A deposit dispute in England is won or lost on the documents, not the argument. Adjudication through the three schemes is paper-based: an independent adjudicator reads the file, with no hearing and no property visit, and decides on the balance of probabilities. The burden of proof sits on the landlord. If the evidence is weak, the adjudicator finds for the tenant, even when the damage was real.
The three schemes run across England and Wales, but the tenancy law here is the English position, and none of this is a substitute for advice on a dispute you are already in.
The deposit is the tenant’s money for the whole of the tenancy. It is held in trust through one of three government-approved schemes: the Tenancy Deposit Scheme (TDS), the Deposit Protection Service (DPS), or mydeposits. At the end of the tenancy the landlord does not simply take what they think they are owed. They propose deductions, the tenant agrees or disagrees, and if the two sides cannot settle, the disputed amount goes to the scheme’s free adjudication service.
That is the moment the nature of the dispute reveals itself. It is not a dispute about what happened. It is a dispute about what can be proved.
How does adjudication actually work?
Adjudication is paper-based. An independent adjudicator reviews the documents each side submits and reaches a decision. There is no hearing. Nobody visits the property. The adjudicator never meets the landlord or the tenant and never sees the carpet, the wall or the worktop in question. They see photographs, reports and correspondence, and nothing else.
The standard of proof is the balance of probabilities. That means the adjudicator decides which version is more likely than not, based on what is in front of them. They are not looking for certainty. They are weighing one set of evidence against another.
GOV.UK sets out the basic route: if you cannot agree on deductions, the scheme’s dispute resolution service can decide for you, and using it is free. The schemes describe the same process. mydeposits, in its own guidance on evidence for disputes, is blunt about what this means in practice: the case is decided on the evidence supplied, so the quality of that evidence is what matters.
Who has to prove what?
The burden of proof sits with the landlord. Because the deposit is the tenant’s money throughout the tenancy, the landlord is the party seeking to keep some of it, and the landlord must justify every deduction. The tenant does not have to prove the property was returned in perfect order. The landlord has to prove it was not, and that the change goes beyond fair wear and tear.
Fair wear and tear is the gradual, reasonable deterioration that comes from ordinary living. A worn patch on a stair carpet after three years of daily use is wear and tear. A cigarette burn in that same carpet is damage. The adjudicator has to be shown, with evidence, that the second thing happened and was not there at the start.
This is the point that catches landlords out. If the evidence is absent or weak, the adjudicator finds for the tenant. Not because they doubt the landlord is honest. Because the landlord has not discharged the burden. A real burn, a real stain, a real broken cupboard door can all go uncompensated if there is nothing to prove the condition changed during the tenancy.
Why the check-in inventory does the heavy lifting
The single most important document is the signed check-in inventory. An inventory is a written and photographic record of the property’s contents and condition at the start of the tenancy. The check-in is the version agreed at move-in. Together they fix the baseline.
Without that baseline, the landlord has no way to prove change. If there is no record of the carpet being clean and unmarked on day one, a burn at check-out proves nothing on its own. The tenant can simply say it was already there, and the adjudicator has no document to say otherwise. The claim fails.
Nothing in English law requires a landlord to produce a professional inventory. It is not a statutory duty. It is good practice, and it happens to be the practice that decides outcomes. The NRLA, reviewing adjudication patterns, has long made the same point: an inventory is what gives a deposit claim a foundation to stand on. That is a practical reality of how cases are weighed, not a legal requirement to do it.
Specific, dated, matched
A check-in inventory on its own is half the story. The other half is the check-out report: a dated record of the property’s condition at the end of the tenancy, ideally cross-referenced item by item against the check-in. The strength of a claim comes from the comparison between the two.
The evidence that wins is specific, dated, and matched. A photograph of the clean worktop at check-in, a photograph of the burn at check-out, both dated, both clearly the same worktop. That lets an adjudicator see the change with their own eyes and date it to the tenancy.
The evidence that fails is assertion. Statements like “the flat was spotless when they moved in” or “this damage was definitely caused by the tenant” carry almost no weight, because they are claims, not proof. Memory is not evidence. Opinion is not evidence. An undated photo proves the condition existed at some point but not when, which is exactly the question in dispute.
Evidence that tends to win
Evidence that tends to fail
Signed and dated check-in inventory with supporting photos
No inventory, or an unsigned inventory
Dated check-out report cross-referenced against the check-in
Check-out report with no baseline for comparison
Matched before-and-after photos showing the same item or area
Undated photos, or photos showing only the end condition
Invoices and quotes for actual remedial work
Round-figure deduction with no supporting costing
Contemporaneous notes and correspondence
Statements such as “I remember it being fine” or “they must have done it”
Reasoned allowance for the item’s age, condition and use
Unsupported opinion that the tenant caused the damage
The pattern is consistent. Documents that were created at the time, that are dated, and that can be matched to each other, beat anything reconstructed afterwards from memory or belief.
Why most landlords lose once they get there
Because by the time a case reaches formal adjudication, the easy wins have already settled. According to the TDS Statistical Briefing 2024/25, reported by the NRLA, around 1% of protected deposits reached formal adjudication in the twelve months to March 2025: 46,950 cases out of 4.7 million deposits protected across England and Wales. The vast majority are agreed between the parties. The ones that go all the way to a decision are, very often, the ones where the landlord’s evidence was thin enough that the tenant felt safe disputing it.
A strong file rarely gets that far. When a landlord can produce a signed inventory, a matched check-out and dated photos, most tenants accept the reasonable deductions, because the evidence speaks for itself. It is the missing inventory, the undated photos and the asserted damage that end up in front of an adjudicator, and those are the cases that lose.
Deductions also have to account for age and use. An adjudicator will not award the cost of a brand-new carpet for damage to one that was already seven years old. They apportion.
After the decision, there is almost nowhere to go
The adjudicator’s decision is binding, and there is no appeal within the scheme. You cannot ask for a second opinion or a rehearing because you disagree. The only route beyond it is the small claims court, which is a separate process with its own cost and risk, and which would look at the same kind of evidence. For nearly everyone, the scheme decision is the end of the matter.
That finality is exactly why the work has to be done at the start and at the end of the tenancy, not after a dispute begins. By the time you are submitting to adjudication, you can only send what already exists. You cannot go back and photograph the clean carpet from move-in day.
What to take from this
The deposit follows the proof, not the story. Whether you are a landlord or a tenant, the lesson is the same: the documents created at check-in and check-out decide the outcome, so treat them as the evidence they will one day become. For landlords, that means a signed inventory, a matched check-out, and dated photos kept from day one. For tenants, it means checking the inventory carefully at the start, noting anything wrong, and keeping your own dated photos when you leave.
The wider tenancy reforms in England make this discipline matter more, not less. Under the Renters’ Rights Act 2025, in force from 1 May 2026, fixed-term assured shorthold tenancies have been abolished and all assured tenancies are now periodic, rolling from month to month with no fixed end date. As tenancies turn over in less predictable ways, a clean baseline at the start and a clear record at the end become harder to improvise after the fact. The scheme process itself is unchanged: it still decides on the paper. If you are facing a live dispute, the deposit scheme’s own guidance and a qualified adviser are the right places to turn for your specific situation.
Sources:
- Tenancy deposit protection: Disputes and problems (GOV.UK): gov.uk/tenancy-deposit-protection/…
- Evidence for Deposit Disputes (mydeposits): mydeposits.co.uk/content-hub/…
- How to dispute unfair deductions (Shelter England): england.shelter.org.uk/housing_advice/…
- Does an inventory really make a difference to deposit claims? (NRLA): nrla.org.uk/news/…
