Minor flood damage caused by tenant

**ndes79** · 23-01-2013 10:17 AM

Hi guys,

My tenant decided it was a good idea to leave her young daughter in the shower unsupervised and the little girl decided to play with the shower head, all over the floor tiles. Needless to say, the water has damaged the flat below's ceiling and light fitting. Damages come to about £200 and my tenant has already admitted that the water was not due to a leak of any sort, and that it was her daughter that sprayed all the water on the floor.

Now, I would have thought that the block buildings insurance policy would cover the ceiling damage to the downstairs flat but my managing agents tell me that it only covers the communal and external areas of the building (not sure if that is true).

My question to you knowledgeable folk is, is it my responsibility to pay for the downstairs flat's damage even though it has been established that my tenants upstairs negligence has caused the water damage?

Hope to hear from you all soon.

Thanks.

**JK0** · 23-01-2013 12:06 PM

Yeah, you should compensate the neighbour, and then withhold that amount from the tenant's deposit when they leave.

**ashburnham** · 24-01-2013 09:48 AM

First off, the block buildings insurance policy should cover any aspect of the building whether internal or external which would include walls, ceilings, fixtures, fittings, etc. Your managing agent telling you it only covers the communal and external areas of the building would certainly ring alarm bells with me. I would hope they are wrong as where else would all these things be covered?!

With a repair bill of £200 I would probably not even look at the claim route as for a start there will probably be an excess to pay on a claim which could be more than £200 anyway!

The bill, in my personal opinion, should surely be the tenant's responsibility and not yours. If the tenant has taken out tenants contents insurance, their may be an extension within it that is called tenant's liability which should cover any injury or damage they cause to other people and their property. Once again this may have an excess applicable but as it is not your responsibility then this is not your concern.

This is, like I say, just my personal view on the situation. It may be an option to consider JK0's idea about paying the bill yourself just get it sorted ASAP but I think I would be looking to recuperate this amount from the tenant as soon as I could rather than withholding it from the deposit when they leave. My reason for this is, what if something else happens that you need that deposit for and also you are going to be out of pocket until they do leave.

Good luck with whatever you choose to do!

**aguila** · 13-02-2013 08:35 AM

Steve

Again relevant to my question posed on the other "leak" thread (see above or below as the case might be) - I agree that (as per our lease) the freeholder is obliged to insure *all* parts of the property, but surely this can't be expected to cover negligence (whether through allowing a child to spray water or not to maintain pipework internal to the leaseholder's property)

Ancillary question: even if the damage was in theory insured by the freeholder, what would be the case if the excess was such that it was effectively *not* covered? Would the freeholder have to pay or could freeholder claim from leaseholder at fault?

Thanks very much

A

**ashburnham** · 14-02-2013 09:00 AM

This is all to do with legal/lease issues and as mentioned before, not my strong point!

The lease should dictate who is responsible for repairs/maintainance of certain parts of the property. If that party is not insured for the damage (whether un-insured, less than excess amount, etc.) then it would have to come out of their own pocket.

If such damage can be proved to be caused by a separate party's negligence, then a claim could be made against them. It is possible that the negligent party may be covered for such negligence by a liability insurance policy (either separate policy or within a buildings insurance).