Tenant caused damage but wants me to claim on my insurance

capital0ne

I will never rent a property ever again after similar experience, tenant refused to pay for damage and actually sued me for his deposit.
He then went on to rent another property owned by a friend of mine and he had an even worse experience with damage, blocked drains etc. I did warn him but it was too late, he'd signed the agreement

And agent's don't do anything, as you know any disputes are between you, the landlord and the tenant which is correct, but the agent will refuse to coroborate any evidence, I guess they can't take sides.

Basically just assume a tenant is going to mistreat your property till they leave and you won't be dissapointed.

lookstraightahead

stroppymare wrote: »

BrassicWoman: If people are going to comment surely they should read and understand what they are commenting on

The problem is you basically just want people to back up your story. I think you are going to have a problem personally as you are the one with the building insurance, irrespective of the moral side of things. GM knows a lot

stroppymare

Not at all .
I just think people should read a post properly before they comment.

MobileSaver

lookstraightahead wrote: »

I think you are going to have a problem personally as you are the one with the building insurance, irrespective of the moral side of things.

What difference do you think it makes whether the OP has insurance or not? Insurance is for the OP's benefit, not the tenant's.

You don't seem to grasp that the tenant is legally liable for the cost of the repairs. The OP could decide to claim off his insurance for speed and convenience but that would be up to the OP, not the tenant (and in such a case the insurer and/or OP could and should still chase the tenant for the repair costs, excess and possibly even future increased premiums.) Just because the OP has insurance doesn't mean the tenant gets away without paying for the damage they caused.

lookstraightahead

MobileSaver wrote: »

What difference do you think it makes whether the OP has insurance or not? Insurance is for the OP's benefit, not the tenant's.

You don't seem to grasp that the tenant is legally liable for the cost of the repairs. The OP could decide to claim off his insurance for speed and convenience but that would be up to the OP, not the tenant (and in such a case the insurer and/or OP could and should still chase the tenant for the repair costs, excess and possibly even future increased premiums.) Just because the OP has insurance doesn't mean the tenant gets away without paying for the damage they caused.

Ok so why can't a tenant take out buildings insurance? I'm grasping everything - I know it's the tenants fault.

MobileSaver

lookstraightahead wrote: »

I think you are going to have a problem personally as you are the one with the building insurance

lookstraightahead wrote: »

Ok so why can't a tenant take out buildings insurance? I'm grasping everything - I know it's the tenants fault.

Perhaps you are not explaining yourself very well then; why would the OP have a problem if you already understand that the tenant is the one who is responsible for paying for the damage?

A tenant can take out buildings insurance but it is unusual because it is the landlord's responsibility to repair any damage to the building. However, while it is the responsibility of the landlord to make the repairs, if the damage is caused by a third-party then the landlord has every right to reclaim the costs of those repairs from the third-party.

So in this case, the OP is responsible for repairing the garage door but the tenant is responsible for paying for the repair and any other costs/expenses incurred in doing so. The whole insurance aspect is a red herring and may or may not make it quicker/easier/cheaper for either the landlord or tenant to have the door repaired but doesn't affect who is ultimately liable for paying for it.

kinger101

stroppymare wrote: »

Not at all .
I just think people should read a post properly before they comment.

I agree. It was her cat. She should pay for the damage to the sofa.


Seriously though, find out who their insurer is it report it to them.

https://www.mib.org.uk/managing-insurance-data/the-motor-insurance-database-mid/public-access/

buggy_boy

Have you spoken to your buildings insurance?

Sometimes insurance companies can help you claim against another party, in this instance it is in the buildings insurance companies interest to help pursue the other party so that you don't claim against your insurance.

Given that it was a car that should have insurance they might be able to help as any legal costs of pursuing the claim can also be claimed against the car insurance. I would suspect as long as you can gather evidence her car insurance company will admit liability straight away to your buildings insurance company, this is because given the value of the claim they would very quickly rack up high legal fees to try to defend the claim.

It will then be her car insurance company coming after her for her excess and her premiums will be affected...

Just another route you might want to try, it should not make any difference to your buildings insurance premiums as you are not making a claim against your insurance, you are just using the legal cover that comes with the insurance to pursue the other party.. Im no expert but could be worth a phone call.

davidmcn

lookstraightahead wrote: »

Ok so why can't a tenant take out buildings insurance? I'm grasping everything - I know it's the tenants fault.

Normal all-risk buildings insurance (fire, flood, subsidence etc) wouldn't be appropriate for a tenant to get because none of that liability falls on them.

They can get tenant insurance which covers them for liability they'd have to their landlord because of their own negligence.

Sea_Shell

Personally, I'd be finding our who their car insurance is with, and making a claim against her (them) for the damage.