PDA

View Full Version : No notice from landlord - breech of contract compensation?



d.bradley
29-09-2011, 12:19 PM
Hi,
I live in a rented property with two housemates and friends living in the flat above. Our landlord recently sheduled work to be done on the roof of our property without notifying the letting agent or us, the tennants. As a result they have cut down several trees in order to put up scaffolding, reducing the quality of the property, we also have extensive scaffolding surrounding the house, which will be up for several months. This makes the property dark and blocks the views from all windows. We have reduced access to the garden, the driveway and the garage, all of which we use frequently. There is also reduced privacy and ongoing noise due to the works. Not to mention the potential hazards of living on a building site.

According to our tenancy agreement this is a breech of contract as they gave us no prior warning and it has reduced the enjoyment of the property. We met with them, explaining that we felt we were entitled compensation. They have offered us only £50 off our rent each.

I feel that this is not enough considering we are paying for use of facilities, i.e. driveway, garage, garden, which we no longer have unrestricted access to.

Does anyone have a guideline on the level of compensation we are entitled to?

Thanks! :)

MrJohnnyB
29-09-2011, 12:29 PM
Does anyone have a guideline on the level of compensation we are entitled to?

For these types of thing it is difficult to say. In terms of £50 off, which could be quite substantial if the monthly rent is only £200 but insignificant if its £2000. If you cannot mutually agree you'd be forced to seek compensation through the courts which would be costly and to be honest losses in these types of case are very difficult to quantify. Your best bet would be trying to strike a deal with LL.

Btw, it’s a breach, not a breech (the latter is a form of clothing or a type of birth I believe!)

Interlaken
29-09-2011, 12:34 PM
Honestly! Be thankful your landlord is fixing the roof - I'm sure he/she is not doing it for fun. Scaffold costs an absolute fortune so I'm sure it won't be there longer than necessary. OK LL forget to tell you and he has offered cash - end of.

If you feel the site is unsafe in any way contact your local council health and safety department and let them inspect and the tree officer to see if trees had TPO's (Tree Preservation Order) on them. You'll get mega brownie points if they had.

ram
29-09-2011, 14:14 PM
Honestly! Be thankful your landlord is fixing the roof - I'm sure he/she is not doing it for fun.
Scaffold costs an absolute fortune so I'm sure it won't be there longer than necessary.
OK LL forget to tell you and he has offered cash - end of.

Also, for d.bradley.

This can be normal for letting agents ( assumtion is "notnormal " for those that
lurk on here ) But they say, "Yes, Iv'e make my one phone call this month to
the builder, that's all I have to do, I have earned my £ 50 this month for one
phone call ) and dont tel anyone.

However, if they HAD told you, would you tell them that the owner cannot
cut his own trees down, and cannot fix HIS roof, and that he cant come
onto the property to do the repairs ?

Yes it's unfortunate that you are "distressed" ? ---
But life has to go on.

If you WERE told, you would still have the same problems :-
cut down several trees
reducing the quality of the property
property dark and blocks the views from all windows
reduced access to the garden, the driveway and the garage
noise due to the works
It's part of getting repairs done.

O.K. it's inconvienient at the moment, but better to have the work done ,
than not at all.
And lets not get into the American claims culture where we sue for getting
repairs done immediately, as against sue for not getting them done.

R.a.M.

MrJohnnyB
29-09-2011, 14:31 PM
Also, for d.bradley.

This can be normal for letting agents ( assumtion is "notnormal " for those that
lurk on here ) But they say, "Yes, Iv'e make my one phone call this month to
the builder, that's all I have to do, I have earned my £ 50 this month for one
phone call ) and dont tel anyone.

However, if they HAD told you, would you tell them that the owner cannot
cut his own trees down, and cannot fix HIS roof, and that he cant come
onto the property to do the repairs ?

Yes it's unfortunate that you are "distressed" ? ---
But life has to go on.

If you WERE told, you would still have the same problems :-
cut down several trees
reducing the quality of the property
property dark and blocks the views from all windows
reduced access to the garden, the driveway and the garage
noise due to the works
It's part of getting repairs done.

O.K. it's inconvienient at the moment, but better to have the work done ,
than not at all.
And lets not get into the American claims culture where we sue for getting
repairs done immediately, as against sue for not getting them done.

R.a.M.

But a key point you've not really commented on, is that if the property is demised in its entirety, they're effectively not the landlords trees. A property is a contract and is let on an as is basis, any detrimental change should be reflected or tenants could look to repudiate the agreement (they would probably fail).

ram
29-09-2011, 14:43 PM
But a key point you've not really commented on, is that if the property is demised in its entirety, they're effectively not the landlords trees. A property is a contract and is let on an as is basis, any detrimental change should be reflected or tenants could look to repudiate the agreement (they would probably fail).

then they tell the builders to get off site, replace the trees, and
let the roof leak ( or whatever the problem ) untill the tenacy runs out,
or an S21 is issued to get them out, so the work can commence.!!

Which is better ? slight inconveinence, or beng told to vacate because
they complain when repairs are getting done.

Grit your teeth, let the repairs get done, accept the £ 50 per month, and
get on with life.

MrJohnnyB
29-09-2011, 14:58 PM
then they tell the builders to get off site, replace the trees, and
let the roof leak ( or whatever the problem ) untill the tenacy runs out,
or an S21 is issued to get them out, so the work can commence.!!

Which is better ? slight inconveinence, or beng told to vacate because
they complain when repairs are getting done.

Grit your teeth, let the repairs get done, accept the £ 50 per month, and
get on with life.

Long and short of it is, work is going to take a while to get done - what is the likelihood of landlord finding a tenant whilst major roof works are being done? I would say relatively slim. Landlord is probably in breach of covenants of quiet enjoyment at minimum and obviously would be liable before a court. Landlord, too has lots to lose, otherwise they wouldn't have made the token gesture.

As I said before, if the monthly rent was £200 and £50 was being offered then I think it would be pretty fair. But if it was £2000 a month then £50 just doesn’t cut the mustard. Plainly it's a pain in the backside and the OP should not be made to suffer because of Landlords lack of foresight regarding roof repairs.

ram
29-09-2011, 15:25 PM
Landlord is probably in breach of covenants of
quiet enjoyment

so what does the landlord do ?
He cannot carry out repairs because of moaning minnies, so refer to post 6
(tell the builders to get off site, replace the trees, and let the roof leak )

MrJohnnyB
29-09-2011, 15:30 PM
so what does the landlord do ?
He cannot carry out repairs because of moaning minnies, so refer to post 6

He either 1) does works when the property is vacant - not knowing the scope of works involved it is difficult to really comment on the possibility of this, but as a general rule, you know when a roof is going to require repair or replacement a long time before it does. option 2) goes through the proper channels and serves the correct notice of intention of works.

jta
29-09-2011, 15:35 PM
I find this strange as well.

I would argue that any property may need repair from time to time, whether it is occupied by owners or renters, from that I would also argue that it must be an implied term that repairs must be allowed.

I am not bright enough to point to legislation covering this but I would think that any claim that came to court over a landlord carrying out his repair obligations in a timely manner would get short shrift from the judge.

Lawcruncher
29-09-2011, 15:42 PM
We do not have enough information to know how reasonable everyone is being. Whatever the position, the landlord has forgotten that he is dealing with someone's home and ought to have consulted the tenants.

ram
29-09-2011, 15:46 PM
1) does works when the property is vacant
2) goes through the proper channels and serves the correct notice of intent

1a) And when will that be ? 6 months / 2 years ? then suffers claims
for not getting the work done sooner due to damage to personal property.
2a) Then refer to post 6. put everything back, serves the correct notice of intent

Still moaning minnies, as the same problems will still exist at 2).
( cant access garage ,reducing the quality of the property, blocks the views
from all windows etc etc etc. )

Yes, landlord has forgotten that he is dealing with someone's home and ought to have consulted the tenants, but - they will still moan.

however, will leave others to sort this out.

Lawcruncher
29-09-2011, 16:23 PM
I think we can all agree that a landlord who carries out repairs is to be commended. However, the point is that there are cases where even if you have a right to do something it pays to consult the tenant.