european social fund? unemployed, need new shower

Fire_Fox

Francesanne wrote: »

I'd rather go without something and save up for a shower rather than do a strip wash each day. I love my daily shower & hate baths.

Your prerogative but my advice was not directed at you: the OP would rather the taxpayer paid than go without and save up.

ceridwen

I do have to say that a lot of the comments here are a bit harsh.

If one moves into a rented flat (Council or otherwise) and there is a shower in situ at the outset - then one knows its the responsibility of the landlord to keep it in order.

To my mind - the Council is making excuses trying to say that its not theirs - so they wont deal with it. If it came with a flat they are renting out and the tenant took the flat on on that basis - then it IS the Council's (even if some previous tenant installed it).

Personally - I would pursue the matter with someone "higher up" in the Council. If that failed - I would go to my M.P.

The Council needs to be made to acknowledge that they have responsibility for their own property. It would obviously be cheaper for them to get the tenant to do their maintenance work for them - hence why they are trying to get away with this.

daska

ceridwen wrote: »

I do have to say that a lot of the comments here are a bit harsh.

If one moves into a rented flat (Council or otherwise) and there is a shower in situ at the outset - then one knows its the responsibility of the landlord to keep it in order.

To my mind - the Council is making excuses trying to say that its not theirs - so they wont deal with it. If it came with a flat they are renting out and the tenant took the flat on on that basis - then it IS the Council's (even if some previous tenant installed it).

Personally - I would pursue the matter with someone "higher up" in the Council. If that failed - I would go to my M.P.

The Council needs to be made to acknowledge that they have responsibility for their own property. It would obviously be cheaper for them to get the tenant to do their maintenance work for them - hence why they are trying to get away with this.

The OP says he was a kid when he moved in so this might depend on whether there is there any record of the shower having been installed when the OP, or presumably his parents, moved in.

Might be worth checking the paperwork for an inventory.

viktory

ceridwen wrote: »

I do have to say that a lot of the comments here are a bit harsh.

If one moves into a rented flat (Council or otherwise) and there is a shower in situ at the outset - then one knows its the responsibility of the landlord to keep it in order.

To my mind - the Council is making excuses trying to say that its not theirs - so they wont deal with it. If it came with a flat they are renting out and the tenant took the flat on on that basis - then it IS the Council's (even if some previous tenant installed it)

That has not been the case with my first council home or my subsequent HA properties - nor was it the case with the LA and HA I worked for.

In all cases, the landlords will not take responsibility for a shower (unless it is a wet room specifically fitted by them) as they have a tendency to leak. Therefore, when I moved into my house/s I was advised that there was a shower in situ but they would not be responsible for the repair and upkeep of it. I could either have it removed and the area made good by them, or leave it in situ and accept responsibility for it. I chose the latter. When it failed I paid for a new shower and also the installation of the shower.

The HA that I worked for went one step further - when upgrading their bathrooms, they would install a hand shower attachment (like the one shown by DMG earlier) strictly for rinsing the bath and hair etc. There was a hook very low to the side of the bath so there could be absolutely no misunderstanding about its use. We also advised tenants that the shower was not intended for showering.

Therefore, I suspect you are giving the OP false hope - no harm in asking though.

daska

That's fair enough if it's part of the contract but if it isn't then the LL is responsible. HA's do seem to try to get away with as much as they can though, I had one tenancy where I was responsible for cleaning the outside of the non-opening windows on the 5th floor. And apparently I was supposed to do this every month!? Needless to say not one resident in the block took this seriously and not one was ever reprimanded for not doing it.

viktory

daska wrote: »

That's fair enough if it's part of the contract but if it isn't then the LL is responsible. HA's do seem to try to get away with as much as they can though, I had one tenancy where I was responsible for cleaning the outside of the non-opening windows on the 5th floor. And apparently I was supposed to do this every month!? Needless to say not one resident in the block took this seriously and not one was ever reprimanded for not doing it.

Actually, the OP should read his copy of the tenant's handbook, or check on is LL's website, if they have one. That will outline his responsibilities and those of his LL. His tenancy agreement (I am assuming this i what you mean when you refer to the contract) will not say anything about repairs and maintenance.

daska

A tenancy agreement is a contract.

viktory

daska wrote: »

A tenancy agreement is a contract.

And your point is?

A tenancy agreement from a HA or LA will not outline repair responsibilities - therefore in this instance there is little point in the OP referring to it, is there?

dmg24

ceridwen wrote: »

I do have to say that a lot of the comments here are a bit harsh.

If one moves into a rented flat (Council or otherwise) and there is a shower in situ at the outset - then one knows its the responsibility of the landlord to keep it in order.

To my mind - the Council is making excuses trying to say that its not theirs - so they wont deal with it. If it came with a flat they are renting out and the tenant took the flat on on that basis - then it IS the Council's (even if some previous tenant installed it).

Personally - I would pursue the matter with someone "higher up" in the Council. If that failed - I would go to my M.P.

The Council needs to be made to acknowledge that they have responsibility for their own property. It would obviously be cheaper for them to get the tenant to do their maintenance work for them - hence why they are trying to get away with this.

You do talk some nonsense!

You are missing the fact (as usual) that the OP (and/ or his family) has lived in the property for years, and the council did not install the shower. Why should they be responsible for something that they did not provide?

john539

ceridwen wrote: »

I do have to say that a lot of the comments here are a bit harsh.

Typical, the OP wants to replace shower, people reply that he doesn't need one.

I think the OP knows what he prefers !

Everyone, back to school.