Professional Carpet Cleaning

[Keys]

Keith
Had it about 5 years and have two trips a year built in cost structure. It is at the expensive end of the rent range and, apart from 1, good tenants. I use a PM to find and vet tenants. They do it for free or low cost to landlords. I have a list of trusted Tradesmen which I got from the experienced local real estate agent that I bought it off. I pay them immediately on emailing me an invoice and get good service from them. They arrange access with tenants. The house is a low maintenance stand alone two bedroom unit with internal entry garage. I have a clause to have a professional carpet cleaning at the end of tenancy by one of my trusted companies. Along with PM taking new tenants through this gives me a good idea if I have to do anything.
I think that I have probably been lucky with tenants and tradesmen but the process of getting and maintaining both groups seems to work.

I think you have been lucky as well.

Scroll down a bit until you see "What are examples of RTA breaches?"

[Re@der]

Hi Keys
I did know about the professional carpet cleaning, so when pressed I agree that this is the standard and let them do it themselves. The fact is that it is to that standard before they move in as I will get it professionally cleaned and I have the invoice whether or not the tenant pays.

[Glen]

I think you have been lucky as well.

Scroll down a bit until you see "What are examples of RTA breaches?"

I can't see what the problem is if a tenant agrees in the original agreement to 'professionally' clean the carpets when they leave the property, knowing that when they moved in the carpets were in the same acceptable state.

I think K purposely antagonizes every argument for the sake of argueing (as he does on the TM message boards), just because he needs to try and prove a bullshit political point, instead of seeing practical reason and common sense!

i.e. simply, if the tenants agree in their original agreement to have the carpets cleaned ( cause the carpets were beautifully cleaned when they moved in and they wish to leave them the same for the next tenants after them), then so be it, and let them have the carpets cleaned!

[Keys]

I can't see what the problem is if a tenant agrees in the original agreement to 'professionally' clean the carpets when they leave the property, knowing that when they moved in the carpets were in the same acceptable state.

I think K purposely antagonizes every argument for the sake of argueing (as he does on the TM message boards), just because he needs to try and prove a bullshit political point, instead of seeing practical reason and common sense!

i.e. simply, if the tenants agree in their original agreement to have the carpets cleaned ( cause the carpets were beautifully cleaned when they moved in and they wish to leave them the same for the next tenants after them), then so be it, and let them have the carpets cleaned!

Suggest you read S 11(3).

Suggest you also abide by the law with your tenancies. As for the "antagonizes" comment. What's correct is my stance. What is yours?

This is not the first time you've promoted unlawful acts.

[Apple]

Reader wrote I have a clause to have a professional carpet cleaning at the end of tenancy by one of my trusted companies…I think that I have probably been lucky…

Keys wrote I think you have been lucky as well. Scroll down a bit until you see "What are examples of RTA breaches?".

Glen wrote I can't see what the problem is if a tenant agrees in the original agreement to 'professionally' clean the carpets when they leave the property, knowing that when they moved in the carpets were in the same acceptable state.

I think K purposely antagonizes every argument for the sake of argueing (as he does on the TM message boards), just because he needs to try and prove a bullshit political point, instead of seeing practical reason and common sense!

i.e. simply, if the tenants agree in their original agreement to have the carpets cleaned ( cause the carpets were beautifully cleaned when they moved in and they wish to leave them the same for the next tenants after them), then so be it, and let them have the carpets cleaned!

Keys wrote Suggest you read S 11(3).

Suggest you also abide by the law with your tenancies. As for the "antagonizes" comment. What's correct is my stance. What is yours?

This is not the first time you've promoted unlawful acts.


The Tenancy Tribunal


Mr Keys, Mr Glen and the tribunal clerk sit silently in the hearing room waiting. In strides the adjudicator and after the usual formalities all are seated except the clerk who, as if following a well practised script, walks over to lay a pin and a small bottle of bubble mix on the adjudicator’s table before moving across to Mr Keys where she places a box of tissues immediately in front of him.

Clerk Just in case Mr Keys…

Mr Keys (whispering and pointing to the adjudicator) What’s the story with all that kids’ stuff?

Clerk (whispering back) She likes bursting bubbles.

Mr Keys (swallowing hard as the sweating starts) Oh…

Adjudicator Good morning everyone. So Mr Keys, today you are here as a tenant making a claim against your landlord, Mr Glen.

Mr Keys Yes, Your Honour. I decided to have a well earned break by the sea to sample some of that fresh ocean air and to get away from all these foolish property owners I have to deal with who don’t know what they are doing and never listen to my advice. I try my best to help these people but sometimes I just wonder if it’s worth it.

Adjudicator How interesting. Now, what then Mr Keys, is your claim against Mr Glen?

Mr Keys That he is in breach of s11(3) by writing on our tenancy agreement that I had to use professional carpet cleaner at the end of the tenancy. This is after I had repeatedly told him to stop committing this and other unlawful acts at his other rentals. He is supposed to know what he is doing, isn’t he, Your Honour? With the utmost of respect to you, I believe you would welcome the opportunity to teach errant and cavalier landlords like Mr Glen a sharp lesson in the RTA. The more landlords that know what they are doing the better, wouldn’t you say?

Adjudicator (looking to Mr Glen) I say nothing Mr Keys, I just rule. But yes, what Mr Keys says would certainly be to everyone’s advantage. Now Mr Glen, it is certainly true that you cannot, as of right, expect a tenant to have the carpets professionally cleaned at the end of the tenancy. The tenant only has to leave the property in a reasonably clean and tidy condition. That is an obligation on the tenant and to expect that is your right.

Mr Glen Yes, I know.

Adjudicator It is also true that s11(3) of the RTA says that any waiver of any right by the tenant is of no effect.

Mr Glen Yes, I know.

Adjudicator Mr keys has apparently advised you of this and yet you still insisted on having a professional carpet cleaning clause on your tenancy agreement.

Mr Glen Yes, I know.

Adjudicator Mr Keys, prey tell me, where is your right that you insist Mr Glen is forcing you to waive?

Mr Keys Er…

Adjudicator And, Mr Keys, where does it say anywhere in the RTA that a landlord who writes a clause in the tenancy agreement about professional carpet cleaning is acting unlawfully?...

Mr Keys Er…

Adjudicator …or indeed is even in breach of the RTA?

Mr Keys(resigned to more tears) Er… But Your Honour, I’ve told the whole world that what Mr Glen is doing is wrong. They all look up to me.

Adjudicator (quietly, slowly, and disapprovingly) The whole world? Really? Well from where I’m sitting I’m not looking up.

Mr Keys (as Mr Glen grins and pulls faces in Mr Keys’ direction) Er…

The clerk rushes over, grabs a tissue and hands it to Mr Keys. The adjudicator blows a huge bubble and eagerly picks up the pin.

Adjudicator This is not the first time you've misunderstood the RTA.

Claim dismissed!

[Keys]

Adjudicator Mr Keys, prey tell me, where is your right that you insist Mr Glen is forcing you to waive?

Suggest you read S40 (1 e iii)

Adjudicator And, Mr Keys, where does it say anywhere in the RTA that a landlord who writes a clause in the tenancy agreement about professional carpet cleaning is acting unlawfully?...

Suggest you read S137 (1) and re read this

[Apple]

Originally Posted by Apple

Adjudicator Mr Keys, prey tell me, where is your right that you insist Mr Glen is forcing you to waive?

Suggest you read S40 (1 e iii)


Quote:
Adjudicator And, Mr Keys, where does it say anywhere in the RTA that a landlord who writes a clause in the tenancy agreement about professional carpet cleaning is acting unlawfully?...

Suggest you read S137 (1) and re read this
__________________



The adjudicator Mr Keys, your constant attempts to take up tribunal time and have the last word are becoming tedious. Your application for a rehearing is denied. For what good it will do I will tell you why.

I know s40(1 e iii) off by heart. Yet again, Mr Keys, prey tell me where is the right that you insist Mr Glen is forcing you to give up? Do you understand the difference between a right and a responsibility? It seems not.

Let us look at s137(1a) and (1b)

First (1a). In what way does Mr Glen, by insisting that you have the carpets professionally cleaned, contravene the part of the act that obliges you to leave the property reasonably clean?

Next (1b). How does the professional carpet cleaning clause defeat, evade or prevent the operation of the tenant’s responsibility to leave the property reasonably clean and tidy? A professional clean may or may not bring the carpets up the level of cleanliness demanded by the RTA, a level that this tribunal will decide. I trust you can now see that there are two separate issues here Mr Keys that you are confusing. Alas, I fear though that you cannot see.

Mr Keys Thank you Your Honour for showing me the errors of my ways.

[revdev]

Apple...you are just a barrel of laughs aren't you?

G

[Keys]

Apple...you are just a barrel of laughs aren't you?

G

Other thoughts have crossed my mind Revdev.

Maybe S85 could help?

After all, the DBH has made the ruling and obviously Adjudicators will run with it.

As seen here. If the applicant doesn't know they can claim, the Adjudicator won't give. Many LL's are lucky.

(apple now rushes to read S85 and compose a witty retort, spending many hours on the format and colouring)

[cube]

Is that the right link, Keys - what's the connection with carpet cleaning?

[essence]

I have new tenants moving into a property today, so this thread was quite appropriate.

I decided to ring TS and find out their position.

What I was told is

a You can write a "clean carpet" clause into the TA.
b If the tenant decides at end of tenancy NOT to clean carpet, it then becomes up to the discretion of Tenancy Mediator whether cleaning the carpet was warranted or not. ie if the carpet is very new then obviously keeping it clean is a good option, however if the carpet is 20 years old the TM could question why you've written a carpet clean clause into the TA (this makes the assumption that a 20 year old carpet will be ratty and dirty ).

The tenants can be ENCOURAGED to clean the carpet, they cannot be MADE to clean the carpet.

It was suggested to take photos (I always do anyway) on start of tenancy, so that there is no argument at the end of the tenancy as to state of property.

[Keys]

Is that the right link, Keys - what's the connection with carpet cleaning?

Absolutely nothing ... except ...

Look at ruling 6.
The application to terminate the tenancy for the tenants causing substantial damage is dismissed

Now, look at reason 1.
Rent was at least 21 days in arrears at the date on which the application was filed.

It's obvious the LL wanted the tenants gone. What the LL didn't know was the RTA. Otherwise they would have asked for termination for rent arrears.

I suggest that tenants don't know the insertion of the carpet cleaning clause is unlawful and, by not claiming, don't get their rightful compensation.

The revamped bill allows for (I believe) tenants advocates.

This will mean more substantive claims by tenants.

[Glen]

Absolutely nothing ... except ...

Look at ruling 6.
The application to terminate the tenancy for the tenants causing substantial damage is dismissed

Now, look at reason 1.
Rent was at least 21 days in arrears at the date on which the application was filed.

It's obvious the LL wanted the tenants gone. What the LL didn't know was the RTA. Otherwise they would have asked for termination for rent arrears.

I suggest that tenants don't know the insertion of the carpet cleaning clause is unlawful and, by not claiming, don't get their rightful compensation.

The revamped bill allows for (I believe) tenants advocates.

This will mean more substantive claims by tenants.

JEEZ!!!....I know i'll get 'told off' AGAIN from the moderators, but c'mon keys!.......[hey guess what, you were right - mod

Rules are fine (i guess) if everyone else wants to abide, but if they don't, then you have to make your OWN rules!

I actually agree (in theory) with most of what you say keys (regarding to 'the' rules of the RTA), but it's your 'scripture' in how you present your case that irks myself and others.
.......and actually, just because (so you know) something that is written by some W****K with a degree, doesn't actually mean that they know what they're talking about!

[Keys]

I actually agree (in theory) with most of what you say keys (regarding to 'the' rules of the RTA), but it's your 'scripture' in how you present your case that irks myself and others.
.......and actually, just because (so you know) something that is written by some W****K with a degree, doesn't actually mean that they know what they're talking about!

Can't help it. Just the way I am. Can't see any misinformation go past, just like tenants get no second chance with me.

As for the chap with the degree? Paper pushers make the rules and have no experience with practical applications. We just have to live by them.

[Glen]

Can't help it. Just the way I am. Can't see any misinformation go past, just like tenants get no second chance with me.

....and how's that going for ya keys?

Being so pedantic about everything doesn't really seem to work does it? All it it does is get peoples backs up.

I think I prefer my style of bending rules where it suits both parties, clearly written down with a mutual understanding, and a flexibility to adjust to circumstances.
Firm but fair. Works for me.

For example I had another landlord tell me the other day that he doesn't allow drug use in his property,....HA!.... get real,...first you'd hardly have any tenants, and secondly how the hell do you enforce? The point is big deal, who cares,....i'm not a policeman.
As long as they pay their rent and look after the property ,(p lab aside) then I don't really care what these losers do. It's their sad life! Just pay me my rent.