Tenants have damaged kitchen cupboard and admitted fault but not paying?

ThisIsWeird

Mr.Generous said:

Quote the part of the tenancy agreement to them that covers this, the one I use says ...

(27) To make good all damages, breakages and losses to the premises and its contents that may occur during the tenancy caused by any act or omission of the Tenant or any person present with the Tenants consent excluding fair wear and tear.

Yes, the OP asking if they could also claim for their time was unfortunate, but assuming all the other details are correct, they are right to feel aggrieved by the tenant's failure to pay.
It's clearly not your average kitchen. The tenant admitted liability. The tenant accepted the quote. They are now, seemingly, trying to avoid paying.
Why? Who knows - perhaps because their friend is also refusing to pay, or is no longer even a friend?
But, the tenant is liable - assuming Mr G's quote above is a standard clause?
Cuti, who is your LL insurance with? Do they have an advice helpline? See if it's simpler/cheaper to pursue them for this now, or can you legitimately deduct it from their deposit when they leave. 
With a longer-term tenant with whom a relationship has been built, it may be worth offering to go halves, but for this person - unless they have a good excuse - I don't think so.

Cuticuraser

ThisIsWeird said:

Mr.Generous said:

Quote the part of the tenancy agreement to them that covers this, the one I use says ...

(27) To make good all damages, breakages and losses to the premises and its contents that may occur during the tenancy caused by any act or omission of the Tenant or any person present with the Tenants consent excluding fair wear and tear.

Yes, the OP asking if they could also claim for their time was unfortunate, but assuming all the other details are correct, they are right to feel aggrieved by the tenant's failure to pay.
It's clearly not your average kitchen. The tenant admitted liability. The tenant accepted the quote. They are now, seemingly, trying to avoid paying.
Why? Who knows - perhaps because their friend is also refusing to pay, or is no longer even a friend?
But, the tenant is liable - assuming Mr G's quote above is a standard clause?
Cuti, who is your LL insurance with? Do they have an advice helpline? See if it's simpler/cheaper to pursue them for this now, or can you legitimately deduct it from their deposit when they leave. 
With a longer-term tenant with whom a relationship has been built, it may be worth offering to go halves, but for this person - unless they have a good excuse - I don't think so.

I have landlord insurance,but I rather not claim for a relatively small amount and risk my premiums going up.
I am trying to find my tenancy agreement and will look for the clause and email my tenants back. I'll also mention that they are liable whether its their friend or not.

Cuticuraser

So I found the relevant section in the tenancy agreement:

To keep the interior of the Premises and the Fixtures and Fittings in the same decorative order and condition throughout the Term as at the start of the Tenancy, as noted in the Inventory and Schedule of Condition. The Tenant is not responsible for the following:

 • fair wear and tear;
 • any damage caused by fire unless that damage was caused by something done or not done by the Tenant or any other person permitted by the Tenant to reside, sleep in, or visit the Premises;
• repairs for which the Landlord has responsibility (these are set out in Schedule 2 of this Agreement);
• damage covered by the Landlord's insurance policy;

I am concerned about the second bullet point. Can the tenant say it is not their responsibility as it was their friend who caused the damage? Or is the second bullet point explicitely referring to fire damage only.

user1977

Cuticuraser said:

 • any damage caused by fire unless that damage was caused by something done or not done by the Tenant or any other person permitted by the Tenant to reside, sleep in, or visit the Premises;

Or is the second bullet point explicitely referring to fire damage only.

Not sure how you can parse it to mean anything other than fire damage?

ThisIsWeird

Cuticuraser said:

I have landlord insurance,but I rather not claim for a relatively small amount and risk my premiums going up.
I am trying to find my tenancy agreement and will look for the clause and email my tenants back. I'll also mention that they are liable whether its their friend or not.

I didn't mean to actually make a claim, but to use their helpline if they have one - pretty sure Direct Line had this, for example?

If so, it'll likely be like 'Legal Protection', so you explain the situation and they'll advise you. I suspect it'll confirm, for example, that a Small Claim should do it and be the correct method (or just the threat - who wants a CCJ against them?), or they might confirm you can advise the tenant you can legitimately withhold it from their deposit (but who wants to wait that long? Or, if they already know they're going to lose £400, they might stop giving a poo about your house - it'll have 10 kitchen doors hanging off when they leave...)

That's all I meant - call them for advice, if they include such a helpline. Ie - be correctly informed about what you can do. Def not worth an actual 'claim'.

youth_leader

Is it likely they are trying to get the money from the 'friend' that did it?  It has only been a week? 

Bookworm105

time will tell whether the tenant pays up, as above they may be waiting for money from the friend.

if not, the "easy" solution is to wait until the tenancy ends and claim it from the deposit
It appears you have written evidence that the tenant accepted it was damage at their liability so will be a uncontentious claim. One takes as read a deposit was taken and is held correctly.

if the tenant has been paying rent on time then not worth getting aggressive with them at this stage as you want them to pay rent to the termination of the contract so the deposit can be used for damages only, rather than rent arrears.

Bookworm105

Cuticuraser said:

Or is the second bullet point explicitely referring to fire damage only.

obviously it is 

theartfullodger

Bookworm105 said:

Cuticuraser said:

Or is the second bullet point explicitely referring to fire damage only.

obviously it is 

The only person who can ultimately decide what it means is a judge in court, obvs.  

Us lot, just guessing (sometimes from a position of informed training). 

Even a barrister can only offer an opinion.

Cheers!