Help Legal advice about tennants rights

[Cadelin]

Boring thread but I am hoping somebody in general can point me in the right direction.

I live in a privately rented flat for the last year or so. The flat is about 3-4 years old, rent is £850 per month. The land lord brought it as a buy to let property and I deal with everything through a management company (who are actually quite reasonable).

The problem is that things keep breaking and the repairs just don't seem to be good enough. I have had to get the shower repaired 3 times, the oven twice, the fridge/freezer is currently broken, the boiler has also been replaced. A panel heater has broken, the electrical meter has had to be replaced.

Its a new flat and I am paying quite a high rent because of it. The rate of things breaking has gone well past the point of reasonable and its costing me money as well as being a serious inconvenience. (ie replacing all the food in my fridge, having to walk to the sports centre to get a warm shower)

I am wondering if there is anyway I can get compensated for these problems. I don't think it would be unreasonable to expect say £250 taken off my next rent because the flat isn't up to scratch. What kind of rights do tennants have? I have a big contract which includes pages on what is required of a landlord in it but I don't know how (or who) to complain.

 

[Ch3tan]

Do you have any direct contact with the landlord?

The reason I ask is because the management company are more likely to be the problem here. They will not want to upset a landlord by constantly reporting repairs to him, it makes them look bad and could cost them his business.

In terms of your rights, it's a difficult one, you are entitled to quiet enjoyment of the property, and essentials like the boiler must be fixed in a reasonable time-scale. With white goods it depends on whether they are provided by the landlord as is, or as a benefit of the property. What provisions are in your contract in regard to missing or short rent payments? When did you last renew your contract? Or is it rolling?

The electric meter is owned by the energy provider, so is nothing to do with you, the landlord or the agent.

 

[MYstIC G]

In the usual "I am not a lawyer" vein.

I'd suggest you write to your landlord, setting out your losses (cost of food, costs of using the sports centre, loss of earnings due to time off work, etc.) and politely ask him to compensate you. If I remember correctly this would most likely fall under the area of "quiet enjoyment" as my understanding is that you're basically to be left alone unless it's an emergency.

If there are so many problems the landlord should hit up the developer imho.

 

[MYstIC G]

Forgot the linkies:
Shelter England - Landlords' responsibilities
Shelter England - Disruption and poor work

 

[DaGaffer]

Speaking as a landlord who's been on the other side of a similar situation in the last year, I'd have to ask, how do "things keep breaking"? Two ovens? Unless your landlord is replacing broken items with second hand gear, the level of breakage seems excessive. Personally I'd kick you out.

 

[Cadelin]

Thanks for the responses so far.

I was planning on writing a letter setting detailing all the problems but the wording is always important. I renewed my contract in August this year, up until then there had been a few issues, but I was just putting it down to a bit of bad luck.

I don't blame the management company because while they need to be reminded quite a bit about the problems they do get things done. The majority of the repairs have been done in a timely manner. The recurring problems are all being repaired under warranty, so its difficult to blame them for providing sub standard repairs.

Taken individually these problems are just a normal part of life but given the shear number of problems its becoming a real pain. For example, I know the energy meter is owned by the electric company but I still had to wait in to get it repaired.

 

[Ch3tan]

That sounds unlucky Cadelin, but it also sounds as if the management agent and the landlord are meeting their responsibilities. Any reduction or compensation they give you would be goodwill, they don't have to as far as I can see.

As the gaffer above, if I were your landlord, and I'd repaired and replaced breakages and faults that were my responsibility, I'd be quite miffed if you then asked for a reduction in rent or compensation from me. I'd probably kcik you out at the next opportunity and I'd certainly be less willing to do anything for you in the mean time.

 

[Scouse]

The scandal is that you're paying 850 quid in rent.

I bought my 3-bed semi for less than 400 quid a month and in doing so didn't metaphorically watch my cash go up in smoke!

If you can afford that much rent, buy your own place m8

 

[MYstIC G]

Speaking as a landlord who's been on the other side of a similar situation in the last year, I'd have to ask, how do "things keep breaking"? Two ovens? Unless your landlord is replacing broken items with second hand gear, the level of breakage seems excessive. Personally I'd kick you out.

You say that but unless Cadelin turns on the shower with a spanner or kicks the oven door closed it sounds like the flat is kitted out with piss poor quality items.

 

[DaGaffer]

The scandal is that you're paying 850 quid in rent.

I bought my 3-bed semi for less than 400 quid a month and in doing so didn't metaphorically watch my cash go up in smoke!

If you can afford that much rent, buy your own place m8

I assume he's in London/SE; I charge more than that, and so does the missus on her place, and even on a low interest rate and a 75% mortgage she doesn't really make a profit (she keeps back the small excess for repairs etc.) So unless you can find 50-60K for a deposit, buying isn't going to be much cheaper than renting (of course you're getting equity, but day to day you won't be better off).

 

[DaGaffer]

You say that but unless Cadelin turns on the shower with a spanner or kicks the oven door closed it sounds like the flat is kitted out with piss poor quality items.

Which is pretty much what was happening in my place; 3 year old Bosch cooker, "broken", Zanussi fridge "broken", then "broken" again (when replaced with new), Bosch washing machine "broken", the list went on and on. In six months every white good in the flat was replaced at my expense, and the oldest one of them was 3.5 years.

The thing that finally made me lose it was they left a tiny piece of mould in the bathroom to fester (when the fan got "broken"), refusing to clean it themselves (because of the "health risk"; wankers) so it covered half a wall when I finally got rid of them.

Sometimes you just say "meh, run of bad luck", other times you really have to ask what the fuck is going on.

 

[Scouse]

...of course you're getting equity...

That's the important thing IMO. Who gives a stuff if you're better off day-to-day.

In a race between total loss or equity, I'd choose equity every time

 

[MYstIC G]

Sometimes you just say "meh, run of bad luck", other times you really have to ask what the fuck is going on.

My sympathies mate. Though for the record, I'm of the opinion that the vast majority of tenants are wankers based upon my experiences. My comment was really just more to say that I figure Cadelin isn't a wanker.

Oh and to answer your "amount" figure Scouse, supply and demand mate.

 

[Cadelin]

While I appreciate that suspicions might be raised as to why things are breaking I can answer it.

The management company do regular inspections of the property and there has never been a problem.

The area I live in is a hard water area, the boiler and shower broke because they weren't designed to cope with the build up of limescale. I have put in a request for a water softener but this is expensive and I don't believe the landlord has agreed to it. I am also regularly cleaning out the shower to prevent it getting blocked and breaking again. It will eventually break but after I have left.

With regards to the oven, the first time the heating element broke, I reckon it was genuinely a bit of bad luck. I believe the new one that was fitted was faulty in some way, which kept tripping the fuse before it finally died and that this may have screwed the fridge.

 

[DaGaffer]

That's the important thing IMO. Who gives a stuff if you're better off day-to-day.

In a race between total loss or equity, I'd choose equity every time

Easier said than done in the current climate though. I'm still renting over here because I don't think the market has reached bottom yet, and we'll probably have to sell the missus' place in London to get the deposit (80% mortgage is the best you'll get in Ireland, if you're lucky). So for now, renting and pushing the rent down every 6/9 months is the least risk approach (with a 200K house oversupply against a 5m population, rent is crashing over here, unlike London, thank fuck).

 

[Bugz]

The management company do regular inspections of the property and there has never been a problem.

I've been living in my flat a year now and never had an inspection, phone call or nothing! Which I felt was really odd considering we told them this was our first place we've had together. I thought they would be more concerned about the upkeep of their flat, especially considering this new tenancy deposit scheme makes the ability for them to take the deposit a lot harder.

Not that the flat is in a shit state or anything but I always believed the renting-market would be a lot more 'stringent.' Afterall, we are living in other peoples' property.

 

[MYstIC G]

I thought they would be more concerned about the upkeep of their flat, especially considering this new tenancy deposit scheme makes the ability for them to take the deposit a lot harder.

It doesn't for any proper landlord who can quantify the costs of any damage caused.

 

[Scouse]

I've been living in my flat a year now and never had an inspection, phone call or nothing!

Put yourself in a landlords shoes. As long as you're paying why the fuck would they ever want to talk to you - or you them!

 

[DaGaffer]

Put yourself in a landlords shoes. As long as you're paying why the fuck would they ever want to talk to you - or you them!

Most half decent agents should be checking the property at least every six months. Mine go in quarterly.

 

[Ch3tan]

Cadelin, if you believe the problems will arise again due to hardwater then raise this directly with the landlord, you may think that the management agents are doing everything to help you, but I'd still question this.

Also remember that by going through the agent you are more than likely paying extra rent to cover their fees. On a management in London at least 10% of your rent will be going to the agent, so if you are looking to renegotiate your rent the agent nor the landlord will be particularly happy.

 

[Chilly]

It doesn't for any proper landlord who can quantify the costs of any damage caused.

Yeah, but it does for the army of ***** who call themselves landlords and make up the majority. Admin fees, carpet cleaning fees, some tiny scratch on a doorframe, flexible definition of "expected wear and tear".

I wouldnt trust any landlord as far as I can throw them. We just took a shit load of photos and will be sending a copy to the agency along with our amended inventory report.

 

[Ch3tan]

Yeah, but it does for the army of ***** who call themselves landlords and make up the majority. Admin fees, carpet cleaning fees, some tiny scratch on a doorframe, flexible definition of "expected wear and tear".

I wouldnt trust any landlord as far as I can throw them. We just took a shit load of photos and will be sending a copy to the agency along with our amended inventory report.

It works both ways Chilly, lots of landlords are too trusting and don't bother with inventories, then suffer on the other side when they can't prove damage.

At the end of the day if either tenant or landlord doesn't insist on a co-signed inventory report, backed up with pictures then they are asking to be taken for a rise.

 

[kirennia]

I've been living in my flat a year now and never had an inspection, phone call or nothing! Which I felt was really odd considering we told them this was our first place we've had together. I thought they would be more concerned about the upkeep of their flat, especially considering this new tenancy deposit scheme makes the ability for them to take the deposit a lot harder.

Not that the flat is in a shit state or anything but I always believed the renting-market would be a lot more 'stringent.' Afterall, we are living in other peoples' property.

You're at uni yeah bud? Well for the most part, landlords who cater for students will have them generally for a period of a little over 8 months iirc and will generally just be happy to not hear of any breakages. If there is any damage, all of your deposits will go so far, then if excessive damage has been done, I'm pretty sure that under university guidelines you have to stipulate someone as... argh, I can't think of the word... your... not next of kin, basically someone the uni can fall back onto with payments if you fall short; unis and uni approved landlords have contracts with each other too.

Generally, people who stay in a property for over a year as a student, aren't the types to destroy the house anyhow.


As for your case Cadelin, I'm not sure I would persue it; it's not a case of what is right or morals, it's a case of you currently having a landlord/agent who is relatively quick in repairing broken items, hasn't bothered you much and as such, is the kind of landlord you want. They CAN be real pricks if they want to be, sending a letter with the minimum 24 hours notice then just walking in your flat if you aren't around, taking your deposit for absolutely no reason, giving no flexability with regards to payments, randomly(ish) hiking prices and also, kicking you out with the minimum amount of notice at an awkward time. I would recommend that you simply do as you have been. While frustrating, unfortunately, it can get a whole lot worse if you decide to start rocking the boat (dependant on the landlord of course). Be content in the fact that you currently have a semi-reasonable working relationship...i.e. you don't talk much, even if truth be told, the landlord should really compensate on a moral basis.

 

[Ch3tan]

They CAN be real pricks if they want to be, sending a letter with the minimum 24 hours notice then just walking in your flat if you aren't around, taking your deposit for absolutely no reason, giving no flexability with regards to payments, randomly(ish) hiking prices and also, kicking you out with the minimum amount of notice at an awkward time.

Wow, so wrong, where to start?

It is illegal for a landlord or his agent to access the property without your consent, even with notice. If they tried to evict you, a court would frown heavily on this.

Taking your deposit for no reason; can't be done. Unless you are a total idiot and are not aware of your rights. A deposit must be secured within 14 days the start of the AST with a deposit scheme or the landlord can be sued by the tenant for 3 time's its value. The deposit can only be released with the tenants consent, in nearly all deposit schemes the money will go to the tenant, with any money the tenant has agreed to pay the landlord going to the landlord. If there is a disupute the money goes nowhere until settled.

Flexibility with regard to payments; unless you have a written consent to pay late or change your payment date, then you are leaving yourself wide open. A good tenant is one who pays on time and treats the property well. A tenant asking for flexibility with payments should start alarm bells ringing for most landlords.

Price increases; so so wrong. To much to get into, but a landlord cannot enforce a price change of your rent while you are under the period of your contract.

Kicking you out; good luck with that. If you are served notice, and you don't wish to leave, then the landlord has to take you to court and have you evicted. This takes 3 months, minimum, and there is no guarantee the courts will rules in their favour. If it's an awkward time, refuse to leave.

Your whole post seems to be based on the rental market of the 70's

 

[MYstIC G]

As for your case Cadelin, I'm not sure I would persue it; it's not a case of what is right or morals, it's a case of you currently having a landlord/agent who is relatively quick in repairing broken items, hasn't bothered you much and as such, is the kind of landlord you want. They CAN be real pricks if they want to be, sending a letter with the minimum 24 hours notice then just walking in your flat if you aren't around, taking your deposit for absolutely no reason, giving no flexability with regards to payments, randomly(ish) hiking prices and also, kicking you out with the minimum amount of notice at an awkward time. I would recommend that you simply do as you have been. While frustrating, unfortunately, it can get a whole lot worse if you decide to start rocking the boat (dependant on the landlord of course). Be content in the fact that you currently have a semi-reasonable working relationship...i.e. you don't talk much, even if truth be told, the landlord should really compensate on a moral basis.

I'm guessing that either:

• You've been burned in the past by a wanker landlord. -or-
• You don't understand the concept of an agreement.

Renters sometimes don't understand how things they think are reasonable (paying rent a few days late) can screw with a landlord. It doesn't happen in most cases that a landlord outright owns a property in its entirety and can be totally flexable. It's fairly basic if you think about it tbh, the landlords general life problems are not your problems and your general life problems are not the landlords. It's real life, some are wankers, some are normal people.

The best bet here is still to ask the landlord politely, Cadelin. The old expression "if you don't ask, you don't get" springs to mind. If they say no, then you have to decide how much hassle it's really worth. Talk to your landlord like a human and see where you get.

Oh and with access, while what Chet said is generally always correct it wouldn't apply in certain situations. For example if there was a burst pipe pissing water throughout a building the landlord would be perfectly entitled to enter to repair it because, as I understand it, this mitigates potential losses.

 

[rynnor]

Harassing tenants is actually a criminal offence - I'd be suprised if many people will find this overzealous type of landlord.

 

[kirennia]

Ch3t/MYsTiC:

While I pride myself in at least thinking I'm the type of person who is happy when proven wrong (it is afterall, the main crutch towards healthy learning), condescention isn't going to best serve either party in healthy debate/talk... I'd rather it if you didn't when all I'm trying to do is help...

1)Entry to the property:
A considerable number of tenant agreements will, within the bounds of the initially signed contract, stipulate a minimum notice timeframe, after which the landlord can enter the property you are letting, even without you present. I'm not saying that they will simply let themselves in if you decline their proposed time but there are ways around this... e.g. knowing when you're going to be away from the house and sending a letter at this time. Not all landlords do this of course, in fact I'd say that very few do. The few who do however are the kind of people who will be pissed off with the tenant for whatever reason (or are just dicks) which is the context with which I meant this and subsequently the point I was attempting to make, even if it was worded badly (and maybe still is).

2)Taking the deposit for no reason:
Worded badly. I didn't mean to imply the only conclusion which you could realistically draw from what I had written, sorry... I'll try and word it better. Stain on the carpet? Scratches on woodwork? Even if you've forgotten to clean behind the oven when you eventually leave the property, these can all be used as excuses for partially taking your deposit which some landlords would ignore, others would go mental about and milk you for as much as they could... I'd go as far as to say that anyone who stays in a property for any meaningful length of time will give the grounds for their deposit to be taken away, dependant on how much of a bastard the landlord wants to be about 'reasonable wear and tear', that's why I like to keep in landlords good books.

3)Flexibility with regards to payments:
Again, worded badly, sorry. I meant only to provide an example with which having a landlord on good terms can be of benefit during times of strife. I've been lucky enough to have good landlords who, when I've been stretched for cash, have allowed for a little flex with regards to payments during times when my cashflow has been uneven. Requesting that payment dates per month be changed or even an individual month payment being changed are a couple of the benefits of having a very nice landlord. Of course they can reject (rightly so) and taking the piss with this is another way to get in their bad books... again, it's just another stated benefit of being on good terms. The time in question I did this was a matter of two days by the way, after which time the landlord came to my door and I had the cheque ready with a crappy bottle of wine (student at the time). Token gesture but it showed appreciation of something which he could have declined to help me with... I didn't have any problems with him for the rest of the year.

4)Randomly(ish) hiking payments:
Again, part of an initial tenancy agreement, landlords can change the amount you pay, dependant on the contract you've had drawn up. Perhaps it's fixed, perhaps it has a percentage 'give' on a yearly basis, it all depends but I'd suggest reading about this before signing anyway. Surely all landlords should at least have flex in preparation for inflation? Of course you can dispute any rises with the RAC but then it starts to get more complicated and less peaceful...

5)Kicking you out with minimum notice:
Dependant on the type of tenancy agreement again. Of course you can dispute eviction, hire yourself a lawyer, go to court and perhaps win, perhaps loose a case. I personally can't think of any time in my life whereby a court appearance, legal fees and potential eviction, even 6 months down the line, wouldn't have been a daunting prospect. Yes it's possible and perhaps that route is the lesser of two evils in some case but with relation to the opening post with which I had in mind while writting this, good relations would avoid this possibility.


Perhaps I shouldn't have written a rushed initial post and perhaps the specifics of my examples weren't very good; my written English is truly awful unless I have time to structure my sentences and re-read them a few times over... this is one amongst other reasons why I don't post often and generally when I do, it's either a long post or very short with little context. I am however, generally up for being shown to be wrong, dependant on the tone of the discussion. Off to bed now anyway, night.

 

[Ch3tan]

Firstly I wasn't being condescending, I was correcting your very incorrect post IMO.

Ch3t/MYsTiC:

1)Entry to the property:
A considerable number of tenant agreements will, within the bounds of the initially signed contract, stipulate a minimum notice timeframe, after which the landlord can enter the property you are letting, even without you present.

Even if this is stated in the tenancy agreement, it's still illegal. Unless it's under the circumstance meg pointed out, i.e, emergency repairs.

2)Taking the deposit for no reason:
Worded badly. I didn't mean to imply the only conclusion which you could realistically draw from what I had written, sorry... I'll try and word it better. Stain on the carpet? Scratches on woodwork? Even if you've forgotten to clean behind the oven when you eventually leave the property, these can all be used as excuses for partially taking your deposit which some landlords would ignore, others would go mental about and milk you for as much as they could... I'd go as far as to say that anyone who stays in a property for any meaningful length of time will give the grounds for their deposit to be taken away, dependant on how much of a bastard the landlord wants to be about 'reasonable wear and tear', that's why I like to keep in landlords good books.

I've already tried to explain this. The change in law with the deposit protection schemes makes this extremely difficult for the landlord. The power with deposits is with tenants. The landlord can try to take the piss, but will have no access to the money, and will have to prove to the DPS (or alternative) that the damage is real with documented evidence. They cannot simply charge you and take the money anymore.

3)Flexibility with regards to payments:
Again, worded badly, sorry.

And again, I only gave advise as to what a tenant should do. Get things in writing. I'm a landlord and deal with other landlords everyday, I'm simply letting you know what most landlords will think if people ask for extra time / pay late.

4)Randomly(ish) hiking payments:
Again, part of an initial tenancy agreement, landlords can change the amount you pay, dependant on the contract you've had drawn up. Perhaps it's fixed, perhaps it has a percentage 'give' on a yearly basis, it all depends but I'd suggest reading about this before signing anyway. Surely all landlords should at least have flex in preparation for inflation? Of course you can dispute any rises with the RAC but then it starts to get more complicated and less peaceful...

I think you are confusing commercial lets with private residential ones. The landlord can increase the rent at the end of your tenancy, and ask you to commit to a new one. If you disagree you can either move or sit and force them to evict you through the courts -the courts may rule that the rent increase is unfair. I've yet to see one residential let that has a increase in rent after x amount of time clause in it..

5)Kicking you out with minimum notice:
Dependant on the type of tenancy agreement again. Of course you can dispute eviction, hire yourself a lawyer, go to court and perhaps win, perhaps loose a case. I personally can't think of any time in my life whereby a court appearance, legal fees and potential eviction, even 6 months down the line, wouldn't have been a daunting prospect. Yes it's possible and perhaps that route is the lesser of two evils in some case but with relation to the opening post with which I had in mind while writting this, good relations would avoid this possibility.

It doesn't depend on the type of agreement, no matter if it's a fixed term or periodic tenancy. The landlord cannot kick you out, the need to go to country court and wait to get an eviction notice. It takes 3 months, it's only country court, not daunting at all. No need for a lawyer. The fee's are paid for by the landlord.


Perhaps I shouldn't have written a rushed initial post and perhaps the specifics of my examples weren't very good; my written English is truly awful unless I have time to structure my sentences and re-read them a few times over... this is one amongst other reasons why I don't post often and generally when I do, it's either a long post or very short with little context. I am however, generally up for being shown to be wrong, dependant on the tone of the discussion. Off to bed now anyway, night.

 

[MYstIC G]

While I pride myself in at least thinking I'm the type of person who is happy when proven wrong (it is afterall, the main crutch towards healthy learning), condescention isn't going to best serve either party in healthy debate/talk... I'd rather it if you didn't when all I'm trying to do is help...

Wasn't trying to be condescending mate, as I said in my post I was guessing that you'd been burned, to me you're post came across as someone who'd suffered at the hands of a landlord. Anyhow it's not really my style to rip on anyone trying to help, you could be a legal expert in this field for all I know

Off to bed now anyway, night.

Laters

 

[rynnor]

1)Entry to the property:
A considerable number of tenant agreements will, within the bounds of the initially signed contract, stipulate a minimum notice timeframe, after which the landlord can enter the property you are letting, even without you present. I'm not saying that they will simply let themselves in if you decline their proposed time but there are ways around this... e.g. knowing when you're going to be away from the house and sending a letter at this time. Not all landlords do this of course, in fact I'd say that very few do. The few who do however are the kind of people who will be pissed off with the tenant for whatever reason (or are just dicks) which is the context with which I meant this and subsequently the point I was attempting to make, even if it was worded badly (and maybe still is).

Chets right about the contract not mattering on this one - if your landlord starts letting himself into your rental place and its not by your consent or the place isnt on fire/flooding then it most likely constitutes criminal harassment and you can phone the police to remove and/or arrest him.

Here's a good link - http://www.landlordlaw.co.uk/content/ArticleHarassment.pdf