We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Legal advice
Comments
-
If they wanted to leave the property as they found it, why would they not leave the original doors and windows? :wall:
Because the original doors and windows are no longer there!
They were replaced with double glazing during the tenancy (by the OP). My reading is that the OP is going to remove the double glazing he/she put in and put in windows and doors which are as close as possible to the original windows and doors. Presuming they are fitted properly and any decorating made good they will then be returning the property in it's original condition - or am I missing something?0 -
Because the original doors and windows are no longer there!
They were replaced with double glazing during the tenancy (by the OP). My reading is that the OP is going to remove the double glazing he/she put in and put in windows and doors which are as close as possible to the original windows and doors. Presuming they are fitted properly and any decorating made good they will then be returning the property in it's original condition - or am I missing something?
I think you may be.
The house was fitted with new doors and windows, which then became part of the fabric of the building.
Removing/replacing them against the owners wishes and without their permission is not a good idea.0 -
Since the doors & windows are part of the structure of the house, if I inherited a house I would expect that they were included as part of the property. Replacing doors & windows isn't something you would expect a tenant to do - I wonder if the new landlord could argue that the new doors & windows were a gift to the previous landlord, and as such became part of the property that he inherited, so removing them would be theft?0
-
In which case using the, "same condition," excuse won't wash.Because the original doors and windows are no longer there!
They were replaced with double glazing during the tenancy (by the OP). My reading is that the OP is going to remove the double glazing he/she put in and put in windows and doors which are as close as possible to the original windows and doors. Presuming they are fitted properly and any decorating made good they will then be returning the property in it's original condition - or am I missing something?
If they went to all that trouble, it would cost them probably the same as it has already.
Seeing as the property was transferred to the current owner with the existing doors and windows, the OP would have enormous difficulty in proving, "original condition."The greater danger, for most of us, lies not in setting our aim too high and falling short; but in setting our aim too low and achieving our mark0 -
I think you may be.
The house was fitted with new doors and windows, which then became part of the fabric of the building.
Removing/replacing them against the owners wishes and without their permission is not a good idea.
I expect you are right, but I was thinking that you can add some things to the property and then remove them again. For example, if you redecorate and then repaint back to the original magnolia before you leave. Or add, say, a stair lift then take it out and make good any damage. Also, wouldn't it be hard to prove that the property should be double-glazed if the original inventory said "single-glazed windows"????0 -
Jeez.
OP: get over it. Sh*t happens.
Enjoy your new property and move onwards and upwards. What's done is done.Everyone is entitled to my opinion!0 -
Since the doors & windows are part of the structure of the house, if I inherited a house I would expect that they were included as part of the property.
Is the inheritance relevant? I don't think so - what the house is like at the point of inheritance is not part of the renters tenancy agreement. If the house was trashed at the moment the house was inherited it would still have to be put back to it's original condition.
Unless there is anything else written then when the tenancy ends the house should be in the same condition as it was when the tenancy started.0 -
I expect you are right, but I was thinking that you can add some things to the property and then remove them again. For example, if you redecorate and then repaint back to the original magnolia before you leave. Or add, say, a stair lift then take it out and make good any damage. Also, wouldn't it be hard to prove that the property should be double-glazed if the original inventory said "single-glazed windows"????
I can see that the new landlord might be able to say that the tenant had to reinstate the original windows at the tenant's own cost and return the property to its original state. I'm not so sure about whether that means that the tenant is entitled to remove the windows.
My feeling is that if it went to court, the tenant would have to prove what the original agreement was with the landlord when the change was made. It doesn't seem likely that the intention was that the windows would belong to the tenant, to be removed when they left the property. It should all have been sorted out properly at the time, before they spent thousands of pounds improving someone else's property, then they wouldn't be in this situation now.0 -
That is a condition in all my of properties.I expect you are right, but I was thinking that you can add some things to the property and then remove them again. For example, if you redecorate and then repaint back to the original magnolia before you leave. Or add, say, a stair lift then take it out and make good any damage. Also, wouldn't it be hard to prove that the property should be double-glazed if the original inventory said "single-glazed windows"????The greater danger, for most of us, lies not in setting our aim too high and falling short; but in setting our aim too low and achieving our mark0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards