LL responsible for phone line/ aerial?

noh

Tiddlywinks wrote: »

..................

I think that it is generally accepted that properties should have the capability to have a working landline - it is part of living in the 21st century.

To simply say that these items were not mentioned on the inventory is just wriggling out of a LL's responsibility.

But there is a working landline.
If not it is the telecoms provider who is responsible. They provide the service.

sandsni

noh wrote: »

But there is a working landline.
If not it is the telecoms provider who is responsible. They provide the service.

AFAIK the provider is responsible up to the point the wires enter the property, after that it's the service user who pays for repairs. That's how it worked when I had a problem with my phoneline. The question the OP seems to be asking is whether that's down to the LL or the tenant in a rental situation.

G_M

sandsni wrote: »

AFAIK the provider is responsible up to the point the wires enter the property, after that it's the service user who pays for repairs. That's how it worked when I had a problem with my phoneline. The question the OP seems to be asking is whether that's down to the LL or the tenant in a rental situation.

Correct. ServiceProvider is responsible for external wiring, and internal up to the master socket' Any internal wiring beyond that is the customer's responsibility, but service providers will repair, at a cost.

See

http://bt.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/13568/~/fault-testing-with-a-master-socket

Guest101

Ladyhawk wrote: »

Hi everyone,

My new tenant (been in for 3 weeks) has contacted my agent to say that there is a fault with the telephone line and the internal aerial doesn't work.

The property was not advertised as having either and I don't particularly think that it is my responsibility to fix them as they are not really intrinsic to the property.

Is this correct? I have done everything else that the tenant has requested since he's moved in.

Thanks as always

Whilst not advertised with either, the tenant presumably saw there was a telephone line and aerial and the house still had these when he moved in. I believe that a contractual obligation came into effect.

tbs624

G_M wrote: »

But either way, as a landlord I would fix them.
* good for relations with your current tenant - why p*ss them off so early in the tenancy?
* good for the property to have working utilities for if/when you next advertise (which may be soon if you p*ss off the tenant!)

Come on- it's basic maintenance.

G_M has it, totally. OP are you new to being a LL?

thesaint

Guest101 wrote: »

Whilst not advertised with either, the tenant presumably saw there was a telephone line and aerial and the house still had these when he moved in. I believe that a contractual obligation came into effect.

That's not how the law works.
See G_M's post with links to the law governing the subject being discussed.

noh

G_M wrote: »

Correct. ServiceProvider is responsible for external wiring, and internal up to the master socket' Any internal wiring beyond that is the customer's responsibility, but service providers will repair, at a cost.

See

http://bt.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/13568/~/fault-testing-with-a-master-socket

That was my point.
There will be a working telephone line at the master socket.

rpc

thesaint wrote: »

That's not how the law works.
See G_M's post with links to the law governing the subject being discussed.

What, like this bit?

b) implicit, if the presence of those items, or anything the LL said, led the tenant to believe they worked & were part of the contract

I would expect (having been on both sides of renting) the LL to fix the phone line. These days, I probably wouldn't be so sure about an aerial but if it is the only means of getting TV then I probably still would.

If a working phone line does not form part of the contract, there is no obligation to leave a working line. T could fix it, then disable it again before vacating. Likewise the aerial.

Would potential tenants be more or less likely to take up a tenancy if, during the viewing, they were told "there's the phone line, but it doesn't work so you can use mobiles or pay for it to be fixed yourself. And over there is an antenna point, but it doesn't work either and there's no cable/satellite so you need to sort out a TV signal yourself."

In my mind, these are cheap repairs which add value. Therefore it is in the best interests of the LL to have them done.

thesaint

rpc wrote: »

What, like this bit?

b) implicit, if the presence of those items, or anything the LL said, led the tenant to believe they worked & were part of the contract

Please show me where the above appears in the link to Sec 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.

rpc wrote: »

I would expect (having been on both sides of renting) the LL to fix the phone line. These days, I probably wouldn't be so sure about an aerial but if it is the only means of getting TV then I probably still would.

What you expect is neither here nor there. We have laws governing what the landlord is obligated to repair/maintain.

rpc wrote: »

If a working phone line does not form part of the contract, there is no obligation to leave a working line. T could fix it, then disable it again before vacating. Likewise the aerial.

Correct. I don't see the point, but you are correct.

rpc wrote: »

Would potential tenants be more or less likely to take up a tenancy if, during the viewing, they were told "there's the phone line, but it doesn't work so you can use mobiles or pay for it to be fixed yourself. And over there is an antenna point, but it doesn't work either and there's no cable/satellite so you need to sort out a TV signal yourself."

In my mind, these are cheap repairs which add value. Therefore it is in the best interests of the LL to have them done.

The OP is specifically asking if it is their responsibility.
No ones opinions on whether it adds value, or has a moral obligation to sort it out is "wrong".

Pixie5740

Is the flat fully furnished and was a television provided or is it the tenant's own television?