non-recorded broken garage door remote

[kimvo]

At check-in, we were given a remote garage door opener which was in good condition. A week after check-in, we were given by the LL an extra garage door remote which was taped because the battery door cover was broken but the remote was working fine. There is no record of this second remote in check-in inventory. Now, at the end of tenancy, the LL is charging us 60 pounds for a replacement. Can we dispute this or we just have to swallow and pay? Please advise.

[P.Pilcher]

If both remote controls are being returned to the landlord in the condition in which they were received (allowing for fair wear and tear) you have nothing to pay. As the second remote was not on the inventory and the landlord has no evidence that he handed it to you he will, IMHO, have the greatest difficuly in making a legal case to obtain the claimed £60.

P.P.

[Andy Parker]

If it is not on the inventory you should dispute it as your LL cannot legally enforce any charge.It sounds like he is just 'trying it on'.

[Paul_f]

You're damn right he can't charge.

P.Pilcher. What's this about wear and tear on a remote control? It either works or it doesn't; you can't assess such an item. And even if it had failed during the tenancy it's still the landlord's duty to replace/repair!

[kimvo]

Thanks so much everyone. I'm learning so much from this forum and realizing that my ex-LL is taking me for a ride and I'm going to fight every bit of it.

Kim

[P.Pilcher]

Good for you Kimvo. Paul - Landlord supplies remote control. Tenant uses it. Markings on control such as "push" or "open" or "close" become worn away due to repeated pressing of the buttons. A LL trying it on could claim that this is damage. It isn't but is wear which is fair - see?

P.P.