Advice on a tenant situation

Greetings all,

Hope you are doing well and staying safe.

I was kindly wondering if I could have advice on the following situation:

I have a tenant who ends their lease on the 30th of August, I have secured a new tenant (well still in the process, fingers crossed it all works out). There are a few issues with the property, just wear and tear sort of stuff that need to be rectified. The property needs a paint job, like big time. The tenant has been the only person who has lived in the property and the property was brand new when they took up the lease. Please note, property is equivalent to a jail cell (tiny apartment).

Would it be fair to request that the tenant pays for the property to be painted considering the scuff marks and everything else on the walls was their doing. In saying this, the subsequent tenant wishes to take up the lease come 1st September, so I doubt there is much time to paint in-between.

I'm not really sure how to go about this situation as I have
a) Never had a property that has required a full paint job
b) Never had a tenant who has requested to move in so quickly when apartment needs a paint job.

Thank you all for your feedback in advance

 

If the new tenant is willing to move in without the paint job, why do it?

 

How long have they been living in the unit since “brand new” the paint could be at the end of its life and hence all wear and tear

 

its been about four years - so definitely not the end of its life but there's a substantial amount of scuff marks and furniture marks and I don't want to have to leave it for the landlord to rectify down the line or other tenants when they have not contributed to it. I mean it's a bit beyond a sugar soap scenario, hence I suggests it needs a paint job.

 

Wait, whats your role in all of this if you are not the landlord?

the new tenant wont have to rectify. This will be in their entry condition report.

landlord will be happy to save the paint money if the new tenant is fine with it.

why are you worrying when no one else is?

 

Thank you for your time.

I wasn't concerned about the new tenant, I was merely just curious as to when both tenants have moved out and the place requires a paint job, who is responsible for this? Considering the first tenant has left marks, scuffs and small dents on the wall in the first place.

 

I'm confused - how did you get a tenant organised who wants to move in so far in advance? And how are scuff marks so bad after 4 years - are they playing squash inside the apartment or is it just general wear and tear?

You have to determine if its actually damage or wear and tear, so you can see if the tenant is responsible.

 

Some scuff marks you can touch up or just paint the whole side of the wall, depending on where it is without painting the whole house.

 

Thank you for your response. Do you consider furniture marks caused by the tenant from moving the furniture around the room as being fair wear and tear or would you say that's a tenants responsibility? Like if they have left deep dark scuff marks without really realising, then perhaps it would be fair to assume that they would be liable to rectify that? Correct me if I'm wrong, hence why I have posted to get feedback. I don't assume that every time a tenant moves out to paint the premises but considering they've been the sole tenant I would presume some liability is on the tenant, no?

 

Yeah, that was what I was thinking. I was just thinking to touch it up. Not a full on paint job. Plus a clean would a long way too. But thank you. That makes sense.

 

Nothing sounds beyond fair wear and tear. If the only issue after 4 years is maybe the paint can use touching up (and even a bit of spakfilla), sounds like a model tenant and the relatively small cost should be borne by the landlord.

 

No. That's not how legal liability for damage works.

 

If you have been the sole tenant and and you have committed the damage......then who is liable if not you?

 

No one, potentially. Otherwise you're suggesting everything that breaks during a tenancy is the responsibility of the tenant.

Tenants are only liable for damage they negligently or intentionally cause.

 

Yeah correct, that was the intended point I was making earlier - perhaps wasn't clear on my behalf. The fact that the damage did not exist prior to this sole tenant moving in (sole tenant meaning, there was no tenants prior to this current tenant and they lived as a tenant not tenant/s) that the damage, which is not necessarily damage but does require attention, was because the tenant negligently (hence, not really realising) allowed for this to happen.

 

No I don't think you understand what I'm saying. Sole tenant, lots of tenants, lots of guests, whatever - it makes no difference. A tenant is only responsible for damage they negligently or intentionally cause.

Maybe you don't understand what negligence means?

 

Thank you for your time and your attempt to belittle me.

I think i'm actually making the point of what negligence is, in this case. Don't know what it means to you but I find someone who pulls furniture along a wall without a care for the fact that it will leave damage behind, without taking the reasonable steps to ensure that it doesn't do so, is negligent. Or perhaps that's just acceptable and no-one has respect for the home they own or rent.

 

It might be, it also might not be.

Negligent damage generally means one of two things:

1. The tenant doing something that wasn't reasonable to do, which led to the damage; or

2. The tenant not doing something that was reasonable to do, which led to the damage.

I don't think scuff marks on the wall are automatically negligent. Otherwise it would be suggesting that a tenant isn't allowed to touch the walls... for 4 years was it in your case?

 

Agreed - however, when the whole room is covered in them, I think it suggests a level of negligence. If it was a scuff mark or two, no problems, people need to live. It's not a display home. But I think there should be an effort on behalf of the tenant to rectify this. I'm not saying hire Da Vinci to come in and give it a lick of paint but surely a touch up at their expense is adequate, otherwise every tenant would walk out of every property knowing they can't be held accountable for anything.