Unfair landlord?

madeupname1

tbs624 either you didn't read my post / didn't understand it or felt the need to be patronising.

I said that the landlord has certain minimum repairing obligations and that is true. If you want to replace the word minimum by basic statutory / minimum statutory fine, but the point remains the same. I specifically noted the poorly performing boiler, rotten windows and cracked window (all of which you emboldened) in the last paragraph of my post as things that OP probably had a case in respect of (I presume your read my post that far?)

However, OP raised a number of other complaints about the general state of the property which ought to have been raised before moving in. I do not understand why you would move into a property that obviously needs repainting, recarpetting and double glazed windows, negotiate a reduction in price (which presumably acknowledges these issues) and then once moved in complain that the place needs to be repainting, recarpetting and double glazed windows. OP acknowledges this when she raises her concern that if these things get fixed, the rental price will be raised.

And, btw, a likely reason why the property would have been standing empty for a long time (and therefore the reason why LL had to drop the price) is precisely because it was in a bad condition. Nowhere did I say that this negates his minimum obligations.

HellsGranny

I am very concerned about the gas boiler, have you had a Gas Inspection Certificate to say that it is safe?

If not, you could be in danger of Carbon Monoxide poisoning.

Cheers, HG

EastMidsGal

madeupname1 wrote: »

tbs624 either you didn't read my post / didn't understand it or felt the need to be patronising.

I said that the landlord has certain minimum repairing obligations and that is true. If you want to replace the word minimum by basic statutory / minimum statutory fine, but the point remains the same. I specifically noted the poorly performing boiler, rotten windows and cracked window (all of which you emboldened) in the last paragraph of my post as things that OP probably had a case in respect of (I presume your read my post that far?)

However, OP raised a number of other complaints about the general state of the property which ought to have been raised before moving in. I do not understand why you would move into a property that obviously needs repainting, recarpetting and double glazed windows, negotiate a reduction in price (which presumably acknowledges these issues) and then once moved in complain that the place needs to be repainting, recarpetting and double glazed windows. OP acknowledges this when she raises her concern that if these things get fixed, the rental price will be raised.

And, btw, a likely reason why the property would have been standing empty for a long time (and therefore the reason why LL had to drop the price) is precisely because it was in a bad condition. Nowhere did I say that this negates his minimum obligations.

(boldening done by me by the way) I am not complaining about the carpets, paintwork or lack of double glazing, nor have I asked for any of those things to be replaced. I only mentioned the state of those things in my initial post to highlight that the property wasn't in perfect condition. The cosmetic side of things such as the broken pane of glass and the rotten window frame I did raise with the EA before I signed the tenancy agreement. But we were 48 hours from being put out on the street and I didn't have time on my side to demand the repairs were done before my daughter and I moved in. Can I just add here that we weren't being made homeless through any fault of our own, we fled domestic violence a couple of years ago and have been moving around ever since with no fixed address until we ran out of places to stay.

I rented the property because it is a nice size, in a nice location and very close to my daughters school which because of my disability takes away the worry of how I would get her to school and that the LL would accept me as an LHA tenant. I was also classified as homeless and we were about to be put into a B&B in a totally different area, so when I found this house, with its perfect location and the landlord dropped the rent to an amount the council would pay I grabbed it.

I posted here for advice about where I stood with my LL regarding repairs, I don't see why I now feel like I have to justify and defend myself.

I don't care about the old carpets or the walls that need freshening up. What I care about is the security of the house, ie making sure a ground floor window isn't flapping open and shut and that the house isn't painfully cold. All the cosmetic things I can live with, it's the things that you notice after living in a place, such as lack of hot water and it being painfully cold, that I am concerned about. The EA told me before I moved in that the broken pane of glass would be repaired within a week of me moving in, but it wasn't done.

The handyman when he came over and saw the state of the back door agreed that the back door had to go because the wood was so rotten it was flaking and you could see daylight through it, he told me afterwards that I wouldn't have believed the problems he had had getting the EA/LL to cough up for a replacement.

I spoke to the EA today, they told me the gas safety certificate was done ages ago and are sending me a copy. I spoke to the council who said that it did sound like there was repairs that needed doing that the LL hadn't done and they are going to get one of their EHOs to phone me to set up an appointment to come round. I also did some research online and found out that as it stands right now and if the LL agrees to let the house out to a council tenant (preferably me ) for the next five years, (he also qualifies on some other counts too), that he may be eligible for a grant from the council to cover up to 60% of the cost of the repairs and a replacement boiler if it needs to be replaced. Hopefully that will sweeten the the LL!

So anyway I've been advised by the council that legally the EA have to, by law, be given the option of being present when the environmental health officer comes over. Then I have to put a request in writing of all the repairs that need doing to the EA and cc it to the LL and get a receipt of delivery. Then take things from there. I can't see the EA or the LL wanting to argue with any repair the EHO asks that they carry out. Hopefully. As long as the house is as warm as you would expect a home to be, there is hot water and it is secure at the back then I'll be very happy. It all just boils down to me wanting to be warm and safe.

tbs624

madeupname1 wrote: »

tbs624 either you didn't read my post / didn't understand it or felt the need to be patronising.

Standard phrase applies - no-one can patronise you without your permission. It's ironic that folk who complain that others misread/misunderstood their posts are themselves often guilty of misreading the posts of others. If you can't cope with someone responding to your posts its best to avoid a public forum,.

madeupname1 wrote: »

I said that the landlord has certain minimum repairing obligations and that is true. If you want to replace the word minimum by basic statutory / minimum statutory fine, but the point remains the same. I specifically noted the poorly performing boiler, rotten windows and cracked window (all of which you emboldened) in the last paragraph of my post as things that OP probably had a case in respect of (I presume your read my post that far?)

Are we throwing a wobbler? You did say

"I don't think a landlord has a statutory obligations to fit key locks to windows / repaint / replace a rotten back door with good quality back door rather than the poor quality one he chose.

which looked awfully like someone not reading properly what the OP herself was saying.

madeupname1 wrote: »

However, OP raised a number of other complaints about the general state of the property which ought to have been raised before moving in. I do not understand why you would move into a property that obviously needs repainting, recarpetting and double glazed windows, negotiate a reduction in price (which presumably acknowledges these issues) and then once moved in complain that the place needs to be repainting, recarpetting and double glazed windows.

And that (patronising?) viewpoint came across loud and clear - it's perhaps best not to make assumptions about the lives of others. Not everyone has the same choice or same options in life: the fact is that most people don't generally * choose* to put up with low standard housing , rather they have little alternative at that particular point in their life. The OP has now let you know her own circumstances and perhaps that will help you understand.

madeupname1 wrote: »

And, btw, a likely reason why the property would have been standing empty for a long time (and therefore the reason why LL had to drop the price) is precisely because it was in a bad condition.

Dear oh dear . This was why I said that LLs don't offer rent reductions as a favour /a gesture- the house is effectively let for what he could get for it. The likelihood is that under LHA he will be receiving a better rent than he would have managed to achieve from a T who was in employment, because of the way the system works.

madeupname1 wrote: »

Nowhere did I say that this negates his minimum obligations.

Check back - that specific response comment from me was originally made to someone else's post. However, you did still seem to be arguing effectively "what do you expect if you get a rent reduction". All Ts who are paying rent to a LL in return for somewhere to live have an absolute right to expect that the property is properly maintained.

tbs624

EastMidsGal wrote: »

(
I spoke to the EA today, they told me the gas safety certificate was done ages ago and are sending me a copy. I spoke to the council who said that it did sound like there was repairs that needed doing that the LL hadn't done and they are going to get one of their EHOs to phone me to set up an appointment to come round. I also did some research online and found out that as it stands right now and if the LL agrees to let the house out to a council tenant (preferably me ) for the next five years, (he also qualifies on some other counts too), that he may be eligible for a grant from the council to cover up to 60% of the cost of the repairs and a replacement boiler if it needs to be replaced. Hopefully that will sweeten the the LL!

So anyway I've been advised by the council that legally the EA have to, by law, be given the option of being present when the environmental health officer comes over. Then I have to put a request in writing of all the repairs that need doing to the EA and cc it to the LL and get a receipt of delivery. Then take things from there. I can't see the EA or the LL wanting to argue with any repair the EHO asks that they carry out. Hopefully. As long as the house is as warm as you would expect a home to be, there is hot water and it is secure at the back then I'll be very happy. It all just boils down to me wanting to be warm and safe.

Great to hear that the property * is* covered by a GSC and that other things are underway - no doubt progress will be slow but I hope things work out well for you.

Maybe you'd update the board now and again as it can help other Ts who may be in a similar situation to your own.