You can use this form to reply to the above review or a displayed comment on the above review.
1 stop properties
491-493 Duke Street
Dennistoun,Glasgow
City of Glasgow
G31 1DL
0141 550 5260
Services | Valuation Accuracy | Fees Satisfaction | Min Price of property reviewed | Max Price of property reviewed |
---|---|---|---|---|
Lettings | 100% | 80% | £400 | £1,200 |
From Landlords | From Tenants | From Vendors | From Buyers | Other | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
3 | 0 | 6 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
No Properties
When Mr Savage moved in to the property on 09.06.2014 the flat was in a good and clean condition as was evidenced by the detailed inventory report (along with 112 photographs of the flat condition at move-in) which he received at the time. Mr Savage accepted this report.
When he vacated the flat, we conducted a detailed check out inspection, as we do with all our properties.
This check out inspection revealed that the property was not in the same clean condition in which Mr Savage received it. The flat required a thorough clean, all windows (inside and out) needed cleaning and the bed mattress required a professional steam clean (due to staining which occurred during his tenancy).
The cost for the flat clean was £110. The cost for window cleaning was £30. So in this respect Mr Savage is not inaccurate.
He has not mentioned the cost for mattress cleaning which was £35.00.
In addition we have charged 15% plus VAT of any costs associated with arranging works to be carried out in order to return the property to the condition in which he received it (and as detailed in the tenancy agreement which he signed). This actually totalled £42 (and not £47 as Mr Savage has stated).
Please bear in mind that had the flat been returned in a good clean condition then we would not have been involved in arranging contractors to clean the flat.
To support my response to Mr Savage's review I have attached several photos which demonstrate the condition of the flat when he moved out.
People reading this should also be aware that, since the introduction of the Tenancy Deposit Schemes (TDS) in Scotland whereby tenant deposits are held by a Scottish Government approved third party (and NOT by the agent) , tenants now have the right to dispute any amounts that an agent requests from a tenant's deposit. If the agent and tenant cannot reach agreement on these amounts then an independent adjudicator will rule on the dispute. This ruling is based on evidence supplied by the agent and the tenant.
In this case Mr Savage did not dispute our costs. Indeed when he was advised of the cleaning costs and our handling chare he agreed that these costs should be deducted from his deposit. At no time did Mr Savage indicate that he was unhappy with the costs for returning the flat to its original clean condition.
The costs we have requested from Mr Savage's deposit are entirely reasonable and justified.
It should also be noted that the balance of Mr Savage's deposit (£345.50) was returned to him by our TDS provider (SafeDeposits Scotland). Therefore his comments about being fleeced of his deposit" are well wide of the mark!
It is all too easy for someone to rant on review forums.
However it is not always so easy for organisations such as ourselves, who provide a professional service to our landlords AND tenants, to provide our side of the story.
I hope that anyone reading this will now be able to balance our evidence based report against Mr Savage's rant.