Flat above me tenant destroyed my ceiling

bouicca21

Gosh, is OP me?  Upstairs tenant’s washing machine leaked into my flat because the landlord’s plumber didn’t seal a joint properly.  Damage much less serious than OP has experienced.  Landlord of said flat passed the buck to his agent who refused to engage.  Decided to make a claim on buildings insurance - managing agent came to assess damage and sorted it all out.

my sympathies to OP, dealing with brick walls is mega stressful.

EssexHebridean

I do have a lot of sympathy with the OP on this one, being flooded from a property above is incredibly distressing, all the more so when it occurs repeatedly and the leaseholder of that property completely refuses to engage with you. 

However - there is a bigger priority here OP, and that is the matter if the insurance. You need to get that sorted as a priority. If you are questioning why, or using the argument of “having nothing worth stealing” - then imagine if instead of leaking, the neighbours washing machine had caught fire…destroying both your homes… Not having contents insurance is a false economy - and I absolutely guarantee that if I went through your budget, I would easily find sufficient savings to be made to cover the sub-£10 per month cost. 

doodling

Hi,

The upstairs tenant is only liable if they were negligent.  Not asking their landlord whether they can install a washing machine is not negligence.  Negligence would be knowing that there was a leak and ignoring it or installing the washing machine in an obviously incorrect manner.

If the OP has any evidence that the upstairs tenant was negligent then pursuing a claim might be worthwhile but I've not seen anything in the thread so far that comes near to the evidence required.

ThisIsWeird

doodling said:

Hi,
The upstairs tenant is only liable if they were negligent.  Not asking their landlord whether they can install a washing machine is not negligence.  Negligence would be knowing that there was a leak and ignoring it or installing the washing machine in an obviously incorrect manner.
If the OP has any evidence that the upstairs tenant was negligent then pursuing a claim might be worthwhile but I've not seen anything in the thread so far that comes near to the evidence required.

Yes, in the usual scenario, but we don't know exactly what went on here. The OP said, "the tenant upstairs fitted a washing machine incorrectly", so if, say, the discharge hose wasn't secured or inserted properly, then we have negligence and liability.

And we seemingly have a tenant who broke the terms of their tenancy agreement by DIYing this - so I think that could be considered negligent? And the fact that it leaked could be considered incompetence. And they seemingly didn't carry out any subsequent checks for a leak given the risk that they should have known they'd undertaken (I mean, I do that whenever I connect a hose like this - go back and check it's bone dry). Add to that the fact they fibbed about it, which suggests they knew all this.

But, I don't know what it means in legal terms.

doodling

Hi,

ThisIsWeird said:

doodling said:

Hi,
The upstairs tenant is only liable if they were negligent.  Not asking their landlord whether they can install a washing machine is not negligence.  Negligence would be knowing that there was a leak and ignoring it or installing the washing machine in an obviously incorrect manner.
If the OP has any evidence that the upstairs tenant was negligent then pursuing a claim might be worthwhile but I've not seen anything in the thread so far that comes near to the evidence required.

Yes, in the usual scenario, but we don't know exactly what went on here. The OP said, "the tenant upstairs fitted a washing machine incorrectly", so if, say, the discharge hose wasn't secured or inserted properly, then we have negligence and liability.

Yes, but what proof of that does the OP have?  If they had a photo of the installation which looked like it had been done by a 5 year old then they might stand a chance, otherwise how are they going to convince a judge that this wasn't just bad luck?

And we seemingly have a tenant who broke the terms of their tenancy agreement by DIYing this - so I think that could be considered negligent? And the fact that it leaked could be considered incompetence. And they seemingly didn't carry out any subsequent checks for a leak given the risk that they should have known they'd undertaken (I mean, I do that whenever I connect a hose like this - go back and check it's bone dry). Add to that the fact they fibbed about it, which suggests they knew all this.

But, I don't know what it means in legal terms.

Whether the tenant did this in accordance with his agreement with his landlord has no bearing on his liability to the OP.  It might have some bearing on his liability to his landlord (e.g. the landlord might be able to claim back the costs of any damage to his flat) but that doesn't help the OP who presumably doesn't have a contract with the upstairs tenant.

The fact that it leaked is not necessarily an indication of negligence.  The question is whether a reasonable person would have expected whatever the tenant did to result in a leak.  To get to that argument you will need evidence of what the tenant did, as well as an argument as to why any reasonable person would have known that it would result in a leak.

Ultimately, unless the upstairs tenant shoots themselves in the foot by sending out a photo of what caused the leak with a caption "look what I've done, I thought it might leak and it did!" then evidence is going to be a real challenge.

ThisIsWeird

doodling said:

Hi,

ThisIsWeird said:

doodling said:

Hi,
The upstairs tenant is only liable if they were negligent.  Not asking their landlord whether they can install a washing machine is not negligence.  Negligence would be knowing that there was a leak and ignoring it or installing the washing machine in an obviously incorrect manner.
If the OP has any evidence that the upstairs tenant was negligent then pursuing a claim might be worthwhile but I've not seen anything in the thread so far that comes near to the evidence required.

Yes, in the usual scenario, but we don't know exactly what went on here. The OP said, "the tenant upstairs fitted a washing machine incorrectly", so if, say, the discharge hose wasn't secured or inserted properly, then we have negligence and liability.

Yes, but what proof of that does the OP have?  If they had a photo of the installation which looked like it had been done by a 5 year old then they might stand a chance, otherwise how are they going to convince a judge that this wasn't just bad luck?

And we seemingly have a tenant who broke the terms of their tenancy agreement by DIYing this - so I think that could be considered negligent? And the fact that it leaked could be considered incompetence. And they seemingly didn't carry out any subsequent checks for a leak given the risk that they should have known they'd undertaken (I mean, I do that whenever I connect a hose like this - go back and check it's bone dry). Add to that the fact they fibbed about it, which suggests they knew all this.

But, I don't know what it means in legal terms.

Whether the tenant did this in accordance with his agreement with his landlord has no bearing on his liability to the OP.  It might have some bearing on his liability to his landlord (e.g. the landlord might be able to claim back the costs of any damage to his flat) but that doesn't help the OP who presumably doesn't have a contract with the upstairs tenant.

The fact that it leaked is not necessarily an indication of negligence.  The question is whether a reasonable person would have expected whatever the tenant did to result in a leak.  To get to that argument you will need evidence of what the tenant did, as well as an argument as to why any reasonable person would have known that it would result in a leak.

Ultimately, unless the upstairs tenant shoots themselves in the foot by sending out a photo of what caused the leak with a caption "look what I've done, I thought it might leak and it did!" then evidence is going to be a real challenge.

I'm not suggesting it's open&shut. And, in legal terms, I have no idea how it would progress.
I'd just say - if you plumbed in a W/M in your upstairs flat, what steps would you take to ensure there were no leaks? Or that any would be detected and sorted?
There's no evidence this fellow did anything wrong? Isn't the evidence that he did the outcome?! I mean, what else could have caused this leak following a new machine being installed - the one it replaced was seemingly ok?
'Ignorance' is no excuse. It was either installed correctly and competently, or it wasn't. For the latter, it should follow that he shouldn't have done it in the first place.
And, knowing that what you were doing was a bit 'dodge', what steps should you take to ensure it was subsequently working fine?
And, no, telling fibs about who dunnit ain't the answer.

AlexMac

Identical damage occurred between an upper and lower flat in a Converted Block of six flats I lived in; luckily not to mine but to my immediate neighbour. 

Ceiling collapsed, while they were away on holiday; kitchen ruined, flat uninhabitable. Literally thousands of pounds including months of lost rent and alternative accommodation cost. So arguably even worse than your experience. 

We ( they) simply claimed on the Freeholders structures insurance without wasting time assigning blame (I saw the letting agent messing about with the vacant upstairs flat’s washing machine so I bet they did what your neighbour did; left the water feed leaking).  But that was history. 

I was involved cos it was a “shared freehold” which we managed collectively without an agent. I arranged insurance so knew what happened-  AVIVA were great.  They covered everything- the repairs, the kitchen replacement and the lost rent/accomodation cost. 

So find out who the freeholder or their managing agent is and demand they claim on the building’s insurance- you might get lucky. You’ll maybe have to ask the landlord who they (the agent, freeholder) is. But your landlord will be paying a Service charge including insurance costs, so get on their case. 

As others say, you might not get your ow possessions  covered, as you’ve chosen not to insure contents. But give it a try?

good luck

eddddy

AlexMac said:

So find out who the freeholder or their managing agent is and demand they claim on the building’s insurance- you might get lucky. You’ll maybe have to ask the landlord who they (the agent, freeholder) is. But your landlord will be paying a Service charge including insurance costs, so get on their case. 

The freeholder / managing agent has a contractual relationship with the leaseholder - not the OP.

So it's unlikely they will discuss things like buildings insurance with the OP.


And I doubt the leaseholder (i.e. the OP's landlord) would want their tenant to decide what building repairs to claim for, etc.

Plus the excess for an "escape of water" claim is usually high for a block of flats - maybe a minimum of £1000 and possibly as much as £5000.

So I doubt the leaseholder would want their tenant to commit them to paying that kind of money. 

BobT36

ThisIsWeird said:

I'm not suggesting it's open&shut. And, in legal terms, I have no idea how it would progress.
I'd just say - if you plumbed in a W/M in your upstairs flat, what steps would you take to ensure there were no leaks? Or that any would be detected and sorted?
There's no evidence this fellow did anything wrong? Isn't the evidence that he did the outcome?! I mean, what else could have caused this leak following a new machine being installed - the one it replaced was seemingly ok?
'Ignorance' is no excuse. It was either installed correctly and competently, or it wasn't. For the latter, it should follow that he shouldn't have done it in the first place.
And, knowing that what you were doing was a bit 'dodge', what steps should you take to ensure it was subsequently working fine?
And, no, telling fibs about who dunnit ain't the answer.

Like I keep saying, the "plumbing" will have already been there. Installing a W/M is a simple screw-on job and turning a tap. It's not like the tenant will have been messing about with copper pipes or joints.
These hoses can be COMPLETELY dry and then leak literally weeks after installing (had the same with multiple). They can also shake loose and start leaking years after install (and just require a hand-tighten). A smart person will wrap some kitchen roll around it and check now and then, (and even then still wake up to their kitchen / utility room pooling with water one day!). A layman will screw it on, turn on the tap, see no leak and think it's fine. And that's not negligent! It's not like he could have left it half-on, or neglected to "seal" it properly or anything. Most of these fill hoses come with the washer pre-installed, so you literally just screw them on.

It's no more of a "plumbing" job or requires any more "competence" than connecting a garden hose. "a bit dodge" is completely laughable. A professional plumber just installed a new expansion vessel to my boiler the other day and the new pipe started leaking soon after he left. Still waiting for him to come back and fix it. **** happens.

Same with this washing machine. This was simply an accident. Accidents happen. Insurance is there for when they do. The tenant could have been more apologetic and handled it better, though (and should have had insurance himself!).

theoretica

The OP has a contract with their landlord - who should sort out the building aspects, and also an alternative place to stay if the property is truly uninhabitable.  If the OP is out of pocket for that, they need to chase their own landlord.  If that is all sorted out, perhaps the mattress and bedding will sting less?