Help! What is considered fair wear and tear?

[Lindseyy01]

Just checked out from a property, and it seems we'll pay more than a thousand for the damages, including some minor scratches on doors, worn off labels on the oven.

Actually the doors had cracks, and the labels were also partially worn off when we moved in. Sadly we thought these minor "defects" were acceptable and did not take any photos of these things. And now it turns out that they are not considered as fair wear and tear, and they are going to charge us to repair all these.

Is there anything we can do to avoid/reduce the deduction of the deposit, considering that we lack solid evidence on the initial status of the property?

[sndy]

Quite typical of LLs and agents here to resort to such unfair tactics. There motive is to extort as much money as possible.

Start communicating everything over email now if not done already, label worn-out can just be refuted or scratches since you don't have the pictures from before would suggest to negotiate on a reasonable price depending on the the extent of damage and only if those are easily visible.

Even then if the LL acts unreasonable, inform the LL that you can go to SCT.

SCT would again try to negotiate and reach an amicable settlement before the case is put to across a judge for hearing.
LL might reconsider since this would consume considerable time of both the parties.

[PNGMK]

You should only be paying a pro-rata based on wear and tear being in excess of the depreciation schedule or rate for those items at most. For most items it's roughly 10 years - 10% per year. So for an oven that is new when you moved in for 12 months - if you contributed more than 10% of wear and tear then the difference is what you're liable for. It's very subjective.

If their claims are unreasonable take them on at the SCT (small claims tribunal).

[PNGMK]

Quite typical of LLs and agents here to resort to such unfair tactics. There motive is to extort as much money as possible.

Start communicating everything over email now if not done already, label worn-out can just be refuted or scratches since you don't have the pictures from before would suggest to negotiate on a reasonable price depending on the the extent of damage and only if those are easily visible.

Even then if the LL acts unreasonable, inform the LL that you can go to SCT.

SCT would again try to negotiate and reach an amicable settlement before the case is put to across a judge for hearing.
LL might reconsider since this would consume considerable time of both the parties.

You misrepresented the SCT process, the judge (magistrate) will try to find agreement at the time but if there is no agreement the magistrate will make a judgement on the spot.

[sndy]

Quite typical of LLs and agents here to resort to such unfair tactics. There motive is to extort as much money as possible.

Start communicating everything over email now if not done already, label worn-out can just be refuted or scratches since you don't have the pictures from before would suggest to negotiate on a reasonable price depending on the the extent of damage and only if those are easily visible.

Even then if the LL acts unreasonable, inform the LL that you can go to SCT.

SCT would again try to negotiate and reach an amicable settlement before the case is put to across a judge for hearing.
LL might reconsider since this would consume considerable time of both the parties.

You misrepresented the SCT process, the judge (magistrate) will try to find agreement at the time but if there is no agreement the magistrate will make a judgement on the spot.

One doesn't get a hearing on the 1st visit itself to SCT, atleast I didn't for my case.

We had meeting with SCT officials which felt more like counseling sessions wherein they tried to make us settle amongst ourselves and ensured all the documentation are in place if the case goes to the judge.
I settled after two such meetings without ever seeing a judge.

[PNGMK]

Ok apologies - seems they try to do more pre-hearing negotiation now.

[x9200]

Just checked out from a property, and it seems we'll pay more than a thousand for the damages, including some minor scratches on doors, worn off labels on the oven.

Actually the doors had cracks, and the labels were also partially worn off when we moved in. Sadly we thought these minor "defects" were acceptable and did not take any photos of these things. And now it turns out that they are not considered as fair wear and tear, and they are going to charge us to repair all these.

Is there anything we can do to avoid/reduce the deduction of the deposit, considering that we lack solid evidence on the initial status of the property?

Even if you don't have it documented, what is fair wear and tear is most of the time rather obvious so you can still make such point and if they claim otherwise let them justify the claim.

Another point to be aware of, different things should be used the way they are designed to be used, so if a label can not survive typical recommended use, cleaning included, then this is something wrong with the label and not the way you use it. What sort of label is that?

As already mentioned, threaten to take it to SCT and you may find half of the problems already solved.