Small Claims Court Shorthold Tenancy

mountainofdebt

well I do have to ask what the students think of this, especially at the end of the day they are nearly 20yrs of age and should be fighting these sorts of battles on themselves.

And for the record, we managed, when we first got married, to cook for a whole year using just a microwave (and a basic one at that - not one of these fancy combo ones)

How did they minimise any additional costs? Did any of their friends offer to help out etc?

arcon5

mountainofdebt wrote: »

well I do have to ask what the students think of this, especially at the end of the day they are nearly 20yrs of age and should be fighting these sorts of battles on themselves.

They can probably barely remember it between boozing and trying to hookup with girls (or boys)

(ahh.. brings back memories )

NCISROCKS

arcon5 wrote: »

Hmm, not sure I would agree, but it's also one of those situations that will naturally affect some much more than others so there's not really a right or wrong answer.

But nonetheless, op makes mention of several, what could be considered significant problems

- no kitchen for 4-5 weeks from the point of finally moving in
- no heating for about 3 weeks from the point of finally moving in
- no means to wash with hot water for about 2 weeks from the point of finally moving in

The fact they had no hot water or means to sanitise in itself could in theory mean the property is classed an uninhabitable, which infact could carry a rebate much greater than 50% if the landlord didn't act reasonably in rectifying the problem.

The above issues combined with the fact the landlord denied them access for the first 3 weeks, unless the landlord could show it to be a result of mitigating circumstances, could be as a whole deemed unreasonable. Especially considering the landlord is likely to be in breach of contract by denying the tenant access.

-they didn't move in apparently...students cooking...err no!

-No heating?

-No hot water...can students not boil a kettle or two? You can actually heat things/water in a microwave...it's how they work!

Now no toilet yes I'd agree with 50% off!

mountainofdebt

NCISROCKS wrote: »

Now no toilet yes I'd agree with 50% off!

As I understood it, rent was due on the property from 1st September but the property wasn't inhabitable until 24th September - at which point a toilet was available.

Therefore if the landlord has offered to refund one month's rent then this would cover September.

Going to a launderette is hardly a hardship now is it - or are students really that soft these days?

What I can't understand is if one of my friends was staying in a house where there was no hot water or washing facilities then I would be offering them the use of mine, as well as offering them meals - or at the very least the use of my cooking facilities.

Voyager2002

I cannot imagine that the landlord could charge rent for a period when his tenants did not have any access to the property. The fact that term had not started simply means that he is unlikely to be liable for additional costs (had the house not been available during term then he might have to pay the costs of B and B arising from his failure to fulfil his side of the contract).

As for the period when there was no kitchen: I suggest contacting the council's Environmental Health department to clarify whether the house could be regarded as being habitable.

I also suggest that the various parents check their own home insurance: it is probable that at least one of you has cover for legal expenses, and a little advice from a solicitor could prove invaluable in this situation.

NCISROCKS

Hmm, I suspect that the OP has been careful in the words/phrases they have used. ie the tenancy agreement gave them 'access' from 1st Sept...not occupancy?

arsenalboy

Okay, I will clarify a few points.

The property was rented on a 10 plus 2 agreement, pretty normal in student towns. By this I mean they paid 50% rent for July/August and the agreement expressly stated this discount was given on the understanding that occupancy wasn't available until 1st Sept.

Yes, they did eat and shower at other student properties. But that makes my blood boil when I am paying hard earned money to a landlord who is not providing facilities.

Not all students are living it up all of the time. As a group of parents we do not want them side tracked on potential litigation and feel we are better equiped to do this for them.

arcon5

What exactly are you wanting? You need to establish this before you can even consider further action.

You have received in effect the first 3 week free, 25% off the next 5 weeks. Once you know what you want and decide what you think is reasonable, you need to decide whether it's worth persuing.

BlueAngelCV

TBH I can't believe some of the comments on here. Would you really be happy paying full rent on a property which had no kitchen, no hot water and no heating? The fact that there were ways to get around that are irrelevant. How would you feel if you paid to stay at a hotel and they said "Sorry, we don't have any toilets or showers but there's a leisure centre a mile away so you could always use that if you need to"? I don't see how this is any different.

I would expect a full refund for the period that they couldn't move in for and then at least 50% for the period they were without a kitchen & hot water.

mountainofdebt

arsenalboy wrote: »

Okay, I will clarify a few points.

The property was rented on a 10 plus 2 agreement, pretty normal in student towns. By this I mean they paid 50% rent for July/August and the agreement expressly stated this discount was given on the understanding that occupancy wasn't available until 1st Sept.

So they've effectively been offered a refund for September so its only the issue of what was / wasn't available in October that is the issue.

arsenalboy wrote: »

Yes, they did eat and shower at other student properties. But that makes my blood boil when I am paying hard earned money to a landlord who is not providing facilities.

So just to clarify the issue is a) no shower for a week b) no heating for say a fortnight and b) no kitchen - at all ? - for a month? But they did have a roof over their head, they had a toilet (admittedly not when they should have moved in but when they eventually did they had one) and they had the means to cook with a microwave as well as mates looking after them . DO they have a washing machine now or are they still having to go to the launderette? What costs are involved in using said launderette that they don't have now?

arsenalboy wrote: »

Not all students are living it up all of the time. As a group of parents we do not want them side tracked on potential litigation and feel we are better equiped to do this for them.

But at the end of the day what do THEY think ?? Is it you, the parents, who are getting their knickers in a knot over this when all the students want to do is consider it a learning experience?