Irresponsible Tenant

mchale

boxer3 wrote: »

Dark Blue...A professional academic then?...Well done and good for you.

Might I suggest you think before you post some of your replies, the wording comes across a bit sarcy, after all you have come on a public forum for advice, if the advice you receive does not suit, then the is no need to be sarcy with people, just ignore them

tbs624

SandC wrote: »

If there are expensive fixtures and fittings in the property shouldn't either the landlord have specific insurance to cover these incidences or have a clause in the tenancy that the tenant should, or risk receiving a large bill for any damages?

LLs cannot insist that their Ts take out insurance and any clause which sought to impose such an obligations is likely to be held to be an unfair contract term, according to OFT guidelines.

The OP/LL in this case says that s/he does have insurance but doesn't want to claim under it: kind of defeats the reason for having the insurance on the first place, although clearly any excess payable would have to be taken in to account.

tbs624

Jowo wrote: »

Neither had I but I've seen some of their products advertised on other sites and they look very nice indeed. Looks like you can rotate and extend many of their surfaces.

http://interiors-thestudio.com/cadabra-cocktail-table-noas-p-491.html

"NAOS “La Casa Animata” or – in English “The Living Home” – is a collection of innovative dining tables, cocktail and side tables and accessories designed to breathe life into solid materials with surprising levels of functionality.

The overall theme is “motion”, creating motion though interchanging surfaces that move the energy, emotions and mood. NAOS believes that “motion becomes emotion” which, paired with the “creativity of Italian design” transforms a house into a dynamic, living home. "

What the bl88dy hell is an "innovative dining table"? I don't want my mood, energy and emotions "moving" by a piece of furniture....

Ye Gods, we should sign the furniture up on a joint and several liability contract as it seems to have a life of its own.:D

Fiddlestick

darkblue wrote: »

I
Unless you video him smoking - and that would be breaching entry and human rights - it's not possible to prove.

My partner and I share a two bedroom flat with a third person and we are all co-tenants - all three names are on the tenancy agreement.

We know the other flatmate has been smoking in her room and burning incense to hide the smell, as you can smell the smoke when she opens her room.

In the event of any dispute over her deposit we would be happy to act as witnesses to the landlord that she has been smoking in his non-smoking property

tbs624

boxer3 wrote: »

t
Re your comment 'Focus entirely on what is needed to put things right, not on your views on the Ts lifestyle which just make you sound like a prig.'

I don't believe I'd passed any comments or judgements on the tenants lifestyle... please enlighten me if I did. I've only commented on the fact that he has broken the terms of the lease he signed.

It's not relevant to anything whether people the T brought back to his *home* were strangers.

The T can however, be held responsible, for any damage caused by his visitors, regardless of how well he does or doesn't know them. Did he report the damage to the police and get a crime number?

tbs624

Fiddlestick wrote: »

My partner and I share a two bedroom flat with a third person and we are all co-tenants - all three names are on the tenancy agreement.

We know the other flatmate has been smoking in her room and burning incense to hide the smell, as you can smell the smoke when she opens her room.

In the event of any dispute over her deposit we would be happy to act as witnesses to the landlord that she has been smoking in his non-smoking property

If you are on one contract, and have joint and several liability for the whole property, you may find that your own deposit is at risk in the event of any bill for dilapidations.

darkblue_2

Fiddlestick wrote: »

My partner and I share a two bedroom flat with a third person and we are all co-tenants - all three names are on the tenancy agreement.

We know the other flatmate has been smoking in her room and burning incense to hide the smell, as you can smell the smoke when she opens her room.

In the event of any dispute over her deposit we would be happy to act as witnesses to the landlord that she has been smoking in his non-smoking property

And that's fine, but not really applicable to this case whereby the tenant is the only tenant in the property.

Fiddlestick

tbs624 wrote: »

If you are on one contract, and have joint and several liability for the whole property, you may find that your own deposit is at risk in the event of any bill for dilapidations.

We've considered this.

Her share of the deposit would be sufficient to pay to redecorate her room

boxer3

Thanks tbs624. Yes he did call the police but didnt call us to inform of us of the incident or damage to the property's contents. Obviously he would not have been feeling well so it seems harsh to judge him on this, but we only found out what had happened 2 days later when the Apartment Concierge Office called to say the police had attended the apartment. We then called him.

He had returned to his parent's house in London. He also subsequently left the apartment unattended for more than 30 days (another breach of his STA) We can gather and prove this from key fob communal door entry information stored by the concierge office.


He has made no effort to inform of us of any of this, and again this breaks the terms of his STA. I do see that it's not relevant whether the people he brought back were strangers but I originally commented on this because it seems to reinforce....

'and that breach was the defendant’s fault rather than unforeseeable or outside his reasonable control' - in my original post.

I would have thought people who you dont know and choose to invite into your home are more likely to be out of the tenant's 'reasonable control' but perhaps this is not relavant legally?

ps. Im thinking of calling Naos and asking them for commission on next months sales. This certainly seems to have attracted them some attention. Lol

sequence

The breaches of contract are minor and irrelevant, I'm not sure why you keep going on about them. It just makes you sound like some dictator, I'd hate to be your tenant!

Is the tenant working and has money most importantly, before you consider trying to get any damage back.....