Broken window in tenanted property

[Deleted User]

I live in a rented house and have a prepay meter. With energy costs as they are, I do run out of gas on occasion and do have to relight the pilot. I think its unreasonable to expect the tenant to keep the gas meter in credit 100% of the time. You do have emergency credit available but u have to know its needed to switch it on lol. My meter charges for using the emergency credit so I don't use it. I wait until I can afford to put more credit in the meter.

It is reasonable to have a boiler that it is possible to relight, make sure the tenant knows how to do it and so avoid repeated engineer calls and make sure u know the right questions to ask when your tenant calls so u can make sure that the boiler isn't working simply because the pilot has gone out. However, the pilot shouldn't go out if your tenant is still using a credit meter if the boiler is working properly. Certainly you should get your tenant to try to light the pilot (so need to know how to do it yourself).., but be aware the boiler might have a problem that needs an engineer to fix. The only time I have had this problem was with an ancient boiler that was eventually replaced.

It doesn't sound like your present tenant is the most ideal.., but its your property so I'd hope u'd know how to light the pilot and be able to tell your tenant how to light it.

thegirlintheattic

I would be serving notice. These sound like tenants from hell. Don't lend her money, tell her you will take it out of the deposit if she cannot pay by the end of the tenancy.

angelsmomma

deannatrois wrote: »

I live in a rented house and have a prepay meter. With energy costs as they are, I do run out of gas on occasion and do have to relight the pilot. I think its unreasonable to expect the tenant to keep the gas meter in credit 100% of the time. You do have emergency credit available but u have to know its needed to switch it on lol. My meter charges for using the emergency credit so I don't use it. I wait until I can afford to put more credit in the meter.

It is reasonable to have a boiler that it is possible to relight, make sure the tenant knows how to do it and so avoid repeated engineer calls and make sure u know the right questions to ask when your tenant calls so u can make sure that the boiler isn't working simply because the pilot has gone out. However, the pilot shouldn't go out if your tenant is still using a credit meter if the boiler is working properly. Certainly you should get your tenant to try to light the pilot (so need to know how to do it yourself).., but be aware the boiler might have a problem that needs an engineer to fix. The only time I have had this problem was with an ancient boiler that was eventually replaced.

It doesn't sound like your present tenant is the most ideal.., but its your property so I'd hope u'd know how to light the pilot and be able to tell your tenant how to light it.

I think you misunderstood, there is not a problem with the boiler. It is 2 years old and working properly. There are not card meters in at the moment, it went out because of something the tenants family did. I went round and relit it then got a gas safe engineer in to check it was safe.

I have shown them how to relight it should it go out again.

I don't want them to have card meters at all but the utility company is insisting on them, I certainly would not expect them to keep the meter in credit at all times, I wouldn't see it as any of my business to tell them something like that.

Thank you everyone for your input, it is sorted out now. I am paying for it and they will pay me back after Christmas. If they don't pay me back I will put it down to experience. I won't be serving a section 21.

clutton_2

"" I think its unreasonable to expect the tenant to keep the gas meter in credit 100% of the time.""

as a LL i think it is eminently reasonable to expect a tenant to keep the gas meter in credit.... especially if by not doing so an engineer visit is necessary....

real1314

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3y3QoFnqZc

The ex only went to that address because of the presence of the tenant and her family. He would, therefore, fall under the umbrella of "visitor". His attack was not a random attack on a random house, it was a targeted attack on a very specific address.

Now, if the TENANT wants to chase the ex-boyfriend for reparation, that is entirely the TENANTS business. The identity or culpability of the ex boyfriend is of no concern to the landlord. He has already secured reparation from the party liable for the reparation of HIS damages/costs.

Erm;

1. Linking to a YouTube clips doesn't make your opinion correct any more than adding "FACT" to your post. It's rather silly and makes you look childish.

2. So you'd think the shop customer was a visitor? Or perhaps someone who picked out the tenant directly for an attack?
Or, what if the T had a discussion with a neighbour who was playing music until 5am at 2000 MegaWatts and the neighbour decided to put the window through?

None of these would have happened but for the (innocent) actions of the T.

Just because the attack was aimed at them, doesn't mean they are responsible. :cool:

johnbusby

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3y3QoFnqZc

The ex only went to that address because of the presence of the tenant and her family. He would, therefore, fall under the umbrella of "visitor". His attack was not a random attack on a random house, it was a targeted attack on a very specific address.

Now, if the TENANT wants to chase the ex-boyfriend for reparation, that is entirely the TENANTS business. The identity or culpability of the ex boyfriend is of no concern to the landlord. He has already secured reparation from the party liable for the reparation of HIS damages/costs.

Im sorry, but this is nonsense. As I have said before you cant hold the tenant responsible for the irrational actions of others. You seem to not want to answer the question that I, and many others, have asked of you - should the tenant pay if they bump into someone and they put the window through or if they attract a stalker and they put the window through.

All of these attacks would not be random but aimed at a very specific address, if another tenant lived there the attack would not of happened. Would you think this is fair? You seem to say that the ex is a visitor but I dont see how, just because he is known to the family, that is the case.

jc808

johnbusby wrote: »

Im sorry, but this is nonsense. As I have said before you cant hold the tenant responsible for the irrational actions of others. You seem to not want to answer the question that I, and many others, have asked of you - should the tenant pay if they bump into someone and they put the window through or if they attract a stalker and they put the window through.

All of these attacks would not be random but aimed at a very specific address, if another tenant lived there the attack would not of happened. Would you think this is fair? You seem to say that the ex is a visitor but I dont see how, just because he is known to the family, that is the case.

Sorry this IMO is nonsense

Why are the police not pursuing the matter?
Is it because he is under 18? Or noone saw him do it? If its the latter then why have the tenants not shown them the Facebook entry (Which is an admission of guilt)

I would mention my intention to issue a S21 (Either immediate, if its rolling or to activate in 6 months time or whenever the contract ends) and recover the window from deposit, on the basis that the boyfriend (Ex or not) of a tenant broke it. This should focus the tenants mind in recovering these funds to repair the window themselves (By way of court action, criminal or civil) or simply speaking to the boyfriends family.

Im sorry, I get the feeling the daughter is 'protecting' the ex(?)-BF. Why?

- Noone saw him do it (But he admitted on FB he would)
- Noone wants to even raise it with the parents (Either because the girl still feels for him, or its a 'problem' family. If its the latter, why ON EARTH were members of this family invited to the house?)

You reap what you sow

dodger1

angelsmomma wrote: »

Boyfriend is now ex which is why he is mad and broke window as daughter has replaced him (she is 15)

What kind of support do you mean, police said since there is no witness there is no case.

Thanks for the answer.

If the window was broken from the outside which is probable as the boyfrend was an ex and nobody witnessed it then it wasn't broken by "the tenant, his family or visitors" as your contract states. So even if that term stood up in court it plainly doesn't cover an ex boyfriend committing an act of vandalism. Your only hope would be a private prosecution if that is at all possible.

johnbusby

He wasnt invited to the house, he allegedly threw a stone through the window presumably from the street. There is not a chance in hell that a tenancy deposit scheme would award you the money for the window because someone known to the family, though not invited, allegedly broke the window.

This idea that because the Ts daughter dated the guy then she is responsible for his actions is unfathomable to me. If he goes out an beats someone up in the street should the T be hauled before the courts for GBH?

jc808

johnbusby wrote: »

He wasnt invited to the house, he allegedly threw a stone through the window presumably from the street. There is not a chance in hell that a tenancy deposit scheme would award you the money for the window because someone known to the family, though not invited, allegedly broke the window.

This idea that because the Ts daughter dated the guy then she is responsible for his actions is unfathomable to me. If he goes out an beats someone up in the street should the T be hauled before the courts for GBH?

No but the family should be more cautious about who they attract to the house, and should be more pro active about pursuing matters of damage caused by people they have bought to the property BEFORE whining to the LL 'oooh can you pay for a new window, like you paid for our flood and our misuse of the boiler thanks'

Note I am perfectly aware that a deposit claim is shaky ground in this situation, my point is if it is not fixed by the tenant at their cost, S21 WILL be issued with a view to recovering funds from deposit.

No playing games.