Carpet clean at end of tenancy.

[Wayne]

I think you're still missing the point Wayne, no one is saying that the carpet has to be absolutely perfectly clean. What is required is that the carpets should be reasonably clean and by getting a pro carpet cleaner in to suck up the dreaded debris in the fibres this is a standard that can and should be adhered to and costs awarded from verification of the receipt with a statement from the contractor as such that indeed the carpet was not clean . You posted in some threads here that you haven't had any of your carpets cleaned in any of your rentals for over a decade . That's outrageous , theirs no way if you informed a "decent" tenant that they would take up residency. As i said before raise your standard for your tenants and yourself ! We're talking a measly $140 , not 1K for a simple procedure that gives peace of mind.

What I said in other threads is irrelevant to this and you really need to get off your hobby horse on that one.
It comes down to a definition.
You suggest that a carpet can only be 'reasonably' clean after a professional carpet clean.
I'd suggest that the TT would say otherwise.
You are entitled to your opinion but if someone takes you to the TT over it you'll have to defend your definition.
I'd suggest that some statement from the carpet cleaner that the 'water was dirty' probably wouldn't cut it.
I could be wrong - let us know how you get on.

[mrsaneperson]

What you said before in other threads relating to the fact you said you haven't had the carpets cleaned for over a decade in your rentals is entirely relevant because it shows an error in your judgment . I have presented reasonable and rational counter argument to that mindset but no doubt you will still not have cleaned those same carpets in another decade .

I've never had a problem with getting costs awarded for a carpet clean that needed to be done and by ensuring this always get the backup of the professional carpet cleaner to state how the condition of the carpet was in this way it squashes counter arguments from a tenant trying to get out of the responsibility of leaving the carpets reasonably clean. This is the same argument used for any repair or cleaning situation involving any tenancy. Statements from the professionals in the trade almost always outweigh negation of responsibility from a tenant.

""The water was dirty doesn't cut it" really ? Thankfully the adjudicators and most people i have discussed this with are not in line with your thinking.

This is a mutual "win win" situation for tenants and landlords, it is not anything to do with getting financial reward but is simply about being fair and reasonable. If you want to be fair and reasonable with your tenancies get those carpets cleaned for goodness sake.

[Wayne]

""The water was dirty doesn't cut it" really ? Thankfully the adjudicators and most people i have discussed this with are not in line with your thinking.

Actually I said " that the 'water was dirty' probably wouldn't cut it" (note the probably as I was thinking how the TT would see it) not "doesn't" cut it.
That you have used that argument and it has been accepted by the TT (other peoples opinions don't count in this) is good and a useful fact to guide others.

[Keys]

I would suggest that having the carpet cleaned again, immediately after your professional cleaner, would produce dirty water again. Should that be the case, do you think your insistence on professional carpet cleaning would be advisable?

Before you jump on me, know me. Many things I have done in my past. One of them was a "professional" carpet cleaner.

[mrsaneperson]

I would suggest that having the carpet cleaned again, immediately after your professional cleaner, would produce dirty water again. Should that be the case, do you think your insistence on professional carpet cleaning would be advisable?

Before you jump on me, know me. Many things I have done in my past. One of them was a "professional" carpet cleaner.

Maybe you weren't "professional" enough..If the water was really dirty then that is an indication it wasn't done properly. Their are "degrees" and these things are all weighed up at TT, but that is how the whole process operates for every factor regarding the tenancy. That's how the RTA is operated , it is not like other courts of law.
We're talking about a situation where the tenant hasn't cleaned the carpet because to them it "looks" clean and then the landlord employing a professional to come in and clean it.
If theirs a receipt , particularly it represents no conflict of interest, and what is being sought is just fair and reasonable reimbursement. That is how the RTA is operated , it is not like other courts of law.

[donna]

We've just taken back a rental for our own use for 6 months. The tenant had driven into the shed and pushed the aluminium cladding in - it was replaced 6 years ago and now it looks terrible. We weren't told about it. PM didn't know - only noticed it during the final inspection. But PM says tenant not liable, so what can you do aye.

Also PM told me another LL renovated a bathroom only to have the new tenant dye her hair and not clean up. The white walls, sealing, vanity etc all stained red- and PM says tenant not liable. WTF!

I think, now the tenants can do whatever they like, if when they depart, they haven't perfectly cleaned the carpets but at least they attempted to clean them and there's no damage to the property the LL should be satisfied.

cheers,

Donna

[mrsaneperson]

We've just taken back a rental for our own use for 6 months. The tenant had driven into the shed and pushed the aluminium cladding in - it was replaced 6 years ago and now it looks terrible. We weren't told about it. PM didn't know - only noticed it during the final inspection. But PM says tenant not liable, so what can you do aye.

Also PM told me another LL renovated a bathroom only to have the new tenant dye her hair and not clean up. The white walls, sealing, vanity etc all stained red- and PM says tenant not liable. WTF!

I think, now the tenants can do whatever they like, if when they depart, they haven't perfectly cleaned the carpets but at least they attempted to clean them and there's no damage to the property the LL should be satisfied.

cheers,

Donna

I wouldn't use a PM like that they are not serving your best interests Donna, I'd be asking a lot more questions. There's always a "grey" area around any aspect of repairs and cleaning , mostly in my experience at TT I've won the majority of my claims ,but you do lose some , usually the arbitrators want to be seen to be fair and reasonable to both parties unless you get one of those lefty liberal socialist types that is gunning for the "evil wicked" landlord . A major setback on one of my expenses claim happened when a tenant fabricated paint damage to his leather suite , he produced a professional quote of $1k for removing some white spots of paint! It was completely bogus . He'd then also tried to fabricate other expense claims to, fortunately the judge saw these as false but still let through the leather suite claim. I was awarded 4K, lost 1K, so i took it as "You win some you lose some" .
Win or lose cases always leave a track record online for the tenant which is never a good look as when they apply for a new tenancy a major question that a PM agent usually asks on the application form is "Have you ever being to TT or had a deduction from your bond?" This should raise a red flag to any Landlord. I always try and sort cases out with my departing tenant in fair and reasonable manner and if they threaten me with TT i say OK but you do realize this will leave a track record against your name for over 3 years? Often they haven't thought this through and when they realize the ramifications it helps take away "I'm not responsible for any damages" attitude .

Neither tenant nor landlord should be willy nilly trotting off to the Courts, that should only be as a last resort .

[Keys]

$20.44 to go to court.

[mrsaneperson]

$20.44 to go to court.

It should always be a last resort as should any legal process always try and work things out between you, some give and take is often required. Seriously the lodging fee is the minimal concern in relation to presenting all the facts , form filling, photos, quotes, sitting in the courtroom, waiting in traffic driving their, preparation etc etc. You relish something that the vast majority of tenants and landlords don't.
Do you usually advise the tenant to use a professional carpet cleaner or you are not really bothered? Raise the bar, then maybe you will get better tenants and not have to constantly be lodging TT applications

[Keys]

Do you usually advise the tenant to use a professional carpet cleaner or ................

I simply follow the law. Unlike many others.

[mrsaneperson]

I simply follow the law. Unlike many others.

Advising or recommending is not against the law.The RTA law is about being fair and reasonable that's why it differs from other types of law in this regard. That's an important distinction you've missed I'm curious , you're a PM , surely you want the best tenants to take up residency for the mutual benefit of landlord and tenant? Or are you one of those many PM's just happy to accept low standards and then go all gung-ho into TT when theirs a problem ? Are you not inputting a "human" element into the job and would you be happy yourself to move into a premises where the carpet hadn't been cleaned? Raise the bar for the industry, this produces a win win for all parties involved.

[Keys]

Advising or recommending is not against the law.

I hate it when tenants try to get out of cleaning the carpets at the end of their tenancy when its stated clearly in their TA.

Looks to me like you are being duplicitous.

[mrsaneperson]

Looks to me like you are being duplicitous.

That is the wording i used in my older TA's so their was no choice. Advising and recommending things which i do in my updated ones is not illegal . So are you going to answer the questions raised or continue to lower the bar ?

[Keys]

That is the wording i used in my older TA's

Four days ago! I will happily lower the bar thanks.

[mrsaneperson]

Four days ago! I will happily lower the bar thanks.

Past tense and present tense were intertwined. You don't have access to my TA's .