Unfurnished House - Electric Cooker repairs?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Unfurnished House - Electric Cooker repairs?

    We rent a House through a lettings agent. Just got the renewed contract and we are puzzled by a section of the contract.

    There's an electric cooker installed which belongs to the landlord. This has always been here and is the only appliance in the otherwise unfurnished house.

    The contract claims the landlord is not responsible for the maintainice, repair or replacement of this appliance, and it's the tenants responsiblilty to repair or replace if required. Is this correct?

    The letting agents send an electricain every 12 months to do the PAT test on this appliance - so clearly they have some responsibility to ensure it's safe - but if it breaks down can they just leave it, or worst insist we as tenants fund a repair or replacement?

    Would be greatful for any views on this.

    Clangnuts

  • #2
    Any appliance provided by the landlord is the landlord's responsibility and if it breaks or needs repairing (other than damage you cause by being careless) it is the landlord who has to do so.

    A clause stating that you are responsible is deemed unfair and wouldn't hold up in court.

    Comment


    • #3
      I feel it would depend on what was agreed when you took the property originally. To put this clause into your contract now when you renew as an afterthought could be deemed unfair, particularly depending on what the initial agreement consisted of (verbally and in writing).

      If the property was let unfurnished, but a cooker was in the property for your use (but not to be maintained by the landlord) then it would be acceptable if stated on the agreement that in the event the cooker broke down it would not be replaced.

      If however, you rented the property on an unfurnished basis but with a cooker provided, and this is stated on the inventory, then it would be unfair to suddenly put a clause into the contract to say that it will not be maintained. It is unlikely that they would ever hold you responsible for the replacement of the appliance, as you suggested, and their point of adding this would be purely to avoid having to replace it when it does break down.

      Comment


      • #4
        Such terms cannot be introduced like this IMHO. If a working cooker was installed when you took over the tenancy then part of your rent is for this cooker which must be maintained in a serviceable condition by the landlord - in the same way that you rent a telly.
        I have inherited some white goods which former tenants cannot be bothered to remove when moving on. They are checked for electrical safety but I always make clear to new tenants that they may have the benefit of them while they continue to work, but should they fail the tenant can either repair them or replace them with their own. Such items are not included on my inventories.

        P.P.
        Any information given in this post is based on my personal experience as a landlord, what I have learned from this and other boards and elsewhere. It is not to be relied on. Definitive advice is only available from a Solicitor or other appropriately qualified person.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by P.Pilcher
          I have inherited some white goods which former tenants cannot be bothered to remove when moving on. They are checked for electrical safety but I always make clear to new tenants that they may have the benefit of them while they continue to work, but should they fail the tenant can either repair them or replace them with their own. Such items are not included on my inventories.
          So can you legally do that (ie absolve yourself of responsibility for said white goods)?

          Comment


          • #6
            The cooker has always been here, and is included in the inventory. The house was described as unfurnished with electric cooker.

            From the replies, I'd say they are responsible for it's maintainance and replacement if required.

            Thanks for the replies. It's still working fine - but it's good to know whats what with this contract term. The letting agents have tried it on with other things over the years - which thanks to this forum I've been able to correct them on.

            Clangnuts

            Comment


            • #7
              I see no reason why not Eric: After all the tenant is informed about it before he accepts the tenancy. His choice is simple: accept my terms or I will remove the item now. Obviously its electrical safety has to be checked but that is all I do.

              P.P.
              Any information given in this post is based on my personal experience as a landlord, what I have learned from this and other boards and elsewhere. It is not to be relied on. Definitive advice is only available from a Solicitor or other appropriately qualified person.

              Comment

              Latest Activity

              Collapse

              • Claiming for protected deposit
                mandm
                This is an interesting one, got me into a spin.
                Tenants signed AST but decided to leave after 6 months and 3 days (problem with moving) using the break clause in the AST. I protected the deposit using DPS (Insured) and returned the deposit minus deductions when the moved out.
                I served the...
                21-07-2017, 08:00 AM
              • Reply to Claiming for protected deposit
                MrShed
                JK - there are *some* upsides of taking a deposit. The main two for me:
                1) Regardless of what it can feel like on here, the majority of tenants do not know they can play the system in this way.
                2) There is something to be said for the mindset of a tenant who has something "invested"...
                21-07-2017, 08:19 AM
              • Discussion - GDPR and implications on landlords
                MrShed
                I've just posted something on GDPR and then wondered whether it had been discussed on here before - a quick search implies its never been mentioned.

                I thought I would raise a topic to discuss it and the implications on landlords.In effect this is a replacement of the Data Protection Act...
                20-07-2017, 15:01 PM
              • Reply to Discussion - GDPR and implications on landlords
                jpkeates
                The ICO should be fining landlords for not registering as data processors - they're not.

                The maximum amount of personal data held by landlords and agents arises out of tenant referencing, and, if that were to be destroyed after a couple of months, most landlords would arguably be pretty...
                21-07-2017, 08:16 AM
              • Reply to Claiming for protected deposit
                JK0
                I'm afraid this rant won't help you much o/p, but:

                STILL!? Still landlords are giving tenants a way to wheedle thousands out of them for no good reason?

                I have come to the conclusion this whole deposit protection nonsense is a government sponsored scam. There is barely any...
                21-07-2017, 08:12 AM
              • Reply to Claiming for protected deposit
                jpkeates
                They are probably claiming that you didn't protect the deposit and give them the Prescribed Information document, both of which you are required to do within 30 days of receipt of the deposit.

                If you didn't do both things to the appropriate deadline, you didn't protect the deposit correctly....
                21-07-2017, 08:09 AM
              • Reply to Discussion - GDPR and implications on landlords
                jjlandlord
                Source: http://news.pwc.ch/31824/gdpr-key-ch...-eu-companies/

                That being said, I don't think it will have much impact on landlords:



                I don't think that'll be the case. References are legitimate and widespread.



                ...
                21-07-2017, 07:51 AM
              • Help. Scam/ fraud letting
                Hayleydenice93
                Hiya

                i need some advise on my situation in regards to this flat offered to me and my partner. We viewed a flat which was in an old office block which had been converted into service apartments and then refurbished into flats.

                The agency we viewed the flats through did not want...
                20-07-2017, 20:59 PM
              • Reply to Help. Scam/ fraud letting
                theartfullodger
                You do not have to own a place to be the Landlord. Suspect they rent from owner (their Landlord), they then rent (as your Landlord) to you.

                Doubt there's any chance of getting proper tenancy from them. You could sign licence, move in, then try and get rights as an AST Tenant (eg sue for...
                21-07-2017, 07:46 AM
              • Claiming for Non protected deposit
                charliesugar
                This is posted on behalf of my cleaner who approached me for help after her last landlord failed to reply to her repeated requests for return of her deposit.
                She rented a room in a shared house in London, AST, weekly rent all paid on time. Notice given and accepted, room left neat and clean....
                27-06-2017, 13:18 PM
              Working...
              X