Broken fridge - Landlord or tenant responsible for removing?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by thesaint View Post
    I shall leave the discussion, as it is going nowhere at the moment.
    Please feel free to return with actual elements to back up your opinion...


      Fridges have to be 'safely' disposed of. If tenant were to dump it in a near-by back alley, I wonder if the owner of the fridge may suffer consequences if he hadn't ensured it was safely disposed of?

      IMHO replacement (including the removal element) is not covered by tenancy law but is instead covered by contract law. Therefore, if the deal was for a house with a working fridge then failing to supply the fridge on an ongoing basis is a breach of contract.

      Can't wait for thesaint to follow Westminsters lead & become a Magistrate


        This is Phlash last month:

        There is no statutory requirement but there is an implied contract term if the fridge freezer is in the inventory and if it is in the AST then there is an express term of contract.

        Why you would want to argue about this with a tenant is beyond me. Good luck to any landlord who wishes to take this kind of short narrow view.

        'In my view', if it's broken from wear and tear and it was provided by the landlord then the landlord should replace without quarrel. If one of my landlords refused, I'd ask the landlord to leave my management - Whether supported by statutory requirements or not, I will not work with someone who can't come to that kind of simple conclusion.

        If the tenant took the property on the proviso that if the fridge broke down then it won't be being replaced, then game on.

        I believe some things shouldn't need to be written in statute, they should just be what a reasonable person may conclude. That's how we manage our property, and I'm sure many may disagree, but we get great results.

        Personally, if I don't want to be responsible for replacing it and there happens to be one I make giving it to the T part of the covering letter with the contract.

        Refer Mad Regulators to Arkell vs Pressdram.


          ML, does that not expose you to problems with The Electrical Equipment (Safety) Regulations 1994? The legislation covers 'supply', not 'sale', so giving away would still be covered.


            I've read that before regarding an 'implied term' regarding repairs.
            However I was never provided sources to back that claim.

            As mentioned above my understanding is that at there is no obligation to repair unless expressly stated in contract, but there is an obligation to replace if beyond repair.


            Latest Activity