Rented property disrepair hazards

coventrees

Can anyone help with these 2 questions:

A. If a landlord instructs urgent substantial plumbing work leaving a mess in a rented property for almost a week, with disturbance to access to kitchen and use of the only shower, do the tenants have a right to compensation or discount off the rent due to inconveniencing the several people in the household?

B. If a landlord replaces a faulty boiler (following a dispute about disrepairs) but after installation the new boiler transpires not to be compatible with the shower mixer (where the lack of a thermostatic mixer is confirmed by the manufacturer to have risk of scalding), and the tenants have always only used showers and never baths, what rights do the tenants have?

Yorkie1

A. Was access only disturbed or completely prevented to cooking or washing facilities, and if completely prevented, for how long at a time?

B. Is there actually a bath in the property?

coventrees

Thanks Yorkie for attempting to help.

Access to cooking facilities was disturbed because of the workers' mess for virtually all the time as it was not practical to clean up dust and tidy up when the next day things need to be cleared for more work. No hot water for 2 days and then no shower due to incompatibility of boiler.


There is a bath (the mixer is for both bath and shower) but with a sizable family and work/school schedules to adhere to it's not practical timewise for everyone to only use baths in the hectic quick-shower lifestyle. Tenants would not have rented the property without a shower, and there was from day 1.

Yorkie1

I'm not sure about A. But as for B, I think the fact that there is a functioning bath in the property means that the LL is discharging his legal responsibilities and you have no recourse on that score.

may_fair

coventrees wrote: »

Can anyone help with these 2 questions:

A. If a landlord instructs urgent substantial plumbing work leaving a mess in a rented property for almost a week, with disturbance to access to kitchen and use of the only shower, do the tenants have a right to compensation or discount off the rent due to inconveniencing the several people in the household?

There is no automatic 'right'. If the LL refuses to compensate, T would have to bring a claim against him. Seriously not worth it for a week of inconvenience (the inconvenience of the court claim would be far greater and the amount in question negligible).

B. If a landlord replaces a faulty boiler (following a dispute about disrepairs) but after installation the new boiler transpires not to be compatible with the shower mixer (where the lack of a thermostatic mixer is confirmed by the manufacturer to have risk of scalding), and the tenants have always only used showers and never baths, what rights do the tenants have?

The LL has a legal obligation to keep the hot water system, shower and bath in repair and working order under s.11 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. Scalding risk may comprise a safety hazard under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System, Housing Act 2004. The local authority have the power to enforce these obligations and assess the health/safety hazards.

T's options: firstly, T must report the disrepair, ideally in writing. If this gets nowhere, either report to the Environmental Health Officer at the local council, or follow a [strict] procedure for arranging to carry out the repair and deduct the cost from the rent. Further info (including the aforementioned procedure, under the heading 'Tenants doing repairs') on:
http://england.shelter.org.uk/get_advice/repairs_and_bad_conditions/repairs_in_private_lets