Tenants changed the lock. Who pays?

becominganobsessivesaver

Ok I’m not a legal expert but currently you have a situation where 2 people have commissioned some work, neither of these people are you. So legally I would not expect the locksmith to have a case to demand payment from you. These people are soon to leave the country so it will be difficult for the locksmith to get the payment from them through the small claims process if they are not in the UK.

You recognise that as landlord it would have been your duty to fix this, but as you did not make the contract the locksmith may not have the legal right to money from you. I would say this puts you in a strong negotiating position with the locksmith and you should offer him a fair settlement whilst being clear it is without prejudice and you are not accepting liability on behalf of your tenants. As I said I’m not a legal expert, but I think the locksmith is trying it on and therefore something should be better than nothing for them.

AdrianC

becominganobsessivesaver wrote: »

Ok I’m not a legal expert but currently you have a situation where 2 people have commissioned some work, neither of these people are you. So legally I would not expect the locksmith to have a case to demand payment from you. These people are soon to leave the country so it will be difficult for the locksmith to get the payment from them through the small claims process if they are not in the UK.

It's almost certain that the payment was taken by card before the locksmith even started work, and the tenants are merely passing the bill on for reimbursement.

amalis

The bill is already paid and tenants want me to reimburse them

zagubov

Out,_Vile_Jelly wrote: »

I wasn't able to browse the best deals, I just had to use a callbox to ring 118118 and be put through to the first on their list (who presumably pay a premium for this privilege, with the cost passed onto customers). My options were seriously limited and it was cold.

I'm making a memo to myself that if I ever get stuck in that situation, I'll ask the operator for whoever's tenth on their list.

Smodlet

amalis wrote: »

The bill is already paid and tenants want me to reimburse them

I hope they tell you to go to hell after all, you'll just take it out of their deposit anyway (which I assume you have in a protected scheme?) They will not be in the country to contest it so whichever way, you win. It is LLs like you who give the rest a bad name.

phillw

Out,_Vile_Jelly wrote: »

I locked myself out of my flat a few years ago, in London, and it cost nearly £400 with call-out fee, VAT etc. The locksmith told me the cost before he started and had a card machine. It was my fault so I paid obviously.

I had a broken front door lock, but fortunately I was able to go somewhere and sit with a computer and google local lock smiths and get quotes from about half a dozen. Most of the quotes were similar to yours, but I eventually found someone who did it for about £100.

I'd talk to the locksmith about what the problem was, but if the story matches up then I'd expect the LL to pay it.

Margot123

Well, these are things you just have to put up with when you are a LL and have reliable tenants.
They made a mistake, just this one mistake by the sounds of it.

A previous tenant of mine had a joiner replace a loose toilet seat in an 'emergency' as their toddler couldn't perch on it without falling in the pan. They were ripped off to the tune of £125 with a cheap £5 seat and 10 minutes work.

I paid the bill. I liked the tenants. They paid their bills as well. I didn't want them paying for this one silly mistake as well.

steampowered

This sounds like a landlord cost to me.

I think you should pay it. If there is an issue with the size of the invoice, you should take it up with the locksmith directly.

You have to understand that there are costs associated with letting a property. You have responsibilities under the lease agreement.

You cannot simply expect the tenant to pay for everything that might go wrong with the property. The state of the property is your responsibility and your cost (unless of course the tenants caused the damage).

steampowered

saajan_12 wrote: »

Step 2: What should the cost to the LL be?
-> The LL should have had the chance to get it repaired, at the cost of the LL's choice of service provider to buy and replace the lock, as an emergency job. So there should be some 'emergency call out fee' on top of parts + labour, but if the LL could have found a cheaper person than the £395 then that should be all he pays.

What an absolute load of nonsense. Do you really expect someone standing outside in the freezing cold, probably with the landlord's number inside, to shop around for the cheapest emergency locksmith?

Using your logic, would you also agree that tenants who damage a property should not have to pay the landlord's costs if the tenant could have got the damage repaired cheaper? Or that if someone hits your car, they should only have to pay the cheapest possible garage?

All a load of nonsense. If the cost was reasonable, it must be paid - even if it was not the cheapest.

saajan_12

steampowered wrote: »

What an absolute load of nonsense. Do you really expect someone standing outside in the freezing cold, probably with the landlord's number inside, to shop around for the cheapest emergency locksmith? -yes, these days 'shop around' just requires 5 mins with internet, or a library, or a favour from a shopkeeper, or a friend's house, or a multitude of options. It's the LL's obligation to get it repaired, at THEIR CHOICE of provider.
Tenant's remedy = repair, not money

Using your logic, would you also agree that tenants who damage a property should not have to pay the landlord's costs if the tenant could have got the damage repaired cheaper? - If the tenant left damage after the end of the tenancy, then it's the LL's job to repair, the tenant has no right to return and have their provider perform the job. However the cost must be reasonable so if the LL gives an inflated price, then the tenant can challenge with the reasonable market rate (eg middle of 3 quotes).
LL's remedy = MONEY, not repair by tenant
Or that if someone hits your car, they should only have to pay the cheapest possible garage? - In this case the person at fault has damaged your car, so your remedy is to be made whole for that damage. You have duty to mitigate losses by accepting a minimal reasonable repair cost or have them buy out your car if that's cheaper. However it's your car and your choice of repair shop. IF you demand an inflated price way above market rate, the defendant who caused the crash can cite a more reasonable quote.
Accident victim's remedy = MONEY by suing

All a load of nonsense. If the cost was reasonable, it must be paid - even if it was not the cheapest.

The point is £395 is not reasonable even for an emergency call out to change a simple Yale lock. In this case the LL owes the tenant a repair, but has the right to choose the service provider. In your examples the damaged party is owed money.

If you're going to call a post 'nonsense' then check your facts and be precise with the liabilities.