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.

📨 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!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide

Paint on car!

Hi All,

Our landlord has recently had our house painted and the painter has managed to get spots of paint all over both of our cars. I've had them valeted and t-cut at a place recommended by the landlord and he has said that he would pay even though it's not really his fault. However one of the cars in particular is still covered in specs of paint. I'm not sure where I stand with getting someone or thier insurance to pay for what I assume to be an expensive professional clean?

Thanks for any advice.

Comments

  • opinions4u
    opinions4u Posts: 19,411 Forumite
    edited 12 August 2012 at 8:49PM
    You are entitled to have the cars returned to their previous condition.

    Liability sits with the landlord who can in turn recover the cost from his employee.

    So civil law is on your side. How far you choose to push it with your landlord is up to you.
  • I agree.
    One thing to consider however - were you aware that the painting was to be done?
    If so would it not have made sense to move the cars away from the property?
    Its called mitigating losses - they may use this as a defence against you.
  • rs65
    rs65 Posts: 5,682 Forumite
    Ninth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    If this a bona fide painting contractor then I would expect them or their PL insurers to pay. If a direct employee of the landlord then its the landlord you have an issue with.

    I don't agree there was a duty on you to move your cars but there is a duty on the painter to avoid damage to other peoples property. The contractor should have asked you to move your car or covered it.
  • Quentin
    Quentin Posts: 40,405 Forumite
    I agree.
    One thing to consider however - were you aware that the painting was to be done?
    If so would it not have made sense to move the cars away from the property?
    Its called mitigating losses - they may use this as a defence against you.

    Ignore this.

    This is nothing to do with 'mitigating losses'
  • hugoshavez
    hugoshavez Posts: 586 Forumite
    Quentin wrote: »
    Ignore this.

    This is nothing to do with 'mitigating losses'

    Is that how you get to 5,500 posts? Just jump into a thread and rubbish someone, without adding anything useful?

    The poster had a valid point, though he was thinking of contributory negligence, rather than mitigating losses. In practice though, I doubt either would fly as a defence, although it all depends on the specific circumstances.

    OP, if the outside of the house was being painted, and proper masonry paint was used, your car may need a respray.

    But the best way to go about it will be to get a quote or two and let the landlord know how they're coming out. It'll be up to him if he wants to pass the case onto his insurers.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 354.3K Banking & Borrowing
  • 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 455.4K Spending & Discounts
  • 247.3K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 604K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 178.4K Life & Family
  • 261.5K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.