|
Can't help with the picture dates, but it is up to your landlord to prove that the property was left in a state far in excess of what is deemed as degraded through normal wear and tear through normal use.
I.e. the property and its contents should have been clearly inventoried showing the condition of everything before you moved in.
Then depending on the amount of time you lived there a degree of knocks, marks and some light damage would be expected as normal wear and tear and has to be allowed for.
If he has nothing to actually show the condition when you moved in, and also has proof that a copy was made available to you and you agreed to the condition reported, then even if the place was left as a tip, you can't be asked to pay, as it could well have been like that when you started your tenancy and you can?t be expected to make betterment of property.
Also if I understand right, you left 4 years ago, in which case, I presume he would have given a deposit back, if so then any damages are normally taken out of deposits, so failing to deduct anything would indicate he was happy with the property when vacated.
He should also have to prove that at no time after you moved out, did anyone else have access to the property, such as other tenants, builders or any other workmen etc? as otherwise anyone could also have done damage to the property after you left.
In the UK the inventories are normally done by independent clerks, otherwise landlords leave themselves wide open to loosing out if they try and claim, as it is well known that landlord/owners are completely biased in their own favour, and as such can not be relied upon to give a completely true account of evidence in a hearing. They also tend to give crap descriptions of things, i.e. stating there is a pair of curtains, with no description of the condition. If something is noted as just being there but then not described as new, clean or in good condition, then the landlord won?t have a leg to stand on, he?ll have to show it wasn?t damaged and you agreed to the description, not the other way around a court can?t presume something was in good condition just because the landlord says it was.
I would inform him you will see him in court, chance are he'll back down, or worst case he'll still have to prove what he says, if it comes down to who the court believes, just make sure it's you.
Also if you can show that the place has since been advertised for rental since you left, then you can show that he either considers the property to be perfectly okay to rent out still, in which case what is he moaning about, or show that he does rent the place out in a known crap state, which would back up any claim you made about the condition always being petty poor from when you first moved in.
Sorry to waffle - hope it helps
|
