UK Landlord Forum / Life

Hello all,

Claiming expenses (as in, costs of maintenance and repairs to the property, but not 'capital' improvements) for tax purposes, is something I've always eared on the side of caution (probably previously to our detriment occasionally).

However, now I've got a more difficult situation to interpret, and would appreciate opinions?

Situation.  Tenants moved out, leaving bath with a hairline crack, which could eventually spread leading to water leaking out to the ceiling below.  Previously tub was fine, solid, just a bit dated (as was the rest of the bathroom (but everything clean and serviceable). 

Importantly, we'd have otherwise left the room as-is for the next tenants.

However.  Although, technically, the bath could be repaired, it's not recommended, and a replacement is advised (confirmed via Google forums).  Due to the size/shape of the bathroom, this isn't simple.

The agent is aiming for £70 from the tenant's deposit, on the basis that the tub was otherwise OK, but showing 30+ years normal wear.  So far, so good.  Except the to replace the tub, it'd have to be cut out, and a smaller model would have to be squeezed in.  And so all the tiling/plasterboard would need to be replaced to make everything watertight.  Which also means new (vinyl) flooring etc etc.  So, with that in mind, we're going for a new bathroom (might as well add a new sink and loo, at our expense obviously).  So, what do you think I could reasonably claim?

Cost of Wickes cheapest bath, less the £70 already obtained from the deposit?  (Old bath wooden floor was also dodgy, and had to be replaced with new chipboard).

Tiling?  Cost of the cheapest available tiles (again from Wickes)?  Closest I can find for 'like-for-like'?  We'll spend a bit more for nicer tiles (but obviously, not claim that).

Labour for the tiling and plumbing to fit the bath?

Shower curtain now replaced with a glass screen – probably not claimable.

Sink/loo and plumbing for that bit – our expense.

Flooring – vinyl and fitting claimable?

Misc repainting of woodwork/ceiling/single wall – will do that myself for simplicity.

(NB, plumber is someone I trust, who has worked on this house before, plus installed a bathroom on the one we live in).  Showed me/walked me through all the stuff he was doing, inc a clever improvised repair to a crack in the soil-stack pipe/Boss strap for water from the bath... could have been a major leak problem there if left.

Does this all sound reasonable?

Appreciate any guidance.
Best
C

Quote from: Chris S on October 17, 2024, 06:26:53 PMThe agent is aiming for £70 from the tenant's deposit, on the basis that the tub was otherwise OK, but showing 30+ years normal wear.

At 30+ years old, the tub has lasted a long time and had pretty much reached the end of its service life. It had little to no residual value, so the proposed £70 deduction is probably the maximum you can reasonably expect.

Likewise, at 30+ years old, the bathroom is likely to be in need of renovation, or soon would be if you had chosen not to tackle it now. You have confirmed this by saying "Old bath wooden floor was also dodgy, and had to be replaced with new chipboard".

Beyond the loss of the residual value of the bath, you cannot claim from the tenant the additional costs of renovating the bathroom. They are a normal landlord maintenance expense, which you would have had to cover when you finally decided to update the bathroom, for example, because the floor under the bath eventually collapsed.

I'd say all of that should be allowable as repairs and maintenance. You're effectively replacing like with like: it's still just a room with a bog, bath and basin in it so nothing has fundamentally changed. You don't need to wait until each individual component fails before you replace it. It's perfectly reasonable to do the lot whilst the opportunity presents itself. Even if the tiles and fittings are a bit nicer, that's allowable.

Ah, maybe I misunderstood.

I took this bit...

Quote from: Chris S on October 17, 2024, 06:26:53 PMThe agent is aiming for £70 from the tenant's deposit, on the basis that the tub was otherwise OK, but showing 30+ years normal wear.
...
Except the to replace the tub, it'd have to be cut out, and a smaller model would have to be squeezed in.  And so all the tiling/plasterboard would need to be replaced to make everything watertight.  Which also means new (vinyl) flooring etc etc.
...
So, what do you think I could reasonably claim?

...to mean that you were seeking to claim a larger deposit deduction from your tenant. Hence my reply.

Apologies if you were just asking about capital vs. maintenance expenses.

Thanks folks for taking the time to help/read.

Nope, the £70 comes from the deposit.  Nothing else will be charged from the tenant.

I was just querying what would be reasonable to then charge as a normal maintenanance expense, though the usual way, via recovery of tax.  Hence, replacing a 'perfectly serviceable sink/loo' just because they are dated becomes very questionable, which is why I wasn't going to do it.  But, the tiling etc is a different matter as it's a necessity to fit a new bath.  Last thing I want is to have the taxman involved asking Qs.

As for the floor, it would probably have to be replaced 'eventually', but my plumber advised better safe than sorry, and to do that bit now.  That's just a bit of chipboard, so hardy a significant cost relative to the other stuff.

I was just queying the cost of the tiling, labour, replacement lino etc.  I.e. the stuff to neccessary to fit a new bath in.  No doubt we'll get a better/new bathroom out of this, which is why taxman might start wagging his finger.

Thanks, all
C

HMRC accept that any replacement for maintenance will result in some improvement. If you replace a bathroom it's going to be maintenance. If you were to put in a super flash wet room in place of a standard bathroom, some element of the work might be capital, and you could split it out.

But it's more of an art than a precise science. Act reasonably and you'll be fine.

Quote from: Chris S on October 18, 2024, 08:47:04 AMLast thing I want is to have the taxman involved asking Qs.

My experience is that you'd probably need to be a real outlier for HMRC to have the impetus or capability to do anything.

They're solely interested in some money coming in. Even with this total cost as an allowable expensive, do you expect your bill to be something above zero (remember, it's across all properties you let)? If so, they'll likely not care one jot.

HMRC [should] have bigger fish to fry... but it's good to keep your wits about you, of course.

Even the £70 is totally unreasonable

The limitations Act gives you 6 years for a claim, 12 in certain circumstances.

I have handled a plethora of ADR claims for both Landlords and Tenants, a product over 6 years old is beyond it's reasonable life, as for the other charges, they will not be allowed either because you would have had to carry out those services an any event when the bath was changed.

You failed to provide a modern bathroom and strung it out for as long as you could, no problem with that but you can't expect the Tenant to now pay for work you would be expected to carry out in any event.

The fact that the bath can be repaired also works against you.

In addition to this there is the Tenant Fees Act (2019), whilst there is some consideration for damages, these charges would inevitably be deemed a prohibited fee.

If you protected the Deposit then you and the Tenant have the chance to accept the ADR or go to Court, not all schemes are binding.

If you did not protect the deposit or did not serve the Prescribed Information to the Tenant within 30 days of receiving the deposit then you could be paying between 1x and 3x the deposit PER TENANCY (where the defect was not corrected in an earlier Tenancy).

I have had so many cases where a decent Tenant is faced with a charge they should not have been liable for, they then fight it in the ADR, get a good decision and then go to Court for the Deposit Protection sanctions.

Do not be the "entitled" Landlord because it might well come back and bite you.

If you do the work which you would have had to do anyway you will be able to offset it against profits no doubt.  You can't double dip either in case you are considering that.

To be clear NONE of it is the fault of the Tenant and NONE of it can be claimed.  Sure you can try but in their position I would skip the ADR and take it to the County Court on Part 8 track so you would be liable for their Solicitors Fees.

Quote from: Chris S on October 17, 2024, 06:26:53 PMHello all,

Claiming expenses (as in, costs of maintenance and repairs to the property, but not 'capital' improvements) for tax purposes, is something I've always eared on the side of caution (probably previously to our detriment occasionally).

However, now I've got a more difficult situation to interpret, and would appreciate opinions?

Situation.  Tenants moved out, leaving bath with a hairline crack, which could eventually spread leading to water leaking out to the ceiling below.  Previously tub was fine, solid, just a bit dated (as was the rest of the bathroom (but everything clean and serviceable). 

Importantly, we'd have otherwise left the room as-is for the next tenants.

However.  Although, technically, the bath could be repaired, it's not recommended, and a replacement is advised (confirmed via Google forums).  Due to the size/shape of the bathroom, this isn't simple.

The agent is aiming for £70 from the tenant's deposit, on the basis that the tub was otherwise OK, but showing 30+ years normal wear.  So far, so good.  Except the to replace the tub, it'd have to be cut out, and a smaller model would have to be squeezed in.  And so all the tiling/plasterboard would need to be replaced to make everything watertight.  Which also means new (vinyl) flooring etc etc.  So, with that in mind, we're going for a new bathroom (might as well add a new sink and loo, at our expense obviously).  So, what do you think I could reasonably claim?

Cost of Wickes cheapest bath, less the £70 already obtained from the deposit?  (Old bath wooden floor was also dodgy, and had to be replaced with new chipboard).

Tiling?  Cost of the cheapest available tiles (again from Wickes)?  Closest I can find for 'like-for-like'?  We'll spend a bit more for nicer tiles (but obviously, not claim that).

Labour for the tiling and plumbing to fit the bath?

Shower curtain now replaced with a glass screen – probably not claimable.

Sink/loo and plumbing for that bit – our expense.

Flooring – vinyl and fitting claimable?

Misc repainting of woodwork/ceiling/single wall – will do that myself for simplicity.

(NB, plumber is someone I trust, who has worked on this house before, plus installed a bathroom on the one we live in).  Showed me/walked me through all the stuff he was doing, inc a clever improvised repair to a crack in the soil-stack pipe/Boss strap for water from the bath... could have been a major leak problem there if left.

Does this all sound reasonable?

Appreciate any guidance.
Best
C

I don' t think a 30- year old bathroom owes you anything. As said above,  why would tenants have to pay anything if the whole thing needs doing ?

Thanks, folks.

The £70 was the aim of the agent, who is taking the view that the bath was otherwise solid (new scratches etc being reasonable wear and tear), hence forcing us down this route.  Wasn't my idea to try to claim this.

Deposit is protected via the proper channels.

The tenancy itself was short - a couple of years on what was effectively a refurbished house (bar the bathroom).  The tenants have been 'difficult' (to put it politely) - in terms of check-out cleaning, damaging a brand new floor (ahh, but that's fabric of the house, and therefore the Landlord's responsibility!), not cleaning a brand new oven, scuff marks over freshly painted walls, not even bothering to change dead light bulbs etc, missing floor threshold bar etc.  Plus a jungle garden.  They claim they employed a professional cleaner (who has clearly missed many bits), but as of yet, not provided us with that invoice.

Intention is to replace the bathroom with as close as possible like-for-like.  But, there's no denying that it was dated.

If the crack in the tub can be interpreted as reasonable wear&tear, I'll tell the agent to drop it.

Cheers for taking the time to reply all,
C

Sorry, just to add, I'd repainted, new flooring and even skirting board throughout.  Basically a re-furbished property.  What really annoyed me (apart from the garden), was the poor cleaning, but damage to a front door lock (not claimed - ahh, but that's fabric of the house, therefore Landlords responsibility! – damage to the flooring, and missing bits like the bulbs (not claimed) and door threshold).
I appreciate the 'fabric of the property' argument, but I can't believe this gives Tenants license to do as they please.

You possibly need to have a read up about being a landlord and what's required and possible, generally. I don't think your agent is helping much.

What you can claim from a tenant is compensation for a loss in the value of your property beyond the normal wear and tear associated with someone living in it. So the floor and lock are possibly a loss, despite being part of the fabric of the house - that's not a factor in the loss. It's the landlord's responsibility to fix, as is the bath, but the loss is the issue. There is no "fabric of the property" argument.

The reason some people are suggesting that the £70 isn't a good claim is because the loss in value of a 30 year old bath is probably negligible - that's probably longer than a bath would be expected to last anyway. And you can't claim compensation when there's no actual loss. It's probably not nothing, because the crack stops it being usable, but it's almost certainly not worth the bother.

I've not had any major probs being a Landlord in the past (10 yrs I think), and yep, previously studied up on what was claimable from HMRC, and never had any deposit issues fortunately (bar the penultimate tenant wrecking the oven by leaving a cleaning product to sock in over 24s, destroying it, plus some rubbish behind I had to shift).  However, the property was now 'looking a bit tired' before these latest tenants, so I decided to renovate it.  And recovered all via 'Repairs and Maintenance' which it seemed I was perfectly entitled to do.

Bar the aforementioned bathroom, where I just replaced the vinyl, shower curtain, and made sure was clean and serviceable.

Other flooring throughout I used LVT – damage arising now where some of the LVT planks have come apart.  Had I used carpet, the situation would be easy – new carpets, deliver them back clean.  But with the LVT, you could argue I'd fitted them improperly (I did it, rather than a professional), used low quality (although it was Howdens) etc etc (there's no scratches, it's a situation of a few panel gaps), so this becomes more grey to interpret.  I know for a fact that the tenant was a 'gamer' and was rolling his chair back and forth in one section where there is now a big gap, but that becomes subjective.

The oven – no argument – it was brand new at tenancy start.  It should be returned with 3 yrs of regular wear and tear.  Which it was not.

Lock – fortunately the front door has two – but if I'd been told about it working gradually loose earlier, maybe I could have sorted it, rather than having to replace it (which I'll claim from Repairs and Maintenance').

Bathroom, you've all convinced me, I'll just replace and claim fully from 'Repairs and Maintenance'.

LVT – I'll take on the chin, superglue any dodgy planks back together.  Avoid any deposit trouble.

Walls – fresh paint.  Bar an acceptable few marks, this one to me is a dead cert.

Sounds good.

Thanks for elaborating Chris

On these other matters, as long as your contract has adequate terms about the responsibilities of Tenants then you should definitely be seeking claims of your actual costs on them.

The best approach is to give them a list of things that need to be fixed and give them 48 hours to mitigate costs by instructing their own professionals or to accept your own restoration, otherwise any claim on the deposit will include your losses for renting to a new Tenant.

I would focus on the oven, garden and light bulbs, but also the floor IF you can show the condition of the floor immediately prior via a check-in and inventory checklist taken at the beginning of the Tenancy with the Tenant being ideally being present.  Receipts would help.

I mention the deposit protection because so many Landlords get the paperwork (Prescribed Information) wrong or they fail to get evidence of service (Ideally a signature of Tenant immediately after protection and before occupancy).

The ability to enforce professional cleaning has been impacted by the Tenant Fees Act (2019) but what is rock solid is returning the property in the same or better state that it was let.  Receipts help the Tenant show they did what they alleged they did, if it is still inadequate then they are liable for the restoration to the same condition it was let.

Quote from: Chris S on October 19, 2024, 09:13:25 AMThanks, folks.

The £70 was the aim of the agent, who is taking the view that the bath was otherwise solid (new scratches etc being reasonable wear and tear), hence forcing us down this route.  Wasn't my idea to try to claim this.

Deposit is protected via the proper channels.

The tenancy itself was short - a couple of years on what was effectively a refurbished house (bar the bathroom).  The tenants have been 'difficult' (to put it politely) - in terms of check-out cleaning, damaging a brand new floor (ahh, but that's fabric of the house, and therefore the Landlord's responsibility!), not cleaning a brand new oven, scuff marks over freshly painted walls, not even bothering to change dead light bulbs etc, missing floor threshold bar etc.  Plus a jungle garden.  They claim they employed a professional cleaner (who has clearly missed many bits), but as of yet, not provided us with that invoice.

Intention is to replace the bathroom with as close as possible like-for-like.  But, there's no denying that it was dated.

If the crack in the tub can be interpreted as reasonable wear&tear, I'll tell the agent to drop it.

Cheers for taking the time to reply all,
C