Most of the disputes raised with TDS involve more than one issue. But cleaning and damage remain the most common areas of dispute.

Cleaning was the single most contested issue last year, with the claim appearing in 50% of disputes submitted. With that in mind, we have this month decided to focus on a cleaning dispute, offering genets greater insight in the process.

The Claim

The claim, in this case, was for a full professional deep clean at the end of the tenancy. The landlord’s evidence included the tenancy agreement, condition reports from the start and the end of the tenancy, and an invoice in support of the claim.

The Tenant’s Response

The tenants disputed the claim and provided evidence in the form of a receipted invoice to show that they had instructed and paid for professional cleaners to attend at the property to clean on the day that the tenants left the property, immediately before the appointed check-out inspection time.

The tenants also claimed that they were not given the opportunity to send their cleaners back to the property to remedy any omissions identified at the check-out inspection.

The property had been professionally cleaned for the start of the tenancy, with some omissions remaining. The summary of the check-out report stated that the property was ‘not cleaned’ with further detail contained within the check-out report, which confirmed that several cleaning oversights were present, including appliances and sanitary ware.

The Outcome

The adjudicator, although persuaded that an award was justified, did not make an award for the full amount claimed. The check-out report confirmed that parts of the property were left ‘as check-in’, and it also noted that some other areas required only relatively minor or finish cleaning. The invoice provided to support the claim included carpet cleaning when there were no carpets in the property.

In the circumstances, the claim for full professional re-cleaning throughout was not justified. For the issues for which the tenants were responsible and taking account of the omissions present at check-in, the landlords were awarded a contribution towards the claimed amount only.

So, what are the key points here?

+ While a tenant cannot be required in a tenancy obligation to pay as a matter of course a third-party contractor fee for example, for a professional clean, it remains that a landlord is entitled to require a tenant to return a property at the end of a tenancy to the same standard of cleanliness as at the tenancy’s start.

+ A tenant has no automatic right of re-entry to carry out repairs or remedial works following the end of the tenancy; any such access is granted solely at the discretion of the landlord.

+ The standard of professional cleans varies. The check-out report is of greater evidential value than an invoice when assessing the extent of the tenants’ liability for additional cleaning at the end of the tenancy.

+ A summary statement within a check-out report such as ‘not cleaned’ or ‘needs cleaning’ is not sufficient. Any general statement must be supported by specific detail within the check-out report, as was the case here.

+ It does not automatically follow that an adjudicator will award an amount equal to an invoice provided. Here, the amount awarded had to reflect that there were cleaning omissions at the start of the tenancy; not all parts of the property were noted as requiring cleaning, and other required a light clean only.

+ Ensure that any claimed amounts are fair and reasonable and accurately reflect the extent of a tenant’s liability. Here, the invoice included carpet cleaning, when there were none.

If you are interested in further guidance relating to deposit disputes, visit the Information Lounge at TDS to browse further guides.

Sandy Bastin, is head of adjudication services at Tenancy Deposit Scheme (TDS), the only not-for-profit tenancy deposit protection scheme.