Thoughts wanted on potential DPS arbitration

toddybad

I was hoping people might give me there thoughts on whether arbitration is the best route for concluding a post-tenancy dispute with my ex-landlord.

At the end of my tenancy a cupboard used to house the boiler and a drawer, both within the kitchen area, had cosmetic damage to them in the form of warping to the laminate (laminate foil I believe) covering. The suggestion, which I do not dispute, is that this damage is due to excessive heating.

The drawer sits adjacent to the oven and it would appear to me that heat from the oven has caused the warping there.

The cupboard is mounted arially but, unlike any of the other cupboard doors mounted in this way, there is not 'shelve' below the door itself. Because electrical points are located under this cupboard, kettles and toasters being used in the kitchen are used in this area. I believe that it is the heat given off by these electricals, together with the nearby cooker, that have caused warping on the cupboard.

My argument is that because these sort of electrical items are made to be used in a kitchen environment, and because the kitchen has been designed in such a way you only likely to use these items under that cupboard it is clear that the cupboard should be made to withstand heating.

The cupboard door manufacturer's website states that doors etc require shielding from high heats such as cooker hobs etc but that particular cupboard door has no such shield.

My tenancy agreement, as you would expect, states that I should leave the property in the state I found it, excepting fair wear and tear. I believe that because of the design of the kitchen and failure to ensure cupbaord doors are adequately protected from heating I should not be liable to pay for the damage as all I have done is use a kitchen as a kitchen. My landlord takes the view that I am liable for the cost of replacing the cupboard doors etc (as he says repair is not an option).

He has offered to split the cost as a way of reaching agreement without abitration. So far I have rejected this for the reasons above. Should I go to arbitration and what are the chances of my argument winning? Am I right to believe I am not libale to pay the cost of this damage?

Opinions wanted!!

taxsaver

Was the kitchen brand new when you moved in, or had there been other users of it before you? If the latter then I think you might have to accept responsibility on the basis that the LL will be able to rightly claim that as others have been able to use the kitchen without causing this damage you must be at fault, at least to some extent and that he has offered to charge you only 50% of the cost of repair.

cooltt

You will win.
If the landlord has sighted a boiler where the cupboard it's in is not fit for purpose then that's his problem not yours. The only argument he could use is if you noticed this warping some time ago but did not inform him straight away. Given that warping would occur over a period of time it would be difficult for you not to notice this. However the root cause of the damage is the location of the boiler is incorrect and that is the kitchen planners fault but for your purposes the land lords.

toddybad

hmm two different views!

To clarify, I lived there for 2 years 9 months. The property in total is ony around 4.5 years old so I was not the first tenant but certainly have lived there for most the time it's been up.

The landord has mentioned the fact that I hadn't advised them of the damage, and in fairness where it is I would've thought I might have seen it but I didn't. With the drawer it would've been almost impossible to spot and was noticed by me in the final minutes before handing back the tenancy.

I had told the landlord about probems with condensation mould in the flat throughout the tenancy, however, so I can show that I historically did bring problems to the landords attention.

Anybody else have a view on this as I have to tell them if I agree to pay half or go to arbitration. How labourious is the arbitration process and whst evidence might I need?

Thanks

sequence

If I crashed into you car and wrote it off, would you be happy to pay half for a new one, even though it was my fault ?

Go to through arbitration.

toddybad

So are you saying it IS my fault?

Bettie

everyone in my house is aware that they don't put the toaster on directly under a cupboard, it has to be pulled out a few inches so nothing is above. is this the sort of thing you mean? I would be fuming if someone used the toaster and warped my cupboard as common sense tells you not to put it on under something. The electric kettle is not so bad as it steams the base of the units.

tbs624

Professional kitchen fitters/installers of hobs etc would *always* advise on the installation of heat shielding in kitchen units that are immediately adjacent to an oven. If there wasn't such a shield then that is the LL's omission: however, as another poster has said you should have drawn the LL's attention to the problem *in writing*. Did the LL/LA undertake any routine inspection of the property during your tenancy? If yes, then you could possibly argue that the LL/LA ought to have noticed the problem then.

A kitchen wall unit should be able to withstand potential damage from the general heat/steam produced in a kitchen but not necessarily by kettles/toasters if the kitchen user decides to use such appliances directly under the cupboard IMO. Wall units tend to be narrower than worktops and you have the option of pulling those appliances forward when in use, especially if it becomes apparent that some damage is already in evidence. It's about using the property in a "tenant-like manner".

Your best bet is to go to adjudication. You can, if you or the LL prefer, alternatively use the small claims track in the County Court.

Edit: Bettie's post not there when I started my response to OP. Bettie - obviously agree about intelligent use of small appliances but it's perhaps worth noting that steam from a kettle is likely to cause damage to foil wrapped/laminated kitchen doors on wall units.

Bettie

tbs624 wrote: »

Edit: Bettie's post not there when I started my response to OP. Bettie - obviously agree about intelligent use of small appliances but it's perhaps worth noting that steam from a kettle is likely to cause damage to foil wrapped/laminated kitchen doors on wall units.

yes, of course:o
but at least it will be clean warping :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

clutton_2

""The landord has mentioned the fact that I hadn't advised them of the damage, and in fairness where it is I would've thought I might have seen it but I didn't""

if you have not reported damage then as a LL i would argue that there is contributor negligence on your part and i would claim ome of the damage repair from you

how much is at stake ?

cooltt

clutton wrote: »

""The landord has mentioned the fact that I hadn't advised them of the damage, and in fairness where it is I would've thought I might have seen it but I didn't""

if you have not reported damage then as a LL i would argue that there is contributor negligence on your part and i would claim ome of the damage repair from you

how much is at stake ?

However the root cause is the boiler cuboard was not sighted correctly in the first place so do you as a LL expect every tenant to pay for replacing this unit after every tenancy?

It is a design flaw plain and simple and since the property owner is at fault, this is exactly as the court would view it. You cannot blame someone else for your mistakes.