This is the second part of an article that looks at the common issue of carpet cleaning (the first part was here)

8. Terms such as ‘professional cleaning’ and ‘cleaned to a professional standard’ are ambiguous terms for which there is no legal or standard definition. Use of the word ‘professional’ suggests the tenant must pay for cleaning. Given that tenants are capable of cleaning to the same standard as some ‘professional’ cleaners consider how meaningful these terms are. Consider also the cases where the tenant cleans carpets as a profession or the tenant owns their own carpet cleaning equipment – several of our tenants are professional cleaners who own and manage their own cleaning businesses!

9. It is unreasonable to expect the carpets to be professionally cleaned at the end of the tenancy if they are returned in a condition the same as if they were professionally cleaned.

10. If you expect a tenant to have carpets professionally cleaned at the end of the tenancy, you would need to be able to show that they were professionally cleaned at the start.

11. In everyday use carpets collect dirt in the form of food particles, household dust, dust mites, dirt and grit from footwear, perspiration, dead skin and hair to name just a few. A vacuum cleaner alone will not remove all dirt collected in a carpet and will not ‘clean’ carpets to as clean a condition as they were at the start of the tenancy. Is it fair for occupiers (tenants or owner/occupiers) to expect the next occupier of a property to inherit their dirt? We would suggest not so always advocate carpets are ‘cleaned’ at the end of each period of occupation.

12. The Competition and Markets Authority consider end of tenancy cleaning charges to be unfair if they are vague or unclear on what basis the money is being demanded, or the extent of the cleaning involved. Reference: Section 4.4 of Guidance on unfair terms in tenancy agreements here

13. If the dispute over cleaning goes through to the Alternative Deposit Resolution Service (ADR) an adjudicator will make a decision on how the disputed deposit amount is to be distributed between the parties based on the evidence submitted. Comparative evidence is required to establish the condition of the carpet at the beginning and end of the tenancy and should be both conclusive and robust.

Carpet cleaning is one of the most common causes of disputes between landlords and tenants and along with the general cleaning of the property it accounts for 22 per cent of all dispute cases. The following should help provide clarity on what is reasonable:

1. Cleanliness is subjective, what one person considers clean may not necessarily be considered clean by another person.

2. As a matter of normal practice in short lets, reflecting the common law, tenants are expected to return the property in as good and clean a condition as it was when they received it, fair wear and tear excepted.

3. The Competition and Markets Authority object to terms that could be used to make the tenant pay for the property to be cleaned to a higher standard than it was in at the start of the tenancy, or that require cleaning regardless of whether or not this is necessary for the tenant to comply with their normal obligations with regard to the state of the property. Reference: Section 4.8 of Guidance on unfair terms in tenancy agreements here

4. Expecting the property to be cleaned a higher standard than it was at the start of the tenancy could be considered to be betterment – something the landlord is not entitled to.

5. Without employing techniques typically used in forensic science you can never be 100% sure the property is returned in as clean a condition as it was at the start of the tenancy so allow some degree of latitude when assessing cleaning.

6. Terms that insist that a particular company, piece of equipment, cleaning technique or cleaning product is used would be difficult to enforce firstly from a practical standpoint – how could you be 100% sure the prescribed technique was employed and what happens where the specified product is not available or the specified company is no longer trading at the end of the tenancy? More importantly such terms may be considered unfair as they are too prescriptive and ignore the underlying principle that tenants are only expected to return the property in as clean a condition as it was at the start of the tenancy and ‘how’ the tenant achieves this is a choice for the tenant.

7. If the landlord is adamant that the tenant cleans the carpets in a specific way at the end of the tenancy then they must make this a special clause of the tenancy agreement – set out separately from the rest of the standard clauses and as such ‘specially negotiated’ and typically shown in a Special Conditions section of the tenancy agreement.

To be continued here