Replacing goods like for like in value or function?

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

    Replacing goods like for like in value or function?

    A small dilema/debate if you will.

    My intention is to furnish a property with decent, but cost effective lower end products (such as Beko).

    However, I have found some -amazing- bargains allowing me, for example, to install a Zanussi cooker with double oven and halogen hobs, for the same price.

    My only concern is that should the appliance break I would have to replace it like for like and then have to pay a fortune, for not eing able to find the bargain again.

    So, I suppose what I am asking is if I install a cooker which cost £250 from a reputable store (but happend to have an RRP of £450), in case of failure could I replace it with a decent £250 Beko or would I need to spend a fortune?

    This question also applies to furniture and other items, but I used the cooker as a current example.

    I want to put in the best items posible butalso do not want to leave myself open in the future. Perhaps there is a tenancy agreement clasue I could use?

    Any rulings?

    Thanks you

    #2
    Originally posted by James Holmes View Post
    A small dilema/debate if you will.

    My intention is to furnish a property with decent, but cost effective lower end products (such as Beko).

    However, I have found some -amazing- bargains allowing me, for example, to install a Zanussi cooker with double oven and halogen hobs, for the same price.

    My only concern is that should the appliance break I would have to replace it like for like and then have to pay a fortune, for not eing able to find the bargain again.

    So, I suppose what I am asking is if I install a cooker which cost £250 from a reputable store (but happend to have an RRP of £450), in case of failure could I replace it with a decent £250 Beko or would I need to spend a fortune?

    This question also applies to furniture and other items, but I used the cooker as a current example.

    I want to put in the best items posible butalso do not want to leave myself open in the future. Perhaps there is a tenancy agreement clasue I could use?

    Any rulings?

    Thanks you
    Well, to some extent the risk of the appliances breaking down will be reduced if they are good quality ones to begin with, although it is not an exact science. One of the best washing machines I have ever had was also the cheapest.

    I think you are obliged to replace any appliances with something of equivalent quality rather than equivalent cost. The tenant may have been persuaded to take your property partly because it seems to have decent quality furniture appliances in it. If those appliances are gradually replaced by inferior quality models, the T has to some extent been misled. However, if a cheaper model can perform just as well as an expensive one, it will not be a problem in practice.
    'Pause you who read this, and think for a moment of the long chain of iron or gold, of thorns or flowers, that would never have bound you, but for the formation fo the first link on one memorable day'. Charles Dickens, Great Expectations

    Comment


      #3
      I've purchased properties with existing items I wouldn't normally have supplied in rented property eg halogen hobs, washer/ driers etc. I just add a clause in the contract (which the tenant signs to acknowledge they have read and understood) that reads along the lines...should the item need replacing then the landlord can, at his discretion, replace with a (conventional electric hob ilo halogen) /(washing machine only ilo washer drier) etc etc.

      I have had a couple of instances where I needed to replace these items and the situation was accepted by the tenants.

      Comment


        #4
        The Landlords obligation is to replace "like for like", so you could replace an old washing machine with another secondhand machine. It could also be argued that changing a used Bosh with a new Beko is improving the goods as you are replacing "new for old" regardless of brand.
        My posts are my opinion only and are not intended as professional advice.

        I do not claim to be an expert of any sort. I may well be totally wrong, do not rely on my contribution to this forum in any way whatsoever.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by subjecttocontract View Post
          I've purchased properties with existing items I wouldn't normally have supplied in rented property eg halogen hobs, washer/ driers etc. I just add a clause in the contract (which the tenant signs to acknowledge they have read and understood) that reads along the lines...should the item need replacing then the landlord can, at his discretion, replace with a (conventional electric hob ilo halogen) /(washing machine only ilo washer drier) etc etc.

          I have had a couple of instances where I needed to replace these items and the situation was accepted by the tenants.
          Conventional electric hob does the same thing (it heats pans) as a halogen hob, so no reason for L/LA to make excuses here. But replacing washer drier washing machine only IS a loss to tenant - and, for L, possible condensation issues in the winter with all that wet laundry around the place.

          Comment


            #6
            Yes you right.

            But the alternative is that I take out the washer drier and put a wasing m/c only in from the start of the tenancy. Hassle for me, loss for the tenant. So, I leave it in, tenant usually very happy but understands if it breaks down & its beyond reasonable repair I will be supplying a washing m/c only.

            If they don't like it they don't sign the contract or I serve notice subject to fixed term/ periodic situation.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by James Holmes View Post

              So, I suppose what I am asking is if I install a cooker which cost £250 from a reputable store (but happend to have an RRP of £450), in case of failure could I replace it with a decent £250 Beko or would I need to spend a fortune?

              This question also applies to furniture and other items, but I used the cooker as a current example.

              I want to put in the best items posible but also do not want to leave myself open in the future. Perhaps there is a tenancy agreement clasue I could use?
              I think it's unlikely that a T would have any grounds for complaint if the replacement appliance had similar functions to the broken one. Probably different in a high end property, where T is arguably paying a premium for 'luxury' appliances/furnishings - but I assume your rent would reflect 'Beko' standard, not 'Zanussi' standard (if you see what I mean).

              There's also a fair chance you would find similar bargains when the time came to replace.

              Not sure how the question also applies to furniture - it would be rare to have to replace furniture in the middle of a tenancy and the most likely cause would be T's accidental breakage, in which case T would be liable (for either full replacement cost or a portion, as appropriate).

              Comment


                #8
                Just found this because I was Googling the same question, effectively, but from the tenant's point of view.

                I've got a landlord who's attempting to swap a decent quality £400 to £500 cooker with a horrible white, cheap £160 cooker.

                The original appliance failed the gas safety check due to the gas cut off switch on the lid not working. Fair enough.

                I did suggest to the letting agent they look into repair costs first (and have subsequently done so myself and discovered it would've cost around £90 to £100), however, I was informed they were just ordering me a new cooker.

                Again... fair enough.

                However, what was delivered was this horrible cheap alternative (I searched, and it was indeed the cheapest cooker I could find anywhere), that not only looks horrible and not in keeping with the rest of the kitchen, it's also a full 4" narrower than the original. So, it would stand in the space available with a 2" gap down each side which you just know is going to collect all sorts of grime and spillages, etc.

                Now, I refused to let the delivery guys take away the original, hoping I could convince the agent/landlord top repair that instead. I've not allowed them to install the new one yet, despite the fact I'm fed up with microwave meals.

                So, as the tenant... am I being unreasonable?

                I didn't necessarily require a like for like replacement, and would have been quite happy to keep the old cooker had they opted to check out repair options. But... I did expect a replacement to be at least close to the original.

                The property isn't kitted out to luxury standards, but it is a big old Victorian town house and, some things just look well out of place, such as the cheapest white cooker you can find.

                What do you landlords think?

                Joe Public

                Comment


                  #9
                  I can’t see a sure argument either way, but as a landlord I would want to maintain the quality of the premises and so would replace with a similar style/quality, it’s not like you will be taking it with you and I wouldn’t want the property overall quality to drop. But, that’s just my opinion.
                  I also post as Moderator2 when moderating

                  Comment


                    #10
                    If you rented a house with a Poggenpohl kitchen, and it was flood damaged, and replaced with a B&Q value kitchen you wouldn't consider it acceptable, would you?

                    There is nothing like for like about an oven that accepts roasting pans that are 4 inches narrower, is there.

                    Comment

                    Latest Activity

                    Collapse

                    Working...
                    X