For the record and due to many inconsistencies with the facts of the case we feel it appropriate to comment in response to this blog. The tenant failed to return the property in an acceptable condition, irrespective of our comments, the landlord has the final say due to this being a company let, falling outside of the protection of the various housing acts and tenancy deposit protection regulations. As such the tenants deposit was held as “agent for the landlord”. Ward and Partners endeavoured to reach an amicable agreement between both parties, and at all times advised the tenant of implications of the company tenancy status. The tenant had removed integral fire door closers, a very costly issue to remedy, and furniture had also been dismantled and stored in the garage. These issues were the landlord’s main concern, not the cleaning and gardening that was also required. The full deposit amount requested by the landlords was approximately £1600.00 and not the £2000.00 stated. At all times we acted on our clients lawful instructions with regards to carrying out any maintenance issues raised by the tenant, we were constantly frustrated with access restrictions placed upon us by the tenant which prevented our contractors dealing with the issues in a timely fashion. It is always a great shame when tenancies fail to end in a satisfactory manor, although in this instance we went above and beyond our contractual requirements to try and resolve the resulting issues.

SOUNDS LIKE A LOAD OF RUBBISH, EVERYONE KNOWS THAT IF YOU HAVE DONE WRONG THEN YOUR DEPOSIT IS KEPT! NO AGENT WOULD KEEP A DEPOSIT IF THEY HAD NO GROUNDS!

You sound like the tenant from hell and I think this is very biased! Good Night!