Burst pipes saga...

moromir

tbs624 wrote: »

That would though equate to suggesting that Ts may never leave their homes during a cold snap, even for a couple of days, just in case the LLs heating system was a bit unreliable and the LA was likely to be slow getting hold of an HE

I really don't agree that tenants wouldn't be able to go away..

Why not leave a spare key with a neighbour/relative/friend and ask them to check in every day? Its not like the weather conditions were unanticipated... 5 days is a heck of a long time to leave a property unattended in those conditions imo.

I appreciate the situation has been made a lot messier by the LA going in the property.

RSn9

moromir wrote: »

My bolding.

I have to say that personally (I've no idea on the legal view) I don't agree that it is reasonable to leave a property unattended for five days in the coldest winter for years.

Whilst the property was unattended by myself, I had an arrangement for a family friend to pop around a couple of times a week to check on it. The incident occured during the three days they hadn't been in.

moromir wrote: »

'insufficient insulation', as far as I know there is no universal definition of what 'sufficient insulation' is. I think that any judge would reasonably agree that no amount of insulation was going to do much against the recent weather without the provision of adequate heating.

Current building regulations stipulate 270mm. Anything below that is considered insufficient.

G_M

moromir wrote: »

My only query would be whether it could be argued that leaving the property unattended for five days without the tenants making arrangements to ensure the heating was checked regularly (at least daily, bearing in mind the weather has been well documented) would equate to not treating the property in a 'tenant like manner'?

Yes, tenants must act in a tenant-like fashion, but that does not preclude going away for periods of time (usually stipulated in the tenancy as has been suggested previously - 21 days? 28? 45? ). Yes, in winter, common sense precautions should be taken.

Left central heating on 12 degrees and all radiators on maximum. Phoned agent/landlord to tell them out of curtasy.

This certainly qualifies as 'common sense precautions.

RSn9

G_M wrote: »

Yes, tenants must act in a tenant-like fashion, but that does not preclude going away for periods of time (usually stipulated in the tenancy as has been suggested previously - 21 days? 28? 45? ). Yes, in winter, common sense precautions should be taken.

In our case the amount of time was 30 days.

G_M

RSn9 wrote: »

In our case the amount of time was 30 days.

Well, there you go!

G_M

RSn9 wrote: »

In our case the amount of time was 30 days.

Well, there you go!

WhiteHorse

The landlord is simply trying to get the whole place refurbished ready for the next tenant.

tbs624

Do I have to thank both of those posts ( 16 and 17) G_M or will you just accept the one

tamarto

moromir wrote: »

I think you do need to concede that had you been at the property, or had the property been regularly checked, it is likely that any fault with the heating would have been picked up well before the property got cold enough to burst pipes.

Howoften is regularly enough for you? A problem was spotted by one of those checks, seems someone thought it wouldn't need dealing with in this bad winter, that is not the tennants fault.

clutton_2

i think if this went to court that a judge might apportion blame on each side..... i would not like to guess what % he would allocate to each party...

the key point for me is why the agent/ll did not send round a maintainanxce guy immediately the fault was reported - or even go round with electric fires.....