Help, Fire!

Tassotti

Agreed , the LL may have insurance to rehouse you, but this doesn't affect the fact of who is liable.

matto

I would imagine the LL has an obligation to rehouse you.

Sadly I don't see he has any further responsibility. However, he may be able to claim for you on his contents insurance if he has it.

To some extent you're fortunate that the fire brigade have essentially ruled out any negligence on your part.

jay78

clutton wrote:

you must then claim off the landlord and insist that the Agent finds you somewhere else to live - that is why landlords have to take out special insurance to deal with situations like this. When does your current AST expire ?

The AST expires 30 June. As I said, the agency will refund the days I've not been able to reside at the property. I did ask (although not demand) if the agency had a similar property, but he quoted properties costing more than what I pay now.

I'm dismayed that an electrical test is not compulsary, how can this be? What if I was in the house when the fire started and been hurt? If I can't get money for the furniture, fine. I've been able to retrieve valuable things like photo's etc because the majority of the damage was caused by smoke but, at the very least I'd like to be compensated for the consequential costs.

Tassotti

jay78 wrote:

The AST expires 30 June. As I said, the agency will refund the days I've not been able to reside at the property. I did ask (although not demand) if the agency had a similar property, but he quoted properties costing more than what I pay now.

I'm dismayed that an electrical test is not compulsary, how can this be? What if I was in the house when the fire started and been hurt? If I can't get money for the furniture, fine. I've been able to retrieve valuable things like photo's etc because the majority of the damage was caused by smoke but, at the very least I'd like to be compensated for the consequential costs.

Refund the days and also cover any expenses you've had whilst not being able to occupy the property. This should be covered by LL's insurance.

Who do you wan't compensation from? (Your subconcious for not insuring your own belongings)

You are right that electrical tests should be compulsory. However, law staes that they are not.

As a responsible landlord, I get electrics tested every 2 years, for the safety of my tenants.

courtjester

Don't wish to be negative, but this doesn't look like you would have a case against the landlord for compensation. You are of course entitled not to pay rent on accommodation that is no longer habitable, but the landlord won't have any liability to you for any possessions or consequential losses you incur, unless you can prove that the landlord has been negligent and that is the direct cause of the fire.

I suspect that even if the fridge was not tested, this is not proof that the landlord was negligent as there needs to evidence that they should have been aware of a problem and failed to take action. Electrical goods which test fine can breakdown the day after for any number of reasons.

Your only real option is to claim on your own insurance (which you said you didn't have) as this doesn't require you to prove someone else at fault. The landlord is very unlikely to take out insurance covering your property as such (why should he /she), so it is simply down to proving negligence in order to recover any legal compensation from the landlord.

This looks like an impossible task unless you go to the trouble of having your own independent electrical inspection of the remains of the fridge, which may prove nothing and be more money down the drain.

livinginhope

Have to agree with some on here that I don't think you have a case against your landlord.Had you have reported your fridge faulty,and he/she not acted then there would be a case for compensation,but nobody could predict an electrical fault occuring.Big lesson learnt the hard way make sure you insure,even if landlord had contents insurance I doubt it would cover your things which you are responsable for,I know from my own experience how devastating a fire can be,not only emotionaly but financialy aswell (107k debt) but trying to enforce blame doesn't help,put it down to experience and next time insure your belongings.
Good luck.

Robert_Sterling

jay78 wrote:

What if i had been in when the fridge blew?

But you were not in.

Astaroth

Presumably you would have either tried to put it out or got out and called the fire brigade

mcbutler1962

Hello,
I am a landlord of many years having a large 80 plus portfolio both commercial and residential in 4 different countries.
Many valid points have been made here without any doubt.
However to me this is an old and boring scenario. Basically what has happened to you happens to many people throughout the country every day, people who are both renting and owning property.

What would you be doing now if you had owned the flat and had not taken insurance? Who would you be looking to bail you out if this was the case?
Do you insure your car?

You have to realise that YOU are responsible for you and yours in this life YOU need to insure yourself against these risks. If you fail to LOOK AFTER YOU AND YOURS don't expect the landlord to bail you out at his expense because YOU did not take the correct action by insuring yourself.

If he had been obviously negligent i.e. faulty unit reported, no action taken then you have a complaint, if not you don't. Simple as that really. Take it on board as a lesson learned.

One other point, in my area (UK) we in the local LL association operate an extensive list containing all details of problem tenants which is reffered to by pretty much all LL in the area when renting, if your on it, forget renting in the area. If the LL feels suitably aggreived by your action he may place you on this list, not a good thing.

Sorry if this seems a bit abrupt, I don't mean to appear rude but as a LL I get pretty peed off with people trying this kind of thing on. You may feel truly wronged but you need to sit down and really think about it, then ring an insurance company and insure your belongings OK.

Regards to you.

Marcus

clairehi

mcbutler1962 wrote:

Hello,
to me this is an old and boring scenario.

You have to realise that YOU are responsible for you and yours in this life YOU need to insure yourself against these risks. If you fail to LOOK AFTER YOU AND YOURS don't expect the landlord to bail you out at his expense because YOU did not take the correct action by insuring yourself.

Marcus

Well this may be an old and boring scenario to you Marcus but to the OP its a big shock and trauma having his flat catch on fire - so have a little human feeling at least.

I dont think the OP is "trying it on". Accidental damage (consequential loss?) has occurred to his property. many people including owner occupiers do not have accidental damage cover on their insurance.

the difference here is that the damage was caused by his landlords property and he feels the landlord should have a duty of care, whether or not this is right in law. Personally, I would be inclined to agree and try and negotiate a reduction in rent or similar to compensate for his loss.

We were affected by flooding in our flat, and although it was not the landlords fault, he gave us a months rent rebate to compensate us for the inconvenience and distress, which we felt was a decent offer. I suppose it depends whether you want to operate like Rachman or a decent human being.