Landlord reviews for
Stuart Knowles in St Helens
Average Landlord Rating: 1
★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Number of times reviewed: 1
Reviews aren't verified by Marks Out Of Tenancy but we check for and remove fake reviews and content when we’re informed.
Stuart Knowles, St Helens
Reviewed 25 August 2017
★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Throughout our tenancy, the owner of the property Stuart Knowles of 12 Windle Grove, St Helens, Merseyside, WA10 6HW, and his wife Julie, were great, until one day, with no prior warning, they decided to serve a section 21 giving us 2 months to vacate the property as they wished to sell it. We advised that we needed longer in order to find alternative accommodation as we would be on holiday for a month, and it was over the Christmas period. Stuart would not allow this, however, after I spoke with Kelrick Properties, he allowed us the time we needed for our house purchase to go through and we vacated the property.
Prior to our vacation, Stuart had arranged for the property to be redecorated ready for sale, and had arranged new carpets to be fitted to the property to prepare it for sale. He arranged this without first seeing the property.
During our 3 years at the property we took exceptional care of it, and arranged a professional deep clean when we vacated, to ensure everything was spotless. There was general wear and tear marks to the wall, however any nail holes from pictures were filled prior to our vacation, and as we knew that Stuart intended to redecorate after we vacated the property, we saw no reason to redecorate ourselves.
The carpets where very cheap new build carpets when we rented the property, and had been poorly fitted causing fraying around the kitchen area, and where the carpet had been jointed in the middle of the lounge, which was wear and tear to the carpet. We had the carpet thouroughly hoovered, but saw no reason to hire a carpet cleaner, as the carpet was going to be replaced anyway, and with the fraying of the carpet, it would need to be done in order to prepare the property for sale.
During our checkout, the agent commented that the property was very clean, and advised there would be no reason why we would not receive our deposit back.
To my shock, after having to chase Kelrick Properties numerous times about the return of my deposit, I was told that the landlord intended to keep all £2400 of my deposit for redecoration and replacement of carpets (something he planned to do prior to our vacation).
They advised the carpet needed to be replaced due to a smell of pet urine, and made no mention of that it would have needed to be replaced anyway due to the fraying of the carpet. The landlord chose to replace the carpet with a much higher quality carpet than was fitted when we rented the property, and expected us to pay for this work.
Upon speaking to the managing director of Kelrick Properties, Richard Lee, he confirmed that during the checkout process, there was no smell of pet urine, and the cleaners that work for the letting agents confirmed that there was no smell of pet urine in the property. He advised that this would be in the report they submitted to the TDS, however when they submitted it, they wrote it as if they where writing it, yet told me it was written by the landlord, and they where just submitting it.
I find it shocking that a landlord can lie, in order to scam get a tenant to pay for improvements to the property and am currently having to go through the TDS to fight for the return of my deposit.
Read Full Review ⇒
Prior to our vacation, Stuart had arranged for the property to be redecorated ready for sale, and had arranged new carpets to be fitted to the property to prepare it for sale. He arranged this without first seeing the property.
During our 3 years at the property we took exceptional care of it, and arranged a professional deep clean when we vacated, to ensure everything was spotless. There was general wear and tear marks to the wall, however any nail holes from pictures were filled prior to our vacation, and as we knew that Stuart intended to redecorate after we vacated the property, we saw no reason to redecorate ourselves.
The carpets where very cheap new build carpets when we rented the property, and had been poorly fitted causing fraying around the kitchen area, and where the carpet had been jointed in the middle of the lounge, which was wear and tear to the carpet. We had the carpet thouroughly hoovered, but saw no reason to hire a carpet cleaner, as the carpet was going to be replaced anyway, and with the fraying of the carpet, it would need to be done in order to prepare the property for sale.
During our checkout, the agent commented that the property was very clean, and advised there would be no reason why we would not receive our deposit back.
To my shock, after having to chase Kelrick Properties numerous times about the return of my deposit, I was told that the landlord intended to keep all £2400 of my deposit for redecoration and replacement of carpets (something he planned to do prior to our vacation).
They advised the carpet needed to be replaced due to a smell of pet urine, and made no mention of that it would have needed to be replaced anyway due to the fraying of the carpet. The landlord chose to replace the carpet with a much higher quality carpet than was fitted when we rented the property, and expected us to pay for this work.
Upon speaking to the managing director of Kelrick Properties, Richard Lee, he confirmed that during the checkout process, there was no smell of pet urine, and the cleaners that work for the letting agents confirmed that there was no smell of pet urine in the property. He advised that this would be in the report they submitted to the TDS, however when they submitted it, they wrote it as if they where writing it, yet told me it was written by the landlord, and they where just submitting it.
I find it shocking that a landlord can lie, in order to scam get a tenant to pay for improvements to the property and am currently having to go through the TDS to fight for the return of my deposit.
