What percentage can you charge tenants for damages?

What percentage can you charge tenants for damages?

11:26 AM, 27th March 2015, About 7 years ago 9

Text Size

I have had a tenant living in one of my properties for the last 18 months. The tenant has now vacated without giving the notice period required so will be charged the notice period rent as stated in the AST.

The tenant has taken the carpet in the hall and underlay and has completely destroyed the laminate flooring in the living room. Some of the kitchen cupboard doors have been ripped off and damaged and will need to be replaced. The whole house will need to be repainted as there are dirty marks and pen marks in almost in every room.

The carpets and laminate flooring were brand new before the tenant moved in and the whole house had just been repainted. In this situation when this happens I don’t usually charge the full cost to replace the carpets and Laminate flooring or the full cost to repaint the house again as I know you have to take into account wear and tear.

However does anybody no the percentage that you can charge to replace the carpets, flooring and repainting of the house ?




by BigMc

12:28 PM, 27th March 2015, About 7 years ago

Hi Steve,
Sorry for your problems. As ever much will depend on the quality of the inventories on check in/out. If they were done well then items they have removed and damage that could not be interpreted as wear and tear, I would charge full replacement cost.
It would also seem to highlight the need for more regular inspections. Good luck

by Ian Cognito

12:53 PM, 27th March 2015, About 7 years ago

Steve's not quite right.

Working on a 5 year replacement cycle for carpets, the carpet will have been subject to 18 months wear and tear. Therefore, you could charge only 3.5/5 = 70% of the replacement cost.

If the carpet was good quality, professionally fitted and came with a 10 year guarantee for residential use in a high traffic area (i.e. a hallway) then you could argue on a 10 year replacement cycle in which case the replacement cost chargeable would be 8.5/10 = 85%.

Same principle applies to laminate flooring and redecorating.

That said, if the tenant as gone AWOL, you'll have your work cut out, so the best of luck to you.

by Joe Bloggs

9:37 AM, 28th March 2015, About 7 years ago

i would say even fairly cheap carpets and laminate should last a lot longer than 5 years. ours last at least ten. so 18 months = 15% deduction.

by Ian Cognito

16:34 PM, 28th March 2015, About 7 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Joe Bloggs" at "28/03/2015 - 09:37":

I also gave the 10 year example. I would advise erring on the conservative side and you'll have less of a fight.

by Joe Bloggs

17:29 PM, 28th March 2015, About 7 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Ian Cognito" at "28/03/2015 - 16:34":

was noted but your 10 year example comes with a lot caveats. i think even cheap stuff lasts longer than 5 years.
i think in such disputes the claim should be for whats fair.

by Terry

9:43 AM, 29th March 2015, About 7 years ago

Wear & Tear!! If the out going tenant has taken your carpet and laminate flooring, it's theft. Surely he/she has stolen them and the police should be notified. With a Police number you could claim off your insurance. The cupboard doors etc is criminal damage. Why just accept this as part of renting out a property?

by The Property Man

9:36 AM, 30th March 2015, About 7 years ago

Thank you all for your comments. I did take a homeowner guarantor for this property like I do for all of my properties but I was just wondering if I could find out what percentage other landlords charge to see if I was getting it right. I usually charge 70% of the cost of replacing leaving the remaining 30% as wear an tear usage. By the comments left I feel I am charging about right. It always amazes me that although some tenants still have homeowner guarantors they still leave some properties in terrible states for the guarantors to foot the bill !!! Unbelievable some people !!

by DC

8:33 AM, 31st March 2015, About 7 years ago

I completely echo Terry Pearce's comments regarding the crimes that have taken place, but that apart, if flooring that was brand new 18 months previously has been totally destroyed I would charge for the full cost of replacement every time.

In fact I have had tenants accidentally damage what was a year old carpet by cigarette burns in various places (shouldn't have been smoking in the house in any case), another from placing a hot iron on the carpet and a third one from placing curling tongs or similar on the carpet, both these carpets of which were much older but never the less were previously in excellent condition. On all three occasions they were given the opportunity to obtain their own estimates to make good or accept my carpet fitter's cost to replace with brand new. My fitter's price is normally far cheaper than the tenant can do it for and in the end all paid their respective costs for full replacement of the damaged carpet in each instance.

Let's face it, most carpets these days come with excellent guarantees and it is very unusual for "normal or fair wear and tear" to have taken place after just 18 months.

by The Property Man

11:30 AM, 3rd April 2015, About 7 years ago

Thanks DC i think i should actually be charging more than just 70% then. I think i will hit them with full replacement costs as you are right not much wear and tear would take place after 18 months.

Leave Comments

Please Log-In OR Become a member to reply to comments or subscribe to new comment notifications.

Forgotten your password?


Landlord Tax Planning Book Now