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.
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. 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
Broken Over Top - Landlord's Responsibility or Mine
Comments
-
Miss_Samantha wrote: »Again, this looks like an unsubstantiated claim.
Perhaps you can give us your reasons for(I assume)disagreeing?
With, or without references.Well life is harsh, hug me don't reject me.0 -
I am just pointing out that it is not obvious that claiming on insurance is 'mitigating one's loss'.
The article provided about mitigating loss does not mention anything on this.
If the tenant breaches the lease then indeed the landlord must mitigate his loss. This is the loss resulting from the breach. See article.
On a side note, most if not all insurance policies also make it a condition of the policy that the insurer must mitigate his loss.
Though I understand the logic of the argument it is not obvious that the landlord must claim off his insurance or that doing so is mitigating his loss.
I haven't seen any reference on either.
Edit:
Let's assume that the landlord must indeed claim on his insurance. This means that every time a landlord proposes deductions to a tenant's deposit the tenant should demand evidence that the relevant loss is not covered by insurance.0 -
and we have yet to establish whether the landlord has insurance, and if he does, whether it extends to accidental damage by tenants.
Neither can be assumed.0 -
Of course, insurance is totally irrelevant to whether the OP should pay £50 or whatever towards the replacement of a decade-old hob.0
-
Of course, insurance is totally irrelevant to whether the OP should pay £50 or whatever towards the replacement of a decade-old hob.
Ah but the saint claimed that the landlord had to claim on his insurance if he was insured, and you claimed that claiming on the insurance was part of the obligation to mitigate a loss.
If so, insurance is very relevant.0 -
<sigh>
There would be no benefit whatsoever - no mitigation - in claiming for such a small amount.0 -
-
How about just paying for something YOU have damaged, the landlords clearly wasn't expecting a bill even though it was 10 years old, your clumsy act means he's getting one or a shed load of paperwork.0
-
I would suspect the cost of this item may not exceed the excess on any insurance. So there would be no reason to claim.
OP you broke it. You fix it. Sorry.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.3K Spending & Discounts
- 247.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.4K Life & Family
- 261.4K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards