Electrocuted, by landlords washing machine

tbs624

stevetodd wrote: »

From the same source as above:

Due Diligence
In the event of a tenant complaint or an incident the defence of "due diligence" may be accepted where it can be shown that the landlord or agent took all reasonable steps to avoid committing an offence - you will need documentary evidence of this.
A private owner letting a single dwelling (not in the course of business) may have a defence, whereas an agent acting on his behalf will not. However, an agent merely introducing a tenant and not becoming involved in the inventory or management of the tenancy my well be exempt from liability.

Thanks for that further clarification Steve - am aware of "due diligence" & had already mentioned it in a previous post in the thread but your point will be useful to others too.

tbs624 wrote: »

........ LLs/LAs have to ensure that all electrical systems and appliances are supplied and maintained in safe working order - they owe their tenants a "duty of care".

Professional LLs/LAs will usually check at each changeover of tenant that all is in order, and in any event they should be able to demonstrate due diligence by keeping records of when checks were made..........

What is interesting is that the case I quoted with the Oxford LA was IIRC amongst the first cases where it was the LA that was held to be responsible: hence my comments to Bernadette about getting help from a qualified source who has *all* the facts of her specific case to hand.

Tozer

bernadette2105 wrote: »

No electrical testing was carried out on equipment and appliances of which the LL was charging for. The appliances were unsafe at start of first tenancy, this cannot be contested as incident happened within two days of start of tenancy. The LL took no reasonable steps to check any of the equipment as this has not been logged. The LL has a duty of care to tenant

OK, so what is the remedy in this case?

bernadette2105

Legislation means that Landlords and Letting Agents have a legal obligation and a duty of care to tenants to ensure that the electrical installation and the electrical equipment supplied is safe.
What does the legislation mean?
The electrical installation and equipment and appliances in a property have to be:
-Certified safe when a tenancy begins
-Maintained in a safe condition throughout the tenancy
-Maintained only by ‘competent persons’
-Fit for purpose and free of defect
What should a landlord do?
Landlords should remove the risk of danger to the tenants and their property by:
As a minimum, have an annual electrical safety inspection (i.e. the Enhanced Electrical inspection or”E2”), which includes the electrical equipment.
Ensure any installation or maintenance works are done by Part P ‘competent persons’.

RabbitMad

bernadette2105 wrote: »

So a LL can just rent out unsafe equipment get paid for it and take no responsibillity for harm caused by faulty goods?

I am sure under law of contracts, law of tort, and European law he has a duty of care to his tenants.

But the LL didn't knowingly rent out unsafe equipment. I think (and most of the other posters agree) that the LL has done enough to satisfy his duty of care.

As an earlier poster said "Sh t happens!"

stevetodd

bernadette2105 wrote: »

Legislation means that Landlords and Letting Agents have a legal obligation and a duty of care to tenants to ensure that the electrical installation and the electrical equipment supplied is safe.
What does the legislation mean?
The electrical installation and equipment and appliances in a property have to be:
-Certified safe when a tenancy begins
-Maintained in a safe condition throughout the tenancy
-Maintained only by ‘competent persons’
-Fit for purpose and free of defect
What should a landlord do?
Landlords should remove the risk of danger to the tenants and their property by:
As a minimum, have an annual electrical safety inspection (i.e. the Enhanced Electrical inspection or”E2”), which includes the electrical equipment.
Ensure any installation or maintenance works are done by Part P ‘competent persons’.

We have done all this, there are no exact regulations, only opinions as to what satisfies a general statement concerning electrical safety

tbs624

My view is that a property that has stood empty for a while, with its appliances unused, should not simply be "assumed" to be safe or unsafe - it is reasonable to expect that the LL/LA should have had things properly checked immediately prior to the tenancy and unless they can show that they did, then they may well be stuffed on this one.

bernadette2105

The Consumer Protection Act 1987 applies if a landlord supplies electrical equipment in let accommodation. The property and equipment should be checked before it is offered for rent.
The Consumer Protection Act 1987 applies if a landlord supplies electrical equipment in let accommodation. The property should be checked before it is offered for rent.
The Consumer Protection Act affects all persons who let property in the course of their business because it defines them as suppliers as they supply goods to the tenant. There are several items of secondary legislation under the umbrella of the Consumer Protection Act that are directly relevant to the supply of electrical goods.
These regulations impose a duty on landlords to ensure that all electrical equipment supplied by them is safe for use by the tenant

Tozer

bernadette2105 wrote: »

The Consumer Protection Act 1987 applies if a landlord supplies electrical equipment in let accommodation. The property and equipment should be checked before it is offered for rent.
The Consumer Protection Act 1987 applies if a landlord supplies electrical equipment in let accommodation. The property should be checked before it is offered for rent.
The Consumer Protection Act affects all persons who let property in the course of their business because it defines them as suppliers as they supply goods to the tenant. There are several items of secondary legislation under the umbrella of the Consumer Protection Act that are directly relevant to the supply of electrical goods.
These regulations impose a duty on landlords to ensure that all electrical equipment supplied by them is safe for use by the tenant

I'll ask again - what remedy is sought?

Premier_2

bernadette2105 wrote: »

No electrical testing was carried out on equipment ...

Let me stop you just there.

As referred to earlier, this property as a new build would have been almost certainly inspected, tested and certified. That was 3 years ago and the next inspection would have been recommended within 5 years.

bernadette2105

stevetodd wrote: »

We have done all this, there are no exact regulations, only opinions as to what satisfies a general statement concerning electrical safety

And in this case it is obvious that a house that has been left empty for 14 months cannot be assumed to have safe appliances. Hence any 'reasonable' person would of undertaken checks.