Wilsons in court again

Graham_Devon

To be fair, with the Wilsons mindset, they probably still think the right colour cistern lid add's 15k of value to the house.

dfh

Graham_Devon wrote: »

To be fair, with the Wilsons mindset, they probably still think the right colour cistern lid add's 15k of value to the house.

lol-imagine how much their properties have gone down in value over the past year.

Graham_Devon

dfh wrote: »

lol-imagine how much their properties have gone down in value over the past year.

Howcome? Did they have a spate of mischevious cistern hooligans as tenants?

HugoSP

wolfplayer wrote: »

Who paid the house insurance? Tenant or landlord?

What would insurers say if a blue cistern lid broke, made a claim explaining the lid was no longer made in that exact shade of colour?

Would they or their loss-adjusters authorise whole new £3,000 bathroom refit to keep everything the exact same shade?

Landlord pays buildings insurance - but sometimes policies don't cover tenant damage.

The tenant is liable for damage caused by their misuse etc.

Insurers would probably go so far as to pay for a new toilet but would not go so far as to pay for a whole bathroom refit. I experienced this when my kitchen cupboards got damaged some time ago. It was the base units that suffered water damage due to a burst pipe under the floor. The wall units were fine. The insurers said they would only replace the base units, meaning that I would then have mismatching base and wall units.

In the end we went an alternative route that didnt involve their very good but expensive national bulder and instead got us a full kitchen replacement.

ad44downey

We should bring back hanging for the likes of these two.

torontoboy45

some on here have attempted to defend the wilsons in the past.

is there a chance that they could read the above article and tell us all why they thought the wilsons were worth sticking up for in the first place?

gott in himmel! the public face of the btl'er. my stomach heaves.

andygb

A despicable pair, who unfortunately were glorified by local media a few years ago, because they epitomised the buy to rent culture which existed. They were at that time portrayed as perfect examples of capitalism.

Harry_Powell

Actually, after reading the article, it seems that the tenants and their parents have tried to find a matching lid and the Wilsons have also tried their best to find one too. The article states that the range has been 'discontinued', which suggests that it's a relatively new installation (if it was 50 years old, they wouldn't have needed to mention that it had been discontinued), so it does make me think that the Wilsons have a decent case.

Why should they put up with having a mismatched bathroom set, it certainly wasn't the Wilson's fault that the tenants broke the lid. £3k is probably quite reasonable to have a bathroom removed and a new one refitted - and we're not talking top of the range suite here either.

If I rented out a property, I wouldn't want it to deteriorate over time with mismatched fixtures and fittings. Wear and tear is one thing, but damage is another. Had the couple found a replacement lid then the Wilsons would have happily let them simply replace that.

Graham_Devon

Harry, are you actually serious or you having a giraffe?

System

Harry_Powell wrote: »

If I rented out a property, I wouldn't want it to deteriorate over time with mismatched fixtures and fittings. Wear and tear is one thing, but damage is another. Had the couple found a replacement lid then the Wilsons would have happily let them simply replace that.

Assuming it's 100% impossible to replace what was broken then I'm not sure what the alternative is to be fair other than a new suite. Does seem a bit harsh though.