Lanlord insisting on payment for plumber

eevie

My daughter is at uni and shares a 4 storey terrace house, on the top floor there is a bathroom and one of those toilets with a macerator which has not always worked well. The other week it packed up completely, so a plumber was sent to fix it this involved replacing all of the piping.

The landlord is now insisting that the students pay for the work as he said that it was their fault as someone must have put something down the toilet that that they should not have and the landlord says he can get the plumber to verify this.

In reality they have always been been very careful in its use because they were warned about it before they moved in. Earlier on in the year a Saniflo engineer called to service it, he told the students that the unit was quite old and the piping was inappropriate for the toilet and also it had not been serviced as regularly as it should have.

They only have a couple of months left in the property and are concerned that the landlord will withold their deposits if they don't pay. Their last rent installment is due in 2/3 weeks.

Is there anything they can do?

lil_me

Get them to contact Saniflo and ask for a statement from them, ask the landlord for the written statement and evidence from the plumber then take both to obtain legal advice.

LillyJ

This happened to me. When the pipes got blocked in our kitchen they said it was our fault for putting food down the sink (which we didn't). A strongly worded letter saying that "we wanted to remain on good terms and did not want to resort to a solicitor" combined with a highlighted copy of the contract stating plumbing was a responsibility of the landlord sorted it. Until then we had tried called, getting our parents to call, etc, but nothing worked other than the letter. We got our parents to all sign it as they were garuntors and that seemed to work.

Bungarm2001

"Earlier on in the year a Saniflo engineer called to service it, he told the students that the unit was quite old and the piping was inappropriate for the toilet and also it had not been serviced as regularly as it should have."

If you can get the engineer who came out to put this in writing and sign it, then as far as I can see, the LL hasn't got a leg to stand on, unless of course it was in the original tenancy agreement that the tenants would be held responsible for any blockages.

Even then, I feel that it would be an unfair clause unless the tenants were presented with some kind of certificate at the beginning of the tenancy (with the inventory perhaps) confirming that the loo was up to standard and in perfect working order, again signed by someone from Saniflo (not the odd job bloke )

Incidently, we have a standard clause in all our lets that the tenant is responsible for paying for clearance if the outside drains block up with food being the cause. After many years of regularly paying for drain clearance caused by assorted mixes of rice, pasta, fat and beans (and other unidentifiable foody stuff :eek: ) we reluctantly had to put this clause in.

LillyJ

Bungarm2001 wrote: »

"
Incidently, we have a standard clause in all our lets that the tenant is responsible for paying for clearance if the outside drains block up with food being the cause. After many years of regularly paying for drain clearance caused by assorted mixes of rice, pasta, fat and beans (and other unidentifiable foody stuff :eek: ) we reluctantly had to put this clause in.

Ours was actually blocked by rubbish that had fallen from the guttering above (which was also LLs responsibility) which the landlord hadn't done for yonks. But they just told us it was food, but when we asked to see they couldn't show us. The plumber was also the LLs friend. Funny that.

Bungarm2001

LillyJ wrote: »

Ours was actually blocked by rubbish that had fallen from the guttering above (which was also LLs responsibility) which the landlord hadn't done for yonks. But they just told us it was food, but when we asked to see they couldn't show us. The plumber was also the LLs friend. Funny that.

Hmmmmm I agree...well dodgy. We always use a drain clearance company if we need to clear, never a plumber.

I always insist that at least one of the tenants is there when the drainman does a clearance just to prevent any misunderstandings about what the drain blocked up with.

We have pre-empted any other reason than food being the cause by building up around each outside drain and putting removable lids on them...that way, leaves and other stuff can't actually get in.

I have to say, that since we have put the clause in, we haven't had a call out for a blockage

JayZed

horseface, you'd probably be better off starting a new thread on this. But I think you'll find that most people will tell you it's your responsibility to pay for the plumber. Of course, if the plumber then tells you that the blockage was a direct result of something your tenants had done (i.e. not just normal wear and tear), then it would be reasonable for you to expect the tenants to reimburse you.

poppysarah

They are notorious for breaking.

Ask the landlord for the service history after asking the company who makes them how often they should be serviced and what the life of them is.

churchrat

Bungarm2001 wrote: »

Incidently, we have a standard clause in all our lets that the tenant is responsible for paying for clearance if the outside drains block up with food being the cause. After many years of regularly paying for drain clearance caused by assorted mixes of rice, pasta, fat and beans (and other unidentifiable foody stuff :eek: ) we reluctantly had to put this clause in.

may I ask how the new tenants can be sure that the pipes etc are fully clear when they move in? many foods, but mainly fat build up over a period of years.
just curiuos--if I was a tenant I wouldn't want to pay for an earlier tenants problems.
thanks