Suing landlord/agency

croto

always_sunny wrote: »

What do you expect the LL to do? Build a window? Replace the exhaust fan?
Why did you take the flat if it was presented in poor conditions?
Why did you move in if on day 1 it was that bad?

Is this a private LL?
It my also boil down to how much rent you pay and where and for what.
Do you have a break clause? Maybe best if you move out at the first opportunity!

The reason why I've moved in is pretty simple. I have given my notice to my previous landlord, hired a van, packed all my stuff and ASKED before signing the contract if all I've mentioned was going to be fixed before I move in, which was responded with a yes...

Cakeguts

Was the flat cheap for what it was? You can tell what a landlord is going to be like from the state of the flat and the rent compared to other rents in the area. Good landlords with expensive properties would replace the carpets and make sure that the flat was really well presented and in a clean condition.

stator

Does the property have a landlord gas safety certificate?
If you think there is a leak you need to get it tested professionally.

You can't sue the landlord just for being a bad landlord.

[Deleted User]

I think the agents themselves must be very poor, the agents I use would not be prepared to market a property in that condition.

croto

Cakeguts wrote: »

Was the flat cheap for what it was? You can tell what a landlord is going to be like from the state of the flat and the rent compared to other rents in the area. Good landlords with expensive properties would replace the carpets and make sure that the flat was really well presented and in a clean condition.

It wasn't really cheap, I'm paying £1000 for a 1 bed flat in zone 3/4 close to Woolwich, so not exactly cheap.

stator wrote: »

Does the property have a landlord gas safety certificate?
If you think there is a leak you need to get it tested professionally.

You can't sue the landlord just for being a bad landlord.

It isn't just the fact that it's a bad landlord, but the fact that I had so many issues and there isn't a carbon monoxide detector installed in the property even though it is a legal requirement... Having in mind I had a gas leak (potentially still have) my life was at risk.

takman

croto wrote: »

It isn't just the fact that it's a bad landlord, but the fact that I had so many issues and there isn't a carbon monoxide detector installed in the property even though it is a legal requirement... Having in mind I had a gas leak (potentially still have) my life was at risk.

If you were that worried about a lack of Carbon Monoxide detector then you would have bought one yourself.


Considering you think its vital to have one i'm assuming you have one now so how long after the inspection was it installed and who installed it, you or the landlord?


If you paid for it you can claim that back from the landlord. But if you don't even have one now then you can't really care that much.

Pixie5740

croto wrote: »

It isn't just the fact that it's a bad landlord, but the fact that I had so many issues and there isn't a carbon monoxide detector installed in the property even though it is a legal requirement... Having in mind I had a gas leak (potentially still have) my life was at risk.

A carbon monoxide alarm isn't going to save you from a gas leak. If you are that concerned about your life being at risk due to carbon monoxide poisoning you would put your hand in your pocket and buy a carbon monoxide alarm yourself regardless of the landlord's legal responsibilities to supply one (and from what you've said your landlord does not have a legal obligation to supply one). If you are concerned about a gas leak or suspect there is still a gas leak contact National Grid immediately. I cannot understand why, when you first smelt gas in your home, you contacted the letting agent rather than National Grid.

Personally, I don't think you will get anywhere suing your landlord. I think your time would be better spent contacting National Grid if you suspect there is still a gas leak, requesting a copy of the gas safety certificate if you don't already have one and contacting HSE should your landlord fail to produce a current one, and writing to your landlord about any outstanding repairs.

The_Logans

croto wrote: »

It isn't just the fact that it's a bad landlord, but the fact that I had so many issues and there isn't a carbon monoxide detector installed in the property even though it is a legal requirement.


Having in mind I had a gas leak (potentially still have) my life was at risk.

A carbon monoxide detector does not detect natural gas. It's bad that you had a gas leak, but a CO detector would not have helped in the slightest.


As stated by a previous poster, a CO detector is good practice but is not a legal requirement unless there is a solid fuel stove/fire. We have 2 in our property as we have a log burner in one room and an open fire in another.

LEJC

BBH123 wrote: »

I think the agents themselves must be very poor, the agents I use would not be prepared to market a property in that condition.

Although to be fair an agent markets lots of properties to lots of tenants.
I have a very good letting agent who lets my property and have often had conversations with them over different types and indeed standards.
What meets someones standard as acceptable is not always the same as what meets others expectations ...its a very subjective perspective...Once you get past the legal bits like gas safety etc which should never be open to compromise it is quite eye opening just what some prospective tenants are happy to accomodate when perhaps they are not paying full market rent on a property....

I have one property in a block of flats where it is mixed ownership and some of the flats have been modernised (mine included) but others suffer from poor windows and antiquated heating systems and boilers....there can be maybe a £300 in the rent payable on the different types of flat based purely on its condition.

Letting agents in my experience dont always shy away from the poorer quality of fixtures and fittings etc as there will be demand from those on a lesser budget to take these properties.

The point of contention comes when what you are actually receiving and expectation dont meet.....its harsh to say but some tenants accept the faults on viewing and signing the contract but the reality of living in a "run down" property become all too evident and real once they move in and live there on a day to day basis.

It is only after you have been in a property for a while you see its flaws.

I'm not in anyway trying to justify a LL that cant be bothered to clean their property before a new tenancy but if the tenant were indeed moving into a newly refurbished property they may well be paying a higher rent than the tenant who accepts something that is a little less than pristine.

LEJC

croto wrote: »

It wasn't really cheap, I'm paying £1000 for a 1 bed flat in zone 3/4 close to Woolwich, so not exactly cheap.

I agree thats not cheap on the face of it.....but what do high specification similar properties in the same area go for....?