Evidence and documents
How to dispute redecoration and painting charges
Redecoration deductions must reflect actual damage — not normal scuffs from living in the property. Challenge full-flat repainting for one marked wall, filler charges for picture holes, and claims with no check-in colour/condition baseline.
Challenge deposit deductions for repainting, filler, scuff marks and touch-up work — when landlords charge for a full redecoration instead of fair, evidence-backed repair.
Redecoration claims often arrive as a single line — "full repaint required, £400" — with no photos of which walls, no check-in paint condition, and no explanation of why touch-up will not do. Minor scuffs, picture holes filled with filler, and faded paint after a long tenancy are frequently confused with tenant damage requiring a whole flat refresh.
Redecoration vs fair wear and tear
Paint naturally dulls where people walk, furniture sits, and light hits walls over years. That is usually fair wear and tear. Redecoration charges bite when there is localised, avoidable damage — large unauthorised marks, severe staining, or holes beyond normal picture fixing — and the landlord can prove it with dated comparison.
- Light scuffs along corridors after a 3-year tenancy — often wear
- Single wall with heavy marking or graffiti — may justify localised work
- Picture holes (small) — often normal; charge for excessive holes without check-in comparison is weak
- Full flat repaint when one room was affected — proportionality issue
- Repaint to "as new" when check-in was already marked or dated
Betterment: you do not fund an upgrade
Landlords cannot use your deposit to refresh a tired property. If check-in photos show chipped, yellowing paint and they claim £500 for "professional redecoration to current standard," argue betterment — you are only responsible for making good damage you caused, not upgrading the entire decoration.
Evidence for painting disputes
- 1Check-in wall condition
Inventory descriptions and move-in photos of the same walls they now claim need full repaint.
- 2Move-out wide shots
Show overall condition — not just close-ups the landlord selected.
- 3Close-ups of disputed marks only
Demonstrate scale — a 2cm scuff vs "heavy marking throughout."
- 4Quotes for localised touch-up
Optional but powerful if their invoice implies whole-property work.
Picture holes, blu-tack and filler charges
Small picture holes are routine in rented homes. A charge for "filling and sanding all walls" without photos is weak. If you left excessive damage — dozens of large holes, shelves ripped out — they need itemised labour and materials linked to those spots.
- Ask which walls and how many defects
- Request photos taken at check-out (not months later)
- Compare to check-in — were holes or marks already noted?
- Dispute filler charges where touch-up paint would suffice
Writing your redecoration response
Common questions
The contract says leave walls as at check-in — what does that mean?
Usually return in similar decorative condition allowing for fair wear. It does not mean professionally repainted if check-in was not freshly painted.
They charged for smoke or candle staining
If staining is genuine and beyond wear, localised cleaning or repaint may be fair — but they need photos and itemised cost, not a blanket full-flat charge.
Can I dispute if I agree one wall needs touch-up?
Yes. Accept a fair localised figure and dispute the rest. Partial offers often read as more credible to adjudicators.
How is this different from general damage charges?
Redecoration is specifically paint, filler and cosmetic wall work. Structural damage or broken fittings fall under damage or repair disputes — see our damage charges guide for those lines.
Ready to build your dispute pack?
Answer a few questions, upload evidence, and generate a structured response for £29 before you send it.