Thread: Floors In A Rented Apartment

without seeing a photo, I'd say it's a try on to keep your bond.

fading from exposure to sunlight is the owner's risk UNLESS your lease required you to keep the culprit window shaded

scratches ? – well it all depends ...
where?
how extensive?
how deep?
caused by dining chairs around a table or because something heavy has been dragged across the floor?

Hi, I would say that you should at least get five years between recoating, as for the scratches, they should come under fair wear and tear. I would tell the owner to go and take a jump.
Just my thoughts.

Two things.

If the floors are finished in lacquer its the wrong type of finish to use on a floor ( absolutely useless) its more than likely an enamel/polyurethane/estapol finish. So if you can get it in writing from the owner what the finish actually is and its lacquer he hasn't a leg to stand on.

If the wood has faded again the finish would normally be clear so if fading has taken place its the actual colour of the wood that has faded or the stain used under the clear that has faded.

If its a stain varnish again poor choise for a floor exposed to sunlight.If its the wrong one then it is going to fade. so find out what was applied to the surface. I don't thing any manufacturer produces a fade free finish for timber, the dyes etc used tend to be colours that fade.

As mentioned by Ian unless the lease states you were to keep the sun off the timber then its the owners problem and if thats the case he should have supplied curtains.

If the scratches are from normal use sliding chairs or walking on and not dragging heavy metal objects that have put in deep scratches I would also consider it normal wear and tear.

Looks like a try on for the bond.

this was in a sunroom area with no blinds on the window

Obviously that goes in your favour.

If it is a soft timber well of couse it is gunna damage more easily.

As long as you didnt have pets (dog comes to mind) or a destructive child I recon u have a fair case. Seen what someones darling mutt did to the floors on a mates rental.

Should a rented apartment be treated/finished with a higher grade polish given it would more hen likely have more users then a normal residental place.

You would think so, however its not uncommon for landlords to skimp on using good materials and do a rushed job on things. Remember an unrented dwelling is a costly one. If the apartment is owned by an individual then by the time one gets to the finishing touches fair chance the $ are getting low. A lot of the time you are helping to pay someones mortgage. I know I've been there.

Pics of couse will help.

Hi Victim,

You could try some Tung Oil on a test patch to see if it can cover the scratches. It will cover slight scratches but not the deep ones. It's not a permanent fix but it may get you across the line.

Cheers

Bryan

Off to the tribunal for a hearing. Normal scratches in a hardwood floor are wear & tear. Perhaps mention that you'll be bringing counsel and claiming costs when he loses.

(If in fact that's possible)

Not a lawyer-all advice given worth the price paid and not a penny more.

Originally Posted by gregoryq

Off to the tribunal for a hearing. Normal scratches in a hardwood floor are wear & tear. Perhaps mention that you'll be bringing counsel and claiming costs when he loses.

(If in fact that's possible)

Not a lawyer-all advice given worth the price paid and not a penny more.

When I had dealings in Melbourne, lawyers are not allowed. I had my landlayd's (used loosely, no lady she) daughter tossed out because she was a lawyer and giving advice.

Here, I have Jarrah parquetry floors. When we evicted the tenant and I moved in to organise renos, initially I used a resin chair as my office chair. The resultant scratching, largely caused by the feet moving as the legs flexed were my problem and this would not be considered normal wear and tear. The rest of the floor was dull but not in bad condition - faded, but it might have been in place for 40 years (the house is that old).

I had quotes about 3 years ago to sand and polish my timber floors and the quotes were around $20 to $25 per square metre, so the quote you have been given in my opinion is VERY over priced. A more fair price would be around $1k to $1,250.
I think that the owner is totally in the wrong and you are well within your rights to refuse to pay it and ask the tribunal for a ruling on this.
I have had over-zealous landlords do similar things to me and we won at the tribunal.
Normal wear and tear would definitely result in scratches to a timber floor and 18 months use is harly cause to get you to pay for it.
Your landlord is just a tight-####.
Fight their decision as they are trying to get away with something they certainly are not entitled to in my humble opinion.
Get advice from the Dept of Fair trading if you can.

Lynnie

I think were starting to waste our collective breath
I just checked and the OP hasn't been back since the date of the original post

Thank you all for your feedback. We are going to Tribunal on Thursday morning, and I will definitely be taking a copy of this thread as reference.

I have pictures, letters from floorboard sellers, and now this as evidence.

My flatmate, also is a legal secretary, so while we wont be able to have a lawyer with us, we certainly have been getting some good advice.

Thanks again to you all, very much appreciated.

Good luck! Don't forget to let us know the outcome.

Originally Posted by ian

I think were starting to waste our collective breath
I just checked and the OP hasn't been back since the date of the original post

Originally Posted by fubar

not an oops, check the dates

Thanks everyone again for your feedback. We negotiated with the real estate agent this morning rather then taking it to the tribunal. Origianlly they were asking for $2000, and we were able to negotiate $300. THe owner was not there at the concilation, however the real estate agent pretty much up front said that she thought he was kidding himself as well, but he was just pig headed and wanted some compensation. So I guess $300 compared to $2000 was an ok outcome. On principle, I didnt want to pay anything, but then I didnt want to risk going to tribunal and having the Member award in his favour.
Thanks again. And sorry for not replying earlier to any of your threads.