I made the mistake of replacing a previous tenant on an ongoing contract instead of forcing a new one to start, and I was punished for it. At no point was a proper inventory done, and I was therefore held liable for every stain and dent that had been done by the person I replaced. I have often moved around during my time renting; and the effort i put into cleaning, as well as minor accidental damage, has always been taken in good faith. My dealings with Frost have vastly changed my attitude for what is apparently 'normal' for an estate agent's conduct in London. Things such as water-marks on the wall by the sink, or dust stains from standing furniture on the carpets, were considered serious offences and had to be haggled down from complete repainting and other overzealous measures. Incidentally, the original paint both in the flat and in the surrounding communal spaces was terrible and would crack if it was heated and cooled too much, while also becoming a chalky streaked or smudged mess if you dared try to clean it with a dry cloth or with anything damp. This was also held against us. In the space of two years a single toilet-seat hinge came loose and eventually cracked, but was still functional, and that alone merited £60 in replacement costs. The list of petty grievances and excessive billing to repair them just went on and on. If you enjoy being patronized when it comes time to leave the property, overcharged for every single petty problem possible, and having to fight to prove that anything might deign to fall under reasonable wear and tear, there is no better estate agent around. If you do go with this estate agent then I HIGHLY suggest that you document absolutely everything possible to avoid being bullied and billed unfairly. Had I done so I might have come out of it with a reasonable experience. Edit, update & response: My responses to your various points are as follows: 1.That is very much not how I remember the original exchange. He did not remove it for being factually incorrect, he removed it due to negotiating its removal with you to solve an earlier issue not related to the moving out process. 2. I would have reviewed your service earlier but I was heavily encouraged by my flatmate to not do so as, in his words, it could have been held against us had we chosen to challenge the deductions. As he was the one who was to be receiving what was left of the deposit, and since I have no reason to trust your agency, I felt it better to wait. Sharing my experiences with your outstanding agency, and estate agents in general, subsequently fell off my radar until recently. 3. I am not contending that the flat was left in a flawless condition. I am, however, contending that: - many of the problems that did occur were unavoidable due to various poor design and material choices, - your agency refused to even use the pretence of considering two years worth of wear and tear on the flat, - your original attempts, as an agency, to deduct money from the deposit were borderline outrageous, as evidenced by the fact that many of the more unproveable claims were immediately discounted under even the minor scrutiny and resistance that we were willing to go through whilst also attempting to move house. In short: I think it's very easy to say "oh, you just left it in poor condition", but please continue to believe that if it suits you. Perhaps it is expected that my experiences outside London are simply a different renting culture. I find this explanation unlikely, considering that the new estate agent I dealt with, and the landlord I now live with, seem in kind with what I would normally expect from these types of arrangements. Kind regards.