Tenants have caused damp.... Help!!!!

olly300

It's not an insurance issue it's an issue of bad maintenance. Insurance doesn't cover maintenance issues.

I suggest you follow the links given and also google a leaflet (like this one https://www.homesforharingey.org/damp_leaflet.pdf ) to print out to give to your tenants on how to prevent condensation and mould in the house.

As suggested:
1. Give your tenants notice to quit
2. Once you have got rid of your tenants find a new EA

There is no point fighting with people when you can simply get rid of them.

In regards to giving the tenants their deposit back. Get another builder plus the one you have and get a quote to fix the damage. With your two quotes photocopy them so once the tenants leave you can send them a copy of this as proof of why you can't give them their deposit back.

In addition take photographs of the condition the house was left in as soon as they move out - if you can take a photograph of how they left the kitchen before it dries out then take one now.

mikey72

The deposit is with an agency I assume, so contact them and advise them you do not wish the deposit returned in the first instance.

Fire_Fox

liz543 wrote: »

The e/a, are politely GITS. they called me ordering me to pay this to have it fixed immediately. I questioned this ..... the reason i went to check it out, and a bloody good job i didnt as it would have done nothing doing what the professionals wanted to do!! paying £1300 to fix rising damp when they only checked one room said it was rising damp and £1300!!!

(sounded like cowboys to me)

e/a didnt like the fact i pointed out that they werent doing all the things they should and to sort out his priorites about who he works for. - so after a massive argument with the e/a on friday about how i thought they were useless theyre not willing to even look at it until they get backoff holiday.

i think i will call head office tomorrow, do you think i should contact my insurance??? or see how it goes? i am very worried as its discusting and the damp is throughout the house. the wallpaper is falling off everywhere!!!!

thanks for all your replies im noting everything your all telling me!!!

liz

Read your landlord's insurance policy and read your contract with the letting agents. There is no point in contacting the insurers or head office until you have a concrete idea of what you are claiming against (if anything). Did you specifically pay your letting agents to undertake regular inspections and have they failed to do so? If you have a complaint about the letting agents then, again, you need to put this into writing and send the letter recorded delivery - I am confident you would get help with this once you join a landlord's association.

Who were the professionals who looked at the damp on behalf of the letting agents? A damp proofing company giving a 'free survey'? Do you have a copy of this damp report, how do you know they only checked one room? The letting agents are right to contact you asking you to rectify the damp problem as you have a duty of care to your tenant. Have you got the tenants written permission to enter the property during their absence? This is critical if they leave on Tuesday - you can then photograph, have the builders quote and use a dehumidifier in their absence.

nikki2804

When I signed my tenancy agreement I was told that it was bog standard in all agreements that the tenants have to adaquatley (sp) ventilate and heat the house.

And certainly if the tenants wish to live in dirt (sorry cannot think of anything worse than living in a house filled with damp) then you shouldn't be penalised for it. Give them their notive, keep the deposit and find a new estate agent. God, my LL is through and e/a and they are useless but at least they look at both sides of an argument!

Blackpool_Saver

I hate how poor tenants give all good ones a bad name too

David_Aldred

Hi,
Okay let's break this down a little and see what can be salvaged. You state the the property was always relatively dry and free of mould prior to the tenant moving in so if this was indeed the case let's run with the property under normal living being acceptably dry and free of significant mould.

Now let's put how the tenant lives to one side and concentrate upon the plumbing leak from behind the washing machine. This is ongoing over a period of time, a considerable period of time according to yourself being around twelve months which has consequentially turned the sub floor void into a saturated environement. This moisture will migrate into floor timbers, base of walls and plaster irrespective of whether the damp proof course in the walls is effective or not as all these attempt to be in equilibrium with that saturated environement. Once the moisture content of the timber rises above the threshold of decay and is sustained then decay will be inevitable and this has the potential to include not only wet rot but more serious and difficult to control dry rot.

This moisture does not stop at the suspended timber floor but will emanate up into the property and up climbs the relative humidity into a dwelling that being tenanted is more than likely going to have marginal heating and ventilation regimes as indicated. Indeed the tenant may have been doing exceptionally well before the onset of winter to vent the excessive moisture away emanating from the sub floor void and it is now only when heating and ventilation are more critical with the onset of winter that things have more dramatically declined over these last four weeks.

The tenant is a layperson as regards dampness. In addition they have little experience in this particular flat as they have only been there around a year. By your own admission the mould only flourished this last month which as we know by the posts on here condensation / mould is just starting to kick in as winter begins to bite. With only a four week period of visible degradation this is a pretty minimal time frame to go to court against a letting agent or tenant and accordinly you may struggle.

So the tenant has a property that is suddenly growing mould at an alarming rate and from the above it may be seen that the primary may well not be the lifestyle but the moisture evaporating up from the saturated sub floor void and the building fabric becomes unacceptably damp as it struggles to be in balance with this new situation for which it was not designed to cope with. Damage to both the flat and the tenant's belongings becomes inevitable.

The products of the mould growth are damaging to health and this may be compounded by microtoxins from the flooding of the oversite / soil of the sub floor void especially if this is marginally heated by the tenant which would tend to accelerate growth. The tenant's health may be compromised.

Okay so is a leak to behind a washing machine obvious? Well to a layperson who finds themselves in a generally damp flat it is resonable to suggest that it is not and the leak is therefore unforeseen and all damage should be covered by an appropriate insurance policy. You can attempt to battle it out with your letting agent whether they should have picked up on it within the four week time frame but personally I would tend to go for the insurance claim assuming your policy covers such an event. You will need a written report from the plumber who made good the leak and preferably somebody to fight your corner with some expertise in these matters rather than simply relying upon the insurer to determine the extent of works required.

The incident needs to be fully documented and areas opened up to quantify the extent of the works which could be considerable. Flood damage of this type will tend to make the dwelling uninhabitable until all factors above are properly addressed. Given you are renting the dwelling out and your insurer and yourself have a responsibity to ensure the property is in a fit state so as to not compromise the tenant's health as part of the works you may also wish to consider:

The property being pumped out if standing water is present under the floors. The walls and floors washed with clean water, the surfaces swabbed and the bacteria counted by laboratory analysis. The building should be then washed with anti bacterial and re-swabbed. The building should be left for about 28 days and re-washed and re-swabbed. When all the results are determined, they will identify the existing condition, the cleaned condition and finally the lack of incubation and aggressive growth.

The building should then be forced dried and moisture test taken at 28 day intervals establishing the drying out measures are effective. When the required moisture content has returned to normal (compatible to those of the unaffected arrears) a further set of swabs should be taken to determine the longevity of the non bacterial growth.

This is of course in addition to the remedial works required to return the fabric of the building to its former state.

Hope this helps give a little light at the end of the tunnel. My comments are based upon experience of such an occurence to a private dwelling and the ins and outs of a rented property may put a different slant on things as Firefox indicates and how you settle the property being unfit to be lived in in its current state with the tenant and any outstanding monies due I cannot comment upon. Kindest regards, David Aldred Independent dampness and timber surveyor.