospective tenants who have viewed but commented in their feedback on odours within the property.

This may be a situation where a diminution in inherent value award is made. So the adjudicator would consider the fact that the oven/hob can still be used, but just doesn't look quite as good. The award would probably be fairly limited - depending on the age/quality of the appliance. For a fairly standard cooker, you would probably be looking at an award somewhere in the region of £50.

The property should still be cleaned to the same standard as at check in.

Tenant Fees Act states that a landlord can require a property to be returned to the same standard of cleanliness as at the start, but generally cannot insist on a professional cleaning service regardless of condition.

This sounds like a reasonable comment to include. However, the adjudicator will also consider the remainder of the check-in evidence - I have seen inventories where comments like this are made in the summary, but the remainder of the document and photographs show that the cleanliness was poor. In that scenario, the remainder of the document/photographs would be more persuasive.

For security reasons, The DPS is unable to access links/Dropbox etc. Most often we see inventory documents which have been compiled with dated photographs embedded in them.

This can be a useful piece of evidence. It's more likely that the full amount would be awarded if we had clear evidence of professional cleaning at check in, yes.

There are a range of factors to consider - the age of the item, the quality of the item, the length of the tenancy, the number of occupants in the property, the reasonable expected usage of that item.

We use industry guidance from bodies like ARLA Propertymark. The lifespan expectation is assessed on the basis of use in a rented domestic property, rather than general manufacturer's expectations, which may be slightly longer.

The adjudicator will consider whether the quote appears to be the cost of a reasonable like for like replacement.

We don't publish guidelines - however in general a budget mattress might be expected to last around 5-7 years, but a premium mattress may be up to around 12 years.

High traffic areas like hallways, kitchens, bathrooms are likely to have a lifespan of 2-3 years. Other rooms like living rooms, dining rooms, bedrooms will probably be around five years.

We'd need to check what the tenancy agreement says about liablity for communal areas. We'd then need to review whether all costs were being claimed from one specific tenant (if so we would need clear evidence of them having caused it) or whether it was being claimed jointly against all occupants.

This will depend on the terms of the tenancy agreement. If use of Blu Tac was specifically prohibited then it's possible an adjudicator will be persuaded that any marks are not attributable to fair wear and tear, so an award/contribution towards redecoration costs may be made.

The DPS can only make an award up to the value of the deposit. If you have a claim for more than the deposit, this would need to go to the county court. It's then best to let The DPS know that you are going to court to resolve the dispute. We'll continue to hold the deposit and you can ask the judge to make a direction that The DPS pays the deposit sum to you.

If a carpet had a five year lifespan, it was three years old when the tenancy started. The tenant lived there for one year making it four years old at the tenancy end. The adjudicator would award 1/5 of the total replacement cost to compensate for one year's loss of expected use.

No. The adjudicator will award on the basis of a "reasonable" likely cost. It's not necessary for the landlord to find the cheapest possible cost. As the long as the adjudicator is satisfied that the sum being claimed is within the likely range of what is would be charged for such work, they can award this cost.

You would need to account for the fact that the heater is around one year old. So I would say the majority of the replacement cost would be awarded, but probably not the full cost.

Wear and tear will still be applied after a one year tenancy.

It's unlikely that the full redecoration cost would be awarded - even if a property was newly decorated at the tenancy start, and the décor had a lifespan of five years, if the tenant lived there for one year then the award would probably be 4/5 of the redecoration cost to account for the loss of expected lifespan.

A full award is only likely to be made if the flooring was brand new and the tenant had only been in the property for a very short time (i.e. only a couple of months).

You can claim on this basis. It's what we call a "diminution in the inherent value" award.

We do consider regional variations in pricing for contractors.

Not as such - the adjudicator will look at whether any of the actions or breaches of obligation by the tenant have increased the likely redecoration cost that the landlord would otherwise have needed to pay. So, for example, if they have redecorated a property that was magnolia in a very dark colour, the adjudicator might be persuaded that the decorator will now need to do a number of additional coats of paint to cover it. They might decide that one/two coats would have been needed anyway, but that tenant should pay for coats three/four.

It is likely that all of that work would be needed as general landlord maintenance after a tenancy of seven years.

The adjudicator has to assess whether the condition has deteriorated during the tenancy to a degree that exceeds fair wear and tear.

Consideration of fair wear and tear will depend on multiple factors - age/quality of the item, no of occupants in the property etc. Décor in high traffic areas like a hallway (particularly in a home with many people living there) will deteriorate quicker than decor in a separate dining room in a property occupied by only one person.

This varies depending on what type of flooring it is - engineered oak is likely to be around 20-30 years. Solid oak flooring is likely to be higher - maybe 50+ years.

Guidance is available in respect of how adjudicators consider disputes at depositprotection.com.

Not necessarily - it can be one general charge.

I hope that this webinar provided some insight into that process - but in short, yes!

If the lifespan of décor has expired anyway, the adjudicator is likely to consider that any redecoration costs are ones which the landlord would have been expected to pay at the end of the tenancy in any event, therefore it is unlikely that the tenant would be required to contribute.

It's not a claim I can ever recall seeing submitted, so I think its unlikely.

The legislation under which we operate the scheme requires the agreement of both parties to DR. If they don't respond, the deposit is "suspended" by The DPS, which basically means it is put into a status where neither party can progress the repayment unless we receive agreement from both parties, or an order from the court.

No, the adjudicator cannot make an award in respect of the costs of participating in the dispute resolution procedure.

In terms of disputes, all three schemes consider the same legal principles and therefore are very similar. All three are government-authorised tenancy deposit protection schemes and all offer a free alternative dispute resolution (ADR) service. A tenant's legal rights are essentially the same regardless of which scheme is used.

Yes, we'll consider quotes and estimates. We acknowledge that sometimes it won't have been possible for the work to have been completed by the time the dispute is submitted to adjudication.

The adjudicator is a human being who reviews the evidence and reaches their conclusion.

We can only pay the funds to the person registered on the account.

Please email contactus@depositprotection.com with the deposit IDs and they can advise on what action might be possible with each deposit.

It shouldn't affect the deposit repayment process. Please email contactus@depositprotection.com with deposit details and they can advise on what action is needed

I understand that a landlord has the option of skipping the adjudication process and going to the small claims court espceially when the claim exceeds the deposit amount. Is this correct?

The requirements for statutory declarations are set out in the deposit scheme legislation set by the government. The legal requirements for a Statutory Declaration are that a "wet" signature should be provided and therefore a posted hard copy is needed.

This would not be permitted under Tenant Fees Act 2019. A tenant can only be liable to pay for the cost of pet treatment if the evidence supports the need for such treatment.

The funds belong to the tenant. The landlord can only claim their costs incurred as a result of a breach of obligation by the tenant.

The parameters of the scheme set in place by the government state that the deposit funds belong to the tenant while they are held throughout the tenancy. Therefore any deposit accrued belongs to the tenant.

No. The deposit can only be used as security for the landlord to pay for costs they have incurred as a result of any breaches of obligation by the tenant. The deposit funds cannot be used to settle disputes or liabilities between the tenants and/or any other occupants.

The adjudicator will still need to consider whether the sum being claimed is a reasonable cost in the light of the damage or issue which has occurred. So, if there is a "standard" charge for redecorating a wall, the adjudicator will still consider whether that is an actual reasonable cost.

This does sound like something the landlord would be able to claim for, yes.

I hope we answered this at the end of the webinar, but in short it's the law which places the burden of proof on the landlord.

You would need to provide evidence to the adjudicator to show that the utility provider was chasing the landlord directly for the costs, and that the tenant did not register an account in their own name.

Once we have received details of the dispute from both parties, and both agree to DR, we'll give a period of two weeks for them to submit evidence. It then takes up to a week to prep the evidence for the adjudicator, and the adjudicator then has up to three weeks to give their decision (however we often do provide the decision even sooner than that!).

If the adjudicator considers that the invoice provided shows that the contractor has charged an particularly high amount, then it might not be considered a "reasonable" cost. The tenant is obliged to pay a "reasonable likely cost" for any work required.

You could submit a claim, however any award is likely to be quite reduced on the basis that the toilet seat may well be reaching or at the end of its expected lifespan.

Yes - it helps us to understand how the claim has been formulated by the landlord.

This is a legal process, set in place by statute, not by The DPS. The fee is paid by the person who starts the process - there is no fee to respond. Therefore, when a tenant starts a repayment by the statutory declaration process, they pay the fee and the landlord does not pay to respond.

It's possible to rely on a quote or estimate as evidence of the reasonable likely cost of completing any post tenancy work.

We would assess in the same way as the damages/decoration claims that we went through in the case study. We would compare the condition at check in and check out and consider how much work was needed to restore the garden to the pre-tenancy state. The only additional factor we consider for gardening is that there will be seasonal variations in the general appearance of the garden depending on whether the tenant moved in or out during summer/winter etc.

It's reasonable for the landlord to require the garden to be returned in the same state as at the start.

Under the Tenant Fees Act 2019 (England), a landlord or letting agent can charge a fee for a variation, assignment or novation of a tenancy when the change is requested by the tenant. The fee is generally capped at £50 (including VAT) unless the landlord can demonstrate that their reasonable costs are higher than £50.

The presentation content was generally in accordance with Housing Law in England, although most of the matters discussed will apply equally to Wales. The last claim we looked at relating to rent is not directly applicable in Wales because this was in relation to the Renters Rights Act changes. In Wales the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 applies which still allows for fixed term tenancies unlike the RRA. Where a tenant breaches the fixed term of a tenancy and costs are incurred as a result of re-letting the property it may be reasonable to recover the loss incurred in re-letting the property providing they are genuine costs to re-let the property rather than a penalty fee. Reasonable re-letting costs are a permitted payment under Renting Homes (Fees etc.) (Wales) Act 2019. 

If use of blu tac was specifically prohibited then it is possible an adjudicator will be persuaded that any marks are not attributable to fair wear and tear, so an award/contribution towards redecoration costs may be made.

We're in a period of crossover at the moment where many of the claims being adjudicated span the period where the legislation and requirements changed.

No, that is entirely up to you as landlord to decide if you feel the rental value of your property has increased.

The presentation was generally in accordance with Housing Law in England, although most of the matters discussed will apply equally to Wales. The last claim we looked at relating to rent is not directly applicable in Wales because this was in relation to the Renters Rights Act changes. In Wales the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 applies which still allows for fixed term tenancies unlike the RRA. Where a tenant breaches the fixed term of a tenancy and costs are incurred as a result of re-letting the property it may be reasonable to recover the loss incurred in re-letting the property providing they are genuine costs to re-let the property rather than a penalty fee. Reasonable re-letting costs are a permitted payment under Renting Homes (Fees etc.) (Wales) Act 2019. 

The legislation doesn't actually make this specifically clear, but this does seem to be a reasonable approach.

The landlord would be able to claim rent in lieu of the required notice period, unless they were able to re-let within that time. In that situation, they could claim rent until the date when the new tenancy started.

Yes, the notice period should coincide with the rental payment date. So if the tenant gave notice on 5 May, but the rental date was the 15th day of the month, that notice would be sufficient to end the tenancy on 14 July.

It may be possible to negotiate this specifically with the landlord, however they could still expect the full required notice period, with a specific end date as this is the legal requirement.

If a properly was brand new, we would approach the claim on the same basis as a property that was newly decorated at the tenancy start.

The adjudicator will decide the order in which to consider each part of the claim.

Ideally they should be within a matter of a couple of days - especially at check out if the property is being re-let and there are people going in/out for viewings. About a week before the tenancy should be ok for check in if the property was empty. Ideally at check out it would be sooner than a week.

The landlord cannot require the tenant to have professional cleaning done. If the tenant can clean to the same standard as a professional, then they can do it themselves. However, a professional standard of cleaning is different to a domestic standard.

Much will depend on the specific wording of the clause in the tenancy agreement.

The deposit funds cannot be used to pay rent while the tenancy is ongoing. The adjudicator can only award up to the value of the deposit. If you wish to recover costs which exceed the deposit, you may wish to consider recovery in court proceedings. In that situation, the deposit funds should remain protected with us until the court proceedings are ended, and the judge can be asked to include a direction in any final order requiring us to pay the deposit to either the landlord or tenant.

There is no best practice as such, but it may be appropriate to send a full statement to a tenant maybe every 6 or 12 months.

We can't release a deposit automatically unless the court order instructs us to do so. If you do not want to get the order amended, and your tenant will agree to dispute resolution, then the order can be submitted as part of your evidence and is likely to be persuasive evidence for the adjudicator to reach their decision.

The deposit is held as security for the landlord against breaches of obligation by the tenant. If the tenant doesn't pay rent, they are in breach, so the deposit could be used for this.

The legislation doesn't actually make this specifically clear. We're aware that industry bodies such as NRLA are suggesting that the original notice requirement in the tenancy agreement would still apply.

If the previous tenancy agreement specifically showed an agreement for one month's notice to be given when the tenancy became periodic, it's likely that the adjudicator would conclude that one months' notice was required post 1 May. If the agreement was silent, the statutory 2 months' notice would apply.

Yes, they are available online via our YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXgDSBeE-jdo&si=3jPRinyekiT9InTG

The adjudication is provided by an independent adjudicator, which complies with the ECHR requirement for a fair trial.

This is not likely to be something that is particularly persuasive to an adjudicator. Their decision must be based on evidence, not inferences.

Not at present. Each decision is considered on its own merits, so there are no binding precedents set by decisions. We have extensive guidance on our website.

Yes, we often see interim inspection reports or supporting emails/correspondence between the parties about issues picked up during the tenancy.

The common legal definition is "The reasonable deterioration of a property and its contents caused by normal day-to-day use and the ordinary operation of natural forces over time, having regard to the age, quality, condition and expected lifespan of the item, and the length and nature of the tenancy.".

I hope we answered this at the end of the webinar, but in short it is the law which places the burden of proof on the landlord.

It could be used, but it will be less reliable that a written quote on company letterhead, because the adjudicator may not be able to see that it is from a legitimate third party contractor.

We don't have any formal relationships with CPD providers. You can ask your CPD provider if they'll accept your attendance as part of your professional development.