PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING
Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.Tenant repairing damage.
Options
Comments
-
deannatrois wrote: »If the tenants have been there 2 and a half years and say, you had it for a couple of years before that, you probably would only get half the costs back anyway, maybe less (betterment).
I have had to replace shower heads but mainly due to the seal or something near the seal going that couldn't be fixed and me wanting to change it because I wanted a change. This most often happens with cheap shower heads. I've never swung from a shower head in my life lol or hung anything from it.., its just a weak point. If the shower head is directional, that can be a cause.
That isn't what happens. They actually break. Something breaks that isn't anything to do with the the seal. Some part of the shower fittment breaks. Where they break is not something that could be explained by normal use.0 -
That isn't what happens. They actually break. Something breaks that isn't anything to do with the the seal. Some part of the shower fittment breaks. Where they break is not something that could be explained by normal use.
Cheap ones do indeed leak as the o ring used is also often cheap. Cheap ones also break due to being run up and down the guide rail. The are made of cheap plastic. Its common for them to break at the neck. We are forever having them replaced at work! There is no great mystery.
The tenant did the right thing, what's the big deal.0 -
No I think you are nit picking. Be glad they paid the rent, broke something and fixed it (wear and tear) plus watch “Can’t Pay well take it away”.0
-
I'm not sure exactly what part we're talking about or the (presumed) reason for it breaking, but it doesn't seem abundantly clear to be that it should even have been the tenants' responsibility to fix it.0
-
When you say kick them out, i'll presume you meant legally evict themPokerPlayer111 wrote: »If your tenants are generally ok people i would just suck it up. Its £40-£50 you say? pretty meaningless amount to a home owner.
Being a tenant usually means you are poor as !!!!!. - really? Hmm who's renting all these flats and houses at £1000+ a month. Having experienced being a poor tenant myself its not a fun. Generally you worry about breaking anything all the time, its a right pain if the landlord is not chilled out.
When the tenants leave go in and fix everything and expect some cost IMO, if its basic stuff broken just let them have the dam deposit back.
If tenants are breaking stuff all the time then you have to put foot down or kick them out etc.0 -
Showers are in a water-based environment, with substantial sudden temperature changes. If a part is, for example, plastic then it won't last forever.
Just because it was okay two and a half years ago when you moved in, this sounds like wear and tear. As does the toilet seat. I've known toilet seats last forever, and others not very long at all.
If they'd contacted you then it would have been for you to put right, at full cost. They decided to fix these minor issues themselves, saving you money and inconvenience.
If you'd put them right, at your cost, then as they break again in the future (it could have already happened again, afterall!) then again it's at your cost to fix.
So they've saved you time, effort and money - and if you want to charge them to put these things how you want them - looking identically to how they were, then go ahead - but you shouldn't / couldn't charge them to do so.
The cost won't be significantly different (one way or the other) than it would have been at the point the incidents happened in the last 2 and a half years, so the cost now would be the same as it was then to you, except you've gotten more time out of it. This means that paying for them to be replaced now has extended the period before you're having to put your hand in your pocket, that's got to be good for you?
These things are pretty sure to be wear and tear, and if not can you prove that it's not? Would you be hopeful of a Deposit Scheme claim finding in your favour that it was the tenants fault over wear and tear?
So even if that did happen, you would only be able to claim back the cost of a X year old toilet seat and an X year old piece of shower fitting, which wouldn't be the same as the costs to replace with a brand new toilet seat and an entire new shower fitting.
As for pressure washing the patio, that is not for you to decide. As long as at the end of the tenancy the property is handed back in the condition it was let to them (minus fair wear and tear), they don't need to pressure wash the patio. Of course, if you feel that this breaks the terms of any clauses that they've agreed in the tenancy and it's enough for you to want them to leave, you can issue a S.21 and ask them to leave. If it's not that big a deal for you, then you should live with it.
It sounds to me that you're too attached to the property as it was once your home, and so you're not dealing with it as an investment property, and that leads to clouding your judgement over the fact that this is the home of your current tenants for now, and the future home of future tenants.
As for claiming back money for those few things, being a landlord does incur costs, and you should have factored that into any rent you charge. Whilst tenants are responsible for looking after the property and not causing negligent damage, wear and tear and issues that aren't their fault are your responsibility.
Two quick questions:
1) Does the slightly different toilet seat and slightly different shower fitting affect the monthly income or value of the house?
2) As long as the patio is returned to you clean, does it matter?
All in all, it sounds like you've got good tenants. I hope your future tenants are as good for you, your current tenants don't seem to have caused any hassles or problems at all!0 -
Are you serious? You kicked up a fuss because an outside patio hadn't been pressure washed?
The paved yard and extended paved garden was spotless at the start of the tenancy as it was recently finished prior to this, and the agreement states it is to be kept in the same character, weed free and in good order. They hadn’t done anything to it in this time till i prompted them, weeds etc started coming through the mortor joins in the paved areas which in time if not cared for can lead to further degradation, hence why i kicked up a fuss.WorkingTowardsDebtFree wrote: »
If they'd contacted you then it would have been for you to put right, at full cost. They decided to fix these minor issues themselves, saving you money and inconvenience.
If you'd put them right, at your cost, then as they break again in the future (it could have already happened again, afterall!) then again it's at your cost to fix.
So they've saved you time, effort and money - and if you want to charge them to put these things how you want them - looking identically to how they were, then go ahead - but you shouldn't / couldn't charge them to do so.
Two quick questions:
1) Does the slightly different toilet seat and slightly different shower fitting affect the monthly income or value of the house?not really
2) As long as the patio is returned to you clean, does it matter?with it being how it was green, yes, it wasn’t clean. The patio was spotless as mentined above with sandy colour flags, not green
I appreciate all the comments, hence why I came here to ask in the first place.
They admitted to breaking the toilet seat and shower so it would have been at their cost regardless of who fixed it. I can take the hit on the shower and some things may seem petty to some other landlords but surely the toilet seat should still be replaced with a similar one, such as slow closing. Why should I accept sub standard replacements just because they broke it? It is more the principle or the matter, you break it, you pay for it.
If i broke someones fence, i wouldn’t replace it with a crappy pallet nailed together. I would pay for the same style that i broke, surely this should be the same?
As said, i understand some LLs are just happy about it being replaced with anything as long as it is functional, but i hate people taking the p***.0 -
The general opinion here is that these tenants don't seem to have been taking the !!!!.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards