Daniel Evans

As you state Rowley you are experienced and have the benefit of wisdom, so many of the ingredients required for ‘neutral facilitation’ have already been learnt through experience over the course of many years acting as an ‘independent inventory clerk’

The issue at this stage with the industry as a whole across the private rented sector is that a significant proportion, potentially between 30-50% , of inventories are currently produced by agents or landlords who cannot be described in the same term. A further large portion is produced by inexperienced clerks with insufficient understanding of the dynamics of all stakeholders and the need to remain impartial in their decision making.

Having recently read all the applications for Inventory Clerk of the Year as an example, almost all situations described ethical dilemmas where agents or landlords had pressured clerks into amending reports to reflect their requirements, how many others have had this happen? And how many out there if they ask themselves honestly have bent to this pressure and amended reports which they initially produced in less biased terms in order to keep either a landlord, or more likely a large agent client who provides them with a volume of work happy?

That last question in reality is the real one of interest because the real ‘white elephant’ in the room isn’t considering this from the perspective of a single transactional nature but rather the more critical business-to-business relationships we rely on to keep ourselves and our staff employed

Going back to the comparison with Surveyors, do we believe they are placed under the same pressures when completing surveys or valuations? The Charters and standards they work against, included documents like the RICS Conflict of Interest code provide much more robust protection for consumers against that kind of behaviour and it is only with an ‘improved framework’ of whatever description we eventually choose collectively that we can be seen unilaterally in the same regard potentially and remove the ‘perception of bias’

Please note again that whilst I’m playing devils advocate in this argument to allow ongoing discussion I’m not strongly in favour for the suggested model at this time and agree there are potential half way measures but it is interesting to discuss the potential options

Taking on board both sets of comments, whilst in many respects I’m fully in agreement with your views especially in relation to the current framework under which we work the reason for wanting to discuss the point is to see whether in terms of working towards a statutory instrument in line with ‘mandatory independent inventories’ addressing the perception of bias may be a requirement of achieving this goal.

As a side issue and one that is raised frequently, the need to deal with ‘conflicts of interest’ more clearly may be an additional benefit of in the long run looking at adapting a more representative system and the methodologies we use to produce reporting.

I would disagree with the statement Rowley made about ‘if it ain’t broke don’t fix it’ because my opinion as both a tenant and an inventory company owner is the current system isn’t truly fit for purpose, especially when dealing with consumers without sufficient knowledge (tenants) to understand fully the requirements of the process. Inventories are frequently in a modern market produced in absence of the tenant being present and only a small window of time is provided to them at check in, if any time at all to discuss with those producing the report its content. Subsequent to which they are expected to move into the property and review a report days later with their possessions more often than not already in situ, this means amendments are frequently submitted only regarding maintenance items without due consideration and understanding over the specific implications of accepting a written report which may or may not be an accurate reflection of the property’s condition

Having spent a lot of time recently reviewing the regulatory framework around Chartered Surveyors and considering the ideas of ‘independent’ representation or secondarily a requirement for a clear disclosure of interests I think there is room for improvement in the way we work and my outline is just an initial brief designed to facilitate further discussion on how best to achieve this.

I’m in full agreement with the points made about reporting and service standard improvements to be made as an initial steps but what comes after to achieve a more regulated, statutory or mandated role for inventory professionals is still up for debate in my humble opinion!

As part of our initiative to share success stories and build a repository of case studies for our upcoming CPD programme, I’d like to share an experience from my own professional journey. I hope this story will encourage you to contribute your experiences and foster valuable discussions within our community.

The Situation

A few months ago, we were commissioned to conduct a check-out inspection for a property at the end of a tenancy. The landlord had concerns about potential damages beyond normal wear and tear, while the tenant was confident they were leaving the property in good condition.

Upon completing the inspection, we noted several issues:

Carpet Stains: Significant staining in the living room that was not present at the start of the tenancy.

Garden Neglect: The garden was overgrown, contrary to the condition documented in the check-in report.

Missing Items: A set of kitchen utensils listed in the inventory was absent.

Both parties were adamant in their positions. The landlord wanted to deduct substantial amounts from the tenant’s deposit, while the tenant disputed the claims, insisting that some issues were pre-existing or due to normal usage.

My Approach

1. Thorough Documentation

We ensured that the check-out report was detailed, including:

Photographic Evidence: High-quality photos of all areas of concern.

Comparative Analysis: Side-by-side written comparisons with reference to the check-in report photos.

Objective Language: Descriptions focused on facts without subjective opinions.

2. Open Communication

With the Tenant: We explained the findings calmly, allowing the tenant to voice their perspective. They mentioned that the carpet stains were due to a leak from a radiator, which they claimed to have reported.

With the Landlord: We presented the report and relayed the tenant’s comments, emphasising the importance of considering all information.

3. Investigating Further

Maintenance Records: It was suggested checking the maintenance request records to verify if the tenant had reported the leak.

Utility of Neutrality: Remained impartial, facilitating communication rather than taking sides.

4. Facilitating a Resolution

Encouraged Open Communication: Organised a meeting between both parties to discuss the findings, encouraging open dialogue.

Exploring Solutions: Proposed practical solutions, such as sharing repair costs if mutual responsibility was established.

Resolution Achieved

After reviewing maintenance records, it was confirmed that the tenant had reported the radiator leak, but the repair was delayed due to scheduling issues with the landlord’s preferred contractor. This contributed to the carpet damage.

Agreed Outcomes:

Carpet Replacement: The landlord agreed to cover the cost of replacing the carpet, acknowledging the delayed repair.

Garden Maintenance: The tenant accepted responsibility for the garden’s condition and agreed to fund a professional gardener to restore it.

Missing Items: It was discovered that the kitchen utensils were mistakenly packed during the move. The tenant promptly returned them.

Both parties expressed satisfaction with the resolution. The landlord appreciated the fair assessment, and the tenant felt their concerns were heard and addressed appropriately.

Lessons Learned

Obstacles Encountered:

Initial Tension: Both parties were defensive, which made initial communications challenging.

Information Gaps: Lack of immediate access to maintenance records hindered quick resolution. We had not undertaken the mid-term inspections so weren’t party to this information

Overcoming Challenges:

Maintaining Calm: By staying composed and professional, we were able to de-escalate tensions.

Encouraging Transparency: Prompted both parties to share all relevant information, which was crucial for a fair outcome.

Key Takeaways

Impartiality is Crucial: Acting as a neutral facilitator helps build trust with both parties.

Effective Communication: Clear, empathetic communication can bridge gaps and resolve misunderstandings.

Comprehensive Reporting: Detailed documentation provides a solid foundation for resolving disputes.

Understanding Tenant Rights: Being aware of tenants’ rights and landlords’ obligations ensures that resolutions are fair and legally sound.

Advice to Peers

Stay Neutral: Always approach disputes without bias. Our role is to present facts objectively.

Encourage Open Dialogue: Facilitate conversations between landlords and tenants when appropriate.

Be Informed: Keep up-to-date with relevant laws and regulations that impact landlord and tenant responsibilities.

Document Everything: Detailed reports and records can prevent disputes or aid in resolving them efficiently.

Develop Mediation Skills: Enhancing your ability to mediate can significantly improve outcomes in contentious situations.

I hope this story resonates with you and provides insights that you can apply in your own practice. I encourage you all to share your experiences, as each story contributes to our collective expertise and the strength of our community.

Looking forward to reading your success stories!

In recent weeks as you will know from personal experience and from the many bulk emails distributed to members which you will have also received, I’ve sought to specifically engage with the membership on a wholesale and individual basis, this does not need to be mutually exclusive from efforts to raise our industry profile which can be done consecutively.

Every single respondent to the post you have highlighted was contacted personally to discuss the matter and I’ve received replies from the majority so that I can as you suggest deal with matters on the ‘home front’ as a priority.

However, many of the responses to the recent questionnaire have indicated that members want our profile raised and it is important to open lines of communication with both internal and external stakeholders of the Association to the benefit of our members and inventory providers across the country which will hopefully result in a greater industry position and a larger body of members going forward.

Doing so will also hopefully encourage more people to become involved at the top end of the organisation which will also strengthen us together.

Hi Karen

This is just one aspect of the intended plan to raise our profile in the industry of inventory clerks I’ve also been working on a number of other initiatives as below:

1. Setting up collaborative partnerships with dispute bodies and ombudsman
2. Working with landlord and tenant groups on education
3. Contacting large corporate agents to discuss how we make the AIIC the benchmark and gold standard for certification
4. External newsletters to subscribers across the industry
5. Effective social media (copy of draft strategy attached)
6. Create partnerships with software providers to try and influence them away from promotion of internal inventory provision

I’m welcome to any other ideas people have which may increase our profile or help deliver on the vision recently sent out in my emails

KR Daniel, Chairperson