A bit of advice regarding no hot water/heating after 3 weeks

FBaby

lookstraightahead wrote: »

It's of no consequence what people do in their owned homes. As a tenant you are paying for a level of service. You are a customer like you are in a hotel. This service is appalling.

This is this attitude that means than some tenants get no fault S21. You are indeed paying for a service but it doesn't come with premium. What you pay is for the luxury to have a LL liable to fix the problem not a LL who has to treat you like loyalty.

Of course you are free to go and live in a hotel and complain your heart away but obviously that comes at a cost that most tenants couldn't afford.

Marvel1

lookstraightahead wrote: »

huh? We're British? It's not World War Two. It's fixable and the tenant is paying for hot water and isn't getting any!

Really? 2 plumbers went and couldn't do it.

Marvel1

lookstraightahead wrote: »

It's of no consequence what people do in their owned homes. As a tenant you are paying for a level of service. You are a customer like you are in a hotel. This service is appalling.

What would you do if your were the landlord?

Rosemary7391

Lookstraightahead, what level of service do you think the tenant is paying for? There are a bunch of folk here saying this is a normal timescale for a non urgent boiler repair/replacement. Unless the tenant is paying above the odds for a contract that specifies these sorts of repairs get dealt with more quickly then they're not being ripped off, it's just one of those things. Not a problem until everything is "one of those things" but we can only assume it's the only major issue so far.

studentguy

deannatrois wrote: »

Nowadays people DO think baths and showers should be available daily.., it hasn't always been so and people still lived. Its a lifestyle thing not a 'one of life's necessities' thing, particularly with the temperatures we have been having. .

It's expected these days, and in this heat you can arguably say its worse as people stink from sweating. Thing is, we used to used to wash clothes in the sink and use a mangle to wring it, we used to have outdoor toilets only. Things have moved on, these days it's expected that people have daily showers, and it's not an unreasonable demand.

FBaby

Yes things have moved on and getting a plumber to fix any issues within 24h doesn't happen any longer in most parts of the country unless you pay a large premium.

Being a tenant doesn't make you more special any differently than leasing your car doesn't mean the garage will fix your car in 2h when it takes 10 days for car owners.

Paying someone for a service monthly doesn't make you special.

lookstraightahead

No but you need compensating for something you've paid for but not received.

I don't know about anyone else but if I paid for breakfast at a service station and it didn't arrive (using service station instead of hotel) I would expect a refund. I don't need to know why it didn't arrive (staff are sick nowadays, cookers break down nowadays, people should bring some peanut butter in their bag nowadays ...). If I bought a top and it fell to pieces I would expect a refund from the shop, irrespective of who the manufacturers are.

I am paying as a tenant for something that was advertised and marketed. Yes you can't control a plumber, but you can compensate. If landlords took thus approach the other way around, why do they take money from the deposit for things that break, instead of thinking "accidents happen, move on"

lookstraightahead

cjdavies wrote: »

What would you do if your were the landlord?

Compensate them.

lookstraightahead

Rosemary7391 wrote: »

Lookstraightahead, what level of service do you think the tenant is paying for? There are a bunch of folk here saying this is a normal timescale for a non urgent boiler repair/replacement. Unless the tenant is paying above the odds for a contract that specifies these sorts of repairs get dealt with more quickly then they're not being ripped off, it's just one of those things. Not a problem until everything is "one of those things" but we can only assume it's the only major issue so far.

You're paying for a 'product' that you didn't receive. As landlords always say, it's a business. And of course it works both ways. No one really cares as a purchaser why something didn't happen, but you wound expect some kind of acknowledgement. If your supermarket delivery didn't turn up for three weeks, would you just accept it? Maybe you would. I would either want my money back, or something off my next delivery etc. I wouldn't just pay and accept that the drivers van was out of action for three weeks.

Kynthia

lookstraightahead wrote: »

You're paying for a 'product' that you didn't receive. As landlords always say, it's a business. And of course it works both ways. No one really cares as a purchaser why something didn't happen, but you wound expect some kind of acknowledgement. If your supermarket delivery didn't turn up for three weeks, would you just accept it? Maybe you would. I would either want my money back, or something off my next delivery etc. I wouldn't just pay and accept that the drivers van was out of action for three weeks.

The OP is paying to live in a property and they did so. If you try to portion out the percentage of their rent that goes towards having a working boiler it would be tiny as the rent is mostly to occupy the property and then the amounts towards having a non-leaking roof, walls without damp, windows and doors that keep out the elements, a water supply, working pipes, a functioning electrical supply, etc, etc would be very small across multiple things. No rental contract guarantees things won't breakdown and need repairing which is why rent isn't broken down into components like this. You pay to live somewhere and the landlord is obliged to maintain the property, so having the boiler break in the property is not like paying for a delivery for a certain day and not getting it.

A court will judge whether a landlord took reasonable steps, and while things weren't done quickly they got a plumber out within days and eventually completely fixed the problem ensuring it won't be repeated (which is really good as repeateded breakdowns and repairs are extremely disruptive), so I can't see compensation being legally required.