Mould caused by Tenant's Leaky Taps

Mr_Matey

As a tenant I wouldn't want to pay for damp caused by your leaky taps.

Sounds to me like you should've done better repairs. I would have reported the problem earlier, but regardless of when it's reported it's your problem.

You and your insurance should pay the lot, and next time get the repairs done correctly.

pucci

.You sound like a cowboy landlord to me and as I said I am a landlord .[/quote]

Old Git,
Firstly, there's no need to jump to conclusions here. Totally unfounded - I must add.

I am a new landlord and I am still on a steep learning curve. Hence, this forum is ideal in gaining information from other landlords.
Whilst I welcome advice I didn't expect to be insulted personally.
Until I posted this thread it did not occur to me or indeed realise that this sort of problem could be claimed through the building insurance. Despite paying over 20 years for building insurance (not on the rented house of course; before I get another barrage of insults) I mean on my the house that I live, I have never ever claimed on the building insurance. Hence, when things go wrong, I don't think instantly - claim on insurance.


Secondly, no, my tenants are not moving out in January, again you have jumped to the wrong conclusion.

These are different set of tenants.

pucci

Mr_Matey wrote: »

As a tenant I wouldn't want to pay for damp caused by your leaky taps.

Sounds to me like you should've done better repairs. I would have reported the problem earlier, but regardless of when it's reported it's your problem.

You and your insurance should pay the lot, and next time get the repairs done correctly.

When you give "advice" it would help greatly if you read the post properly. This was not a REPAIR/MAINTENANCE job.

I rented the house out with SINGLE taps in the bathroom. The tenant wanted MIXER taps. Therefore, I agreed that they could change it but at their own expense.

In hindsight, I have learnt that I will source the workman and tenant can pay for the work should they wish to improve/upgrade the furnishings.
Obviously, in this instance the plumber they had in was a cowboy.

pucci

simpywimpy wrote: »

Ive had a similar problem with a long existing leak. I claimed on my insurance. I agree that the tenant should have made you aware, and for that point they could be charged the excess but not the full amount, and certainly not for any damp problems at the other end of the property.

Thank you Simpywimpy.
You have given advice without getting personal.:T

pucci

It's quite clear that you haven't got a clue what you're talking about. I suggest you get an expert in to assess - perhaps your insurance company when you've opened the claim :rolleyes: before you start trying to lay incredulous claims like that on your tenants! :eek:

If you don't know what rising damp is then you really don't have any right to start assuming it's caused by the bathroom. The ground underneath your house contains moisture. You won't have water from the bathroom creeping to the opposite side of the house without leaving a mighty trail and it won't travel through concrete foundations either. There is water in the ground under your house and there is water coming down from the sky, as well as out of the taps. The front of the house is your own maintenance issue.

Building Insurance is there for a reason. It's unfair for your tenants to be faced with quite a shocking bill if joists need replacing around the bathroom just because you don't want your premiums to go up. They may not have taken responsibility for what has ensued, but neither did you when the taps were first installed.

Let them pay the excess and you learn the lesson. I wouldn't let a tenant organise plumbing in my own home so I don't expect them to do it in a house I rarely see the inside of either. Maintenance of my properties is my responsibility.[/quote]

Doozergirl , regarding, the damp to front of the house, and damp in the bathroom, my intention is to seek professional advice and find out the source of damp and eliminate it. I am not not laying incredulous claims on my tenants as you put it. I was thinking that this may have been caused by the bathroom problem. Naturally, before I "lay any claim" on anyone, professionals would be called in to ascertain source of damp, assess the damage and rectify the problems.

I am merely throwing questions and see what other people would do if they're faced with a similar situation as this and help point me in the right direction.
Doozer girl, if I had a clue then I would not have posted this thread in the first place. No point in raising a thread if I had all the answers.
Beauty of using a forums surely.

Lastly, maintenance of my properties are my responsibility too.

As I mentioned before, any "improvements" tenants may wish to carry out in future, I will find the work people. Or maybe better still, refuse them any request to alter the house in any shape or form!

Mr_Matey

pucci wrote: »

When you give "advice" it would help greatly if you read the post properly. This was not a REPAIR/MAINTENANCE job.

I rented the house out with SINGLE taps in the bathroom. The tenant wanted MIXER taps. Therefore, I agreed that they could change it but at their own expense.

In hindsight, I have learnt that I will source the workman and tenant can pay for the work should they wish to improve/upgrade the furnishings.
Obviously, in this instance the plumber they had in was a cowboy.

Oh right. I've misunderstood your post.

Did the tenant know about the leak or was it only uncovered when you investigated the mould?

Also how do you know the plumber did a bad job and the leak didn't occur later?

Peter_Simon

Cliam on the insurance and agree with the tenant for them to pay the excess. The faulty installation of the bathroom taps is unfortunate, but you have insurance for this reason.

mrcow

pucci wrote: »

Thanks guys for this info. My concern is that if I calim through buildings insurance my premiums would increase the following year.

That's some seriously warped logic you have there!

If there is damp and damage in your house caused by months of leaking then you need to get the entire area dried out and repaired and redecorated before any further damage is done. This could cost thousands.

And you're worried about your insurance premiums?

POSSETTE

i get amazed at people who have insurance but dont claim on it when its legit because of premium rises!!! my dad is just as bad..why bother paying it at all if you are not going to make a claim in the 1000s??..it will be that much too,we had a washing machine leak,it involved new tiles on floor,new wooden floor under them,and new joist under that!!..1000s and 3 days of hassle! think insurance went up £34..so maybe i shouldnt have claimed???

Airwolf1

If this claim was in our area, and we were on your insurer's panel of surveyors, from what you have said, I can't see that it would be a valid claim. The photos would show the insurance company that the leak has been there some considerable time and this would probably get rejected. The damage now is far worse than it would have been.

I'm only posting this, based on what you have said. Sorry if it isn't what you may want to hear.