NovAn inventory should describe the mark, not assign blame
Record existing furniture condition precisely so a later inspection can identify changes without turning observations into unsupported deposit claims.
This article reflects the named expert’s practical perspective. See NovAsia’s editorial policy for how material is prepared and reviewed.
“Table in good condition” looks neat on an inventory until someone later notices a worn corner and nobody can remember whether it was already there. A condition record is useful when it allows two people to identify the same item and compare the same feature over time. Broad praise such as “good” or “excellent” often fails at exactly that job.
A stronger entry is factual and specific. It identifies the object, the location of the mark and what can be seen. A photograph can support the description, but it should be possible to tell which object the photograph belongs to. A close-up of a scratch is weak evidence if there is no wider image or label connecting it to the correct table.
The most important discipline is to separate observation from responsibility. “Wear on the front-right corner of the tabletop” describes condition. “Tenant must pay for a replacement table” is a claim that needs a contractual and legal basis together with the circumstances. An inventory is not improved by making the second conclusion sound more confident.
I prefer condition records that stay almost boring in tone. Words such as “careless”, “terrible” or “obviously damaged by the tenant” introduce an argument before the facts have been compared. More useful language records a chip, stain, loose fitting, missing part or mechanical fault. If the cause is not known, the record should not pretend that it is.
Photographs need context as well as detail. A close image can show the mark clearly, while a wider shot shows which item and which part of the room is being documented. The date or stage of the tenancy should also be identifiable. A folder containing hundreds of unlabeled pictures is much less useful than a smaller set that can be matched to written entries.
Existing marks should remain visible in the next tenant's starting record if they still exist. Cleaning the apartment should not also “clean” the history. Otherwise an old scratch can reappear months later as if it were new. The incoming resident then starts from an unrealistically perfect baseline that nobody actually observed.
The reverse is also true. If an item has been repaired or replaced, the record should change. Carrying an old fault forward forever is just as misleading as deleting it too soon. A useful history might show that damage was noted, work was completed and the current item is now in a different condition.
Normal wear also deserves careful handling. Furniture that is used for several years will not remain visually identical. A condition record does not have to decide the legal boundary between ordinary wear and chargeable damage. It does, however, help show the pace and character of change. Without that history, gradual ageing can easily be mistaken for one new event at the end of a tenancy.
Some marks matter much more than others. A light surface scuff may have little effect on how a table works. A cracked support or unstable leg changes the practical condition of the item and may require action. The inventory does not need to calculate money on the spot, but it should make these differences recognisable rather than placing every imperfection under the same label.
This approach helps the owner manage the property as well as prepare for disputes. If every note is presented as “damage”, it becomes difficult to see which items need repair, which may require replacement soon and which are simply ageing normally. Specific descriptions create a maintenance history as well as a tenancy record.
A calm inventory does not decide a future dispute in advance. Its value is narrower and more realistic: it reduces disagreement about what was present at the beginning, what changed later and exactly which item everyone is discussing. That is a better foundation for any later conversation than a collection of flattering descriptions and unexplained photographs.