Landlord refuses to fix washing machine

Planner

barnaby-bear wrote: »

If the LL is in Japan - the LA must be their legal representive and managing agent in the UK (under section 48) and therefore you can inform them that you intend to undertake the work and reclaim the cost and costs of recovery against them.

Section 48 merley states that a tenant has to be provided an address in the UK for the serving of notices, that address could be a PO BOX address, it doesnt make the company/letting agents/person at that address the landlords legal representative.

I have also reconsidered my position on the guarantor's agreement, being a standard one, I dont think it is. A standard agreement would be one where after 7 days (for example) of arrears, the guarantor would be notified in writing that there are arrears and given 7-14 days (for example) to cough up, or legal action will be taken through the county county. Are you 100% sure money is just automatically taken? and if so how?

If the case, then it appears you have no options left only to get the washer repaired yourself an foot the bill.

Piggles12345

Planner wrote: »

I have also reconsidered my position on the guarantor's agreement, being a standard one, I dont think it is. A standard agreement would be one where after 7 days (for example) of arrears, the guarantor would be notified in writing that there are arrears and given 7-14 days (for example) to cough up, or legal action will be taken through the county county. Are you 100% sure money is just automatically taken? and if so how?

If the case, then it appears you have no options left only to get the washer repaired yourself an foot the bill.

I'm not sure about the guarantor's agreement; I don't have a copy. I will call them this evening and ask exactly what it says about the letting agent recovering money. Even if the agreement was a standard like you have suggested, you mention that the guarantor would be given a certain amount of time to cough up the money or legal proceedings would begin- this still leaves the situation where my guarantor would be paying for my washing machine repair to avoid legal proceedings.

However, speaking completely hypothetically- if the guaranto agreement is standard, and I do deduct x amount from next month's rent for the machine repair, and the guarnator refuses to pay, and legal proceedings begin, how likely is it that my case would win and the guarantor would not have to pay up?

N79

Piggles12345 wrote: »

However, speaking completely hypothetically- if the guaranto agreement is standard, and I do deduct x amount from next month's rent for the machine repair, and the guarnator refuses to pay, and legal proceedings begin, how likely is it that my case would win and the guarantor would not have to pay up?

That will depend on whether the court feels you have acted reasonably. You will need to have followed all the steps outlined by Planner and TBS, including sending all four of the letters and giving the LL plenty of time to correct the issue before witholding rent would be considered reasonable.

Time spend in oral dialogue with the LL prior to comencing the procedure outlined by planner would probably not count as there is no proof - it would be LL's word against yours.

Planner

Piggles12345 wrote: »

I'm not sure about the guarantor's agreement; I don't have a copy. I will call them this evening and ask exactly what it says about the letting agent recovering money. Even if the agreement was a standard like you have suggested, you mention that the guarantor would be given a certain amount of time to cough up the money or legal proceedings would begin- this still leaves the situation where my guarantor would be paying for my washing machine repair to avoid legal proceedings.

However, speaking completely hypothetically- if the guaranto agreement is standard, and I do deduct x amount from next month's rent for the machine repair, and the guarnator refuses to pay, and legal proceedings begin, how likely is it that my case would win and the guarantor would not have to pay up?

If you follow the advice that has been given and the procedure for witholding rent for repairs then I would suggest you would have a pretty watertight case, you (or rather your guarantor) would make a counter claim (as part of the same case) for the cost of repair (and I would also suggest your laundarette bills if you have recipts). Any reasonable judge would see that its the landlord that has broken the agreement and not yourself/guarantor. But as in all things, no one can give you 100% confirmation that you will be successful.

Piggles12345

Planner wrote: »

If you follow the advice that has been given and the procedure for witholding rent for repairs then I would suggest you would have a pretty watertight case, you (or rather your guarantor) would make a counter claim (as part of the same case) for the cost of repair (and I would also suggest your laundarette bills if you have recipts). Any reasonable judge would see that its the landlord that has broken the agreement and not yourself/guarantor. But as in all things, no one can give you 100% confirmation that you will be successful.

I don't have receipts from the laundarette as its a coin-operated one!

I will give them until Monday to see what the letting agent manager says and then I will begin drafting letters!!

Thanks again for everyone's help. I will, again, keep you all posted on how it goes!

silvercar

However, speaking completely hypothetically- if the guaranto agreement is standard, and I do deduct x amount from next month's rent for the machine repair, and the guarnator refuses to pay, and legal proceedings begin, how likely is it that my case would win and the guarantor would not have to pay up?

Lets be clear what is happening, you would be short in your rent, the letting agent/ landlord would be taking you to court to make the payment up. You may claim that the reason that the rent was short was to pay for the washing machine repair, a judge may judge that reasonable or not. The point i am making is that it is you that has made a deduction from the rent payment not the guarantor. The guarantor would be sued jointly with you for the shortfall (as they guarantee your payments). So it would be both of you being sued together, not your guarantor on his/ her own.

Adding a question to that, you would be being sued for non-payment of rent (not argueing that you would be non-paying for a reason, just looking at the facts), I'm not sure if you can be taken to court for non payment of rent unless the non-payment falls within catagories prescribed whin the relevent housing acts. AFAIK that would have to be persistent late payment or rent outstanding of at least 2 months. So I think that the LL/ LA couldn't actually take you to court.

N79

silvercar wrote: »

AFAIK that would have to be persistent late payment or rent outstanding of at least 2 months. So I think that the LL/ LA couldn't actually take you to court.

Silvercar, the acts (I assume you mean schedule 2 of the housing act) give the grounds for seeking possession. Ground 10 could be used where any amount of rent is overdue. It is worth noting that by month 2 of not paying any T would also satisfy the criteria of persistent delay in paying rent.

However, if a LL just wants to sue for the rent and not possession then they can go via the normal small claims route without reference to the housing act.