Tenant wants back money for yard work he has done.

[Steven Maduro]

I have a problem.
I will be having an upcoming conversation in the next week with a tenant.
Out of nowhere he
has requested back money from grounds keeping he has performed
since January.

Originally I was going to have a neighborhood landscaper keep the property.
The tenant stated that he would do it. He even stated he enjoys doing it. ( I should have known that feeling would not last)

I stated that he should be compensated since I would have payed the landscaper anyway.

Nothing further was said.

now 5 months later he is requesting that he be paid for these past months.

I have three issues with this
1) no discussion about frequency, quality expected, or compensation was really ever discussed.
2) I only have his word that he performed yard duties twice a month. According to the previous landscapers the property has too much shade to grow grass with any frequency and one landscaper refused to do a bi monthly service contract because he would be taking my money unnecessarily.

3) no pictures to verify work. no conversation prior to now. about compensation.
The one or two times I have seen the property
the grounds did not look completely over grown but they didnt look manicured either
which is what I expect if I am going to shell out money.

I am not an unfair person if he has been doing a workers share of work
I have no problem reimbursing him.
I would have paid a landscaper 60 per month to keep the grounds
but that landscaper would have a knowledge about what bushes needed to be there and what needed to be done away.

I need some advice about how to go into this conversation.

[Sam Craven]

Well this is a tough situation since you promised to reimburse him but you never specified.

My suggestion is to offer up exactly what you WOULD have paid if someone else was doing the work. Dont let the guy over inflate it and take you to the cleaners. You guys also need to agree on what it will be in the future.

My $.02 are the tenant should do the lawn work and not be reimbursed, but the precedent was set early.