Issues with letting agents/landlord regarding damp/mould

anselld

fairy_lights wrote: »

Honestly what are people expected to do? If you don't have a garden or the space/money for a tumble dryer then you have no choice but to dry laundry indoors. I really don't see how it can cause damp though providing windows are opened for ventilation.

Its a question of priorities. Most people manage to afford a TV, a mobile phone contract, they scrape together a deposit, etc, etc. It is just a necessary cost of living in your own place.

£150-£200 on a dehumidifier is a good investment. It is cheaper to run than a tumbledryer, it will cut down on the need to ventilate by opening windows and losing heat that way, and it will ultimately protect deposit from mould damage deductions.

GwylimT

I very rarely dried clothes outside in my previous homes, it is something I can't do here, the amount of mold/damp I've had? Zero. I know my tenant dries most of his clothing indoors and he has never had any issues in the last eight years.

It really isn't difficult to dry your clothes indoors properly.

If you think you have penetrating damp thoroughly dry the area and cover with a water proof membrane such a thick plastic sheet, tape this to the wall with something stronf and fairly water resistant. If you have any condensation forming on the inside there is a damp issue in that area.

dirty_magic

anselld wrote: »

Its a question of priorities. Most people manage to afford a TV, a mobile phone contract, they scrape together a deposit, etc, etc. It is just a necessary cost of living in your own place.

£150-£200 on a dehumidifier is a good investment. It is cheaper to run than a tumbledryer, it will cut down on the need to ventilate by opening windows and losing heat that way, and it will ultimately protect deposit from mould damage deductions.

We bought a dehumidifier and while it does help it didn't stop it. completely. Our furniture still went mouldy and my shoes that were stored under the bed. I still had to wash with bleach, repaint to paint over the mould and regrout the bathroom twice!

I still think that if there's a bad problem that's not being solved by usually methods it's better to just move. I highly doubt that the OPs problem will be solved by buying a dehumidifier. If our landlord had tried to take our deposit for mould I'd have been so annoyed having spent 3 years desperately trying to get rid of it! It's not how we were living, our new house isn't mouldy and nothing has changed!

fredthefish

sofarbehind wrote: »

I would try taking your clothes to a laundrette an drying them there for a few weeks. As your heating is up and you have the windows open I would be amazed if this stopped the problem, unless your work from home involves running a laundry service.

A few people have suggested something similar, yeah. I think the issue with any kind of experimental changes to what we're doing is that, realistically, the weather is getting better and so we can't rule out any reduction in damp wasn't just caused by it being generally warmer outside. The keen GCSE science student in me is cringing at the thought of trying to prove something experimentally that way with so many unknown variables!

It doesn't help that the main guy who came round to do all of our quarterly house inspections (and gave us glowing reviews every time) has apparently now moved jobs, and all the stuff he helpfully suggested to get around the issue of damp/mould (which definitely did not include "stop drying clothes inside") are 'not recorded in their notes'.

dirty_magic wrote: »

We bought a dehumidifier and while it does help it didn't stop it. completely. Our furniture still went mouldy and my shoes that were stored under the bed.

Fair point, it might not resolve it completely. But I feel like on principle he should follow through with something he did offer us verbally - if nothing else, it will mean he is admitting that he has some responsibility to sort this out. If after that it doesn't help, we can cross that bridge when we come to it.

For others who pointed out checking our tenancy agreement, thanks - good advice and something I hadn't thought to check. It specifically says we are contracted to keep the property "sufficiently aired and warmed" in order to avoid "condensation and mildew". It does not say anything specific about about drying clothes inside. So I read that as meaning that as long as we are making sure there's a reasonable amount of heating and ventilation, then we're fine. Or is that open to another interpretation?

I am seeing a very polarised set of views here. Some who whole heartedly agree that we should be able to do this, especially if we can't fit a tumble drier in. Some who are vehemently agreeing with the landlord.

I just wish there was some precedent or government guidance or something to say what is a reasonable expectation of what we can and can't use the property for. But I suspect that, if pushed on the issue, the current lot would come out on the side of the landlords!

To those who were generally in agreement with me that this is a reasonable thing to do, and a fault of the house rather than its occupants, this seems to be the general policy of our letting agents: "With the property being an old terraced property you cannot dry clothes on the radiators and with us managing many properties we do advise this every time"

Total nonsense and whenever I have known anyone to receive this kind of response before it has come across as a total cop out and something I have always associated with shady ripoff merchants you have to deal with as students: dodgy student letting agencies and shady landlords trying to milk the student cash cow for every last penny. Not leaving a pleasant taste in my mouth when we previously thought these guys were really good.

(As an aside, I am glad I read through the contract for another reason too: because it reads like the exact opposite of what he said to us in passing when we moved in, which was "oh yeah, make it your own, you can basically do anything you want to it which doesn't involve builders!" - glad we have never taken him up on that or we'd be !!!!!!ed if he decided to claim he never said that!)

fredthefish

anselld wrote: »

Its a question of priorities. Most people manage to afford a TV, a mobile phone contract, they scrape together a deposit, etc, etc. It is just a necessary cost of living in your own place.

£150-£200 on a dehumidifier is a good investment. It is cheaper to run than a tumbledryer, it will cut down on the need to ventilate by opening windows and losing heat that way, and it will ultimately protect deposit from mould damage deductions.

While I can see the point you're trying to make, the thing is that we feel we shouldn't have to buy one to deal with a problem which is mainly a result of an old property without modern or sufficient insulation. You can't apply that situation to TVs and mobile phones.

"It is just a necessary cost of living in your own place" - I disagree with this idea that the default assumption should be that houses are inherently insufficiently insulated and riddled with damp and mould. I've lived in plenty of really well looked after houses before (some even older!) which had zero issues like this.

If the landlord and agency had made it clear before we moved in that the property had these inherent issues, and offered a reduced rent because of it, then that would be fair enough and we could have worked a dehumidifier into our living costs or maybe even rejected the place because of lack of space for a tumble drier. But when we first looked round the place, nobody said anything about this despite us asking about it. We looked out for the signs, but a recent redecoration had hidden anything obvious.

Sorry but I just can't get behind this idea that damp/mould should be the assumption rather than the exception.

[Deleted User]

I have lived in a number of houses. Never had a problem with damp - in spite of drying even more clothes (baby in the house) on radiators/clothes airers etc AND having an unvented tumble dryer. Until I moved to this one. I have a condenser drier, a dehumidifier, don't dry clothes on radiators etc, but there is mould. Usually due to a problem with roofing that the LL won't fix. Not me drying clothes.

I agree, blaming tenants for mould, is a very useful cop out for LL's that don't want to look for other sources of mould, let alone fix them. I was constantly blamed for mould in the bathroom (it was condensation apparently in spite of being very rectangular in nature, and I always kept windows open in bathroom which led to some showers where I wondered if body parts would drop off due to cold). Then the ceiling caved in near to the damp, it was finally fixed, and I haven't seen mould in that area since. but of course, it was always my fault. Cop out.

There is more mould around the bay window. To me the cause is obvious. But not to LL. He told me he couldn't find the cause when he purchased the place. I assume he was temporarily blinded by the £ signs.

FBaby

While I can see the point you're trying to make, the thing is that we feel we shouldn't have to buy one to deal with a problem which is mainly a result of an old property without modern or sufficient insulation. You can't apply that situation to TVs and mobile phones.

If the landlord and agency had made it clear before we moved in that the property had these inherent issues, and offered a reduced rent because of it, then that would be fair enough

How can you be so sure that the rent doesn't take into consideration that it's an old property more likely to have issues with damp if not all precautions are being taken?

That's what it comes down too really. The landlord could say that the rent DOES reflect these issues and that unless it becomes a health and safety issue, it is about your comfort and therefore not for him to sort out.

I personally think that it is quite sad to risk a poor relationship with one's landlord over the cost of a dehumidifier.

Gigervamp

OP, where are you getting the mould? I noticed that you said you close the bathroom and kitchen doors after using them.
We have a problem with mould in our bathroom and I've found that if the door is left open (as well as the window) after use, it doesn't get mouldy.

Hope you get it sorted.

[Deleted User]

However cheap the place is.., its supposed to be habitable. That means not mouldy and damp.

Sorry but the above is quite ridiculous. Cheap means you shouldn't, quite rightly, expect the latest mod cons. You should expect a basic but serviceable kitchen. Clean, basically decorated and with basic flooring rather than marble tiled floors and luxury bathrooms, you should expect a working boiler and no damp or mould (particularly in view of the health risks and potential damage to goods). You should never feel you have to accept that as expected because you may or may not be paying a lower rent.

Cheap does not mean what you often get. Inadequate insulation, damp and mould, kitchens falling apart, boilers that work when they feel like it and a lax attitude towards repairs, the list is endless.

FBaby

However cheap the place is.., its supposed to be habitable. That means not mouldy and damp.

And you really think that houseowners never have to cope with this issue? We have issues with mould and damp in our very well kept owned house, which became a bit of nuisance considering I suffer from a mould allergy! What do you think we have done? All the things that have been advised here. Keep the place warm, not dry clothes inside, put a dehumidifier. There is still some, the house is naturally damp, but it's not a structural issue and certainly not one of health and safety that makes it inhabitable, we deal with it as we can and accept it is part of the house we chose.

Do you really know what inhabitable means? Certainly not having to cope with a bit of mould and damp, especially when they are easy solutions to try to make it better in the first place but one refuses to spend a couple of pounds to deal with.

Would OP be much happier if the landlord agreed to get the dehumidifier and then increase the rent by £50 a month? I really think you need to pick your battles.