Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!

Steam Cleaning Carpets Clause not Legal in ALBERTA Residential Tenancy Agreement?

LucilleW

0
REIN Member
Joined
May 8, 2009
Messages
7
I have an addendum to the standard RTA that includes following the condo bylaws, no pets, etc. One of the clauses is that the carpets are cleaned by a professional carpet cleaning company after vacating the premises. Human nature being what it is, new tenants really appreciate that the carpet was professionally cleaned before they moved in -- but they sure as heck grumble about it on the way out!



I thought that the clause was all I needed. If they didn't do it, I had it cleaned and deducted it from the damage deposit. However, I found this gem on this legal services site:

http://www.slsedmonton.com/userfiles/file/Landlord%20Tenant.pdf



On page 6/7, it states:




The Residential Tenancies Act says that a tenant cannot agree to waive or release any rights, benefits, or protections that the Act gives to the tenant. This means that if a tenancy agreement includes something that the Act does not allow, the tenant will not be bound by that part of the tenancy agreement. For example, a landlord cannot force a tenant to steam clean the carpets if there is no damage to the carpets beyond "reasonable wear and tear" as stated in the Residential Tenancies Act s.46(5). However, the tenancy agreement could stipulate that the landlord can exact $150.00 extra in the last month of rent. This rent can be used as the landlord sees fit and could, for example, be used to clean the carpets.



Although this was produced by STUDENT legal services, their work was overseen by a lawyer. This seems weird -- "Wear and tear" is different than "cleaning." Besides, no amount of steam cleaning is ever going to restore a carpet from "normal wear and tear."



Has anyone else gone before the Residential Tenancy Dispute Resolution Service (RTDRS) about this one? Thanks!
 
That is one lawyer's veiw. Not the court's view. The act does not allow to charge an extra $150 extra in the last month. But once again, that is someone view, not written law.



The RTDRS is currently throwing out most carpet cleaning, late charges for rent, NSF charges for bounced cheques and numerous other items. But if you go to Court of Queen's bench, most of the charges are accepted. GO figure in the wild west.



We have been charging carpet cleaning for 25 plus years. Since it is in our lease, and most people turn over a clean unit, carpet cleaning is usually the only charge. But the bad tenants, who don't clean and then complain about the charges, are the ones that take us to court over the charges. And if they have pets, the courts will alwasy allow carpet cleaning (Except RTDRS)



We only go to court over move out charges in 1 out of every 100 -200 cases. So if you lose 1 case, it does not break you.
 
[quote user=brentdavies]NSF charges for bounced cheques and numerous other items



Really? A NSF charge seems pretty reasonable to me, since you're recouping an actual fee charged by the bank to deal with a NSF cheque. I guess what's reasonable isn't always the actual rule... Silly, in my opinion.
 
Brent: I appreciate you taking the time to write such a prompt and thorough reply. I appreciate the advice from such a seasoned property manager. (As the saying goes, I've never met Brent, but I am familiar with his work!)



Once my tenant had pulled out her copy of the signed lease (didn't trust the one I had scanned and emailed to her), she backed right down. So, no visit to the Calgary RTDRS to see if they are judging the same as the Edmonton RTDRS.



Thanks again!
 
This will depend on account but often the tenant who gave the NSF charge will be hit with a higher bank fee (ie $40 etc..) but the account where it was deposited will have minimal or no fee (ie $7)



So a tenant advocate perspective - that a lot of adjudicator's seem to have - no reason for landlord to charge an NSF fee.



It might be different in Alberta, but if memory serves (it might not) the last time I looked into it in Ontario LTB would allow $20 fee + cost.



[quote user=bizaro86][quote user=brentdavies]NSF charges for bounced cheques and numerous other items



Really? A NSF charge seems pretty reasonable to me, since you're recouping an actual fee charged by the bank to deal with a NSF cheque. I guess what's reasonable isn't always the actual rule... Silly, in my opinion.
 
[quote user=housingrental]It might be different in Alberta, but if memory serves (it might not) the last time I looked into it in Ontario LTB would allow $20 fee + cost.





Which seems quite reasonable to me. It's not like I'd charge someone a $200 fee for an NSF cheque. The amount is nominal and specified in the lease. I couldn't find anything in the Residential Tenancy Act of Alberta that prohibits this practice, so as far as I know it is allowed. If anyone has other information I'd be interested in hearing it. Seems like a potential case of the RTDS overstepping to me.



Regards,



Michael
 
Back
Top Bottom