UK Landlord Forum / Life

Hi all,

Myself & wife purchased a BTL property a couple of years back which has been rented to a young family.
They will be vacating the property this weekend but we expect a dispute with them regarding a leak a couple of months back which has lead to a small section of the ceiling to come away.
The nature of leak was due to a bath plastic waste pipe being partially clogged with hair & other debris.
The steady build up of the material then over time works its way in between the seals of the pipe due to pipe expansion / contraction associated with temperature fluctuations - this has then lead to the leak.
Once they reported it to me I immediately resolved the issue by removing the small section of pipe of all of the debris.  No other leaks since.
However, upon me requesting they put the ceiling right as the leak was to due to them not doing routine cleaning, they have rejected claiming the pipework system 'is believed to be badly maintained' - which is ridiculous IMHO.  No leak until 18 months into the tenancy, partial obstruction removed, no more leak!
I guess I'll now have to go through the dispute mechanism with the deposit holding scheme (which ive not done before) but I can't really provide any evidence other than a whatsapp exchange advising the tenant to ensure they take measures to ensure the pipework system clear of any obstructions and/or build up of debris.,
Do I have a valid claim here against them?

Appreciate any advice.

Quote from: Neil1975 on September 08, 2023, 10:27:12 AM
Do I have a valid claim here against them?

Appreciate any advice.

No, you don't. On the face of it, they've been using the property in a tenant-like manner. A (push fit?) joint in the waste pipe failed and they reported it promptly.

My advice would be to use solvent weld next time.

Thanks for responding however it's not a push fit connection - it it's actually the U pipe connecting to the waste.
No pipe has failed, no replacement parts needed - simple removing the built up debris, which was considerable, resolved the problem.
Terms of their contract specifically states they are not cause obstruction or damage to any of the plumbing including drains pipes sinks lavatories or cisterns at the property.

You're entitled to claim compensation for any loss arising from the contract that is beyond the normal wear and tear implicit with a tenant's normal occupation of the property.

Quote from: Neil1975 on September 08, 2023, 11:11:25 AMTerms of their contract specifically states they are not cause obstruction or damage to any of the plumbing including drains pipes sinks lavatories or cisterns at the property.

Good luck with that.

It's possible you might find a judge prepared to consider that a reasonable term, but not damaging things is implicit and not causing an obstruction isn't really something you can contract to.

I think it's unlikely to succeed against a tenant who doesn't want to agree.

Quote from: jpkeates on September 08, 2023, 12:22:35 PM
You're entitled to claim compensation for any loss arising from the contract that is beyond the normal wear and tear implicit with a tenant's normal occupation of the property.

Quote from: Neil1975 on September 08, 2023, 11:11:25 AMTerms of their contract specifically states they are not cause obstruction or damage to any of the plumbing including drains pipes sinks lavatories or cisterns at the property.

Good luck with that.

It's possible you might find a judge prepared to consider that a reasonable term, but not damaging things is implicit and not causing an obstruction isn't really something you can contract to.

I think it's unlikely to succeed against a tenant who doesn't want to agree.

Thanks for responding.
I'm going to place claim & see where we go - I do not think it unreasonable for a tenant to ensure they keep drains clean & clear from obstructions.

Quote from: Neil1975 on September 08, 2023, 11:11:25 AM
Thanks for responding however it's not a push fit connection - it it's actually the U pipe connecting to the waste.
No pipe has failed, no replacement parts needed - simple removing the built up debris, which was considerable, resolved the problem.

At the very least you'd need to be able to demonstrate that it was the build-up that caused the joint to fail, that the debris didn't exist before the tenancy and that the build-up would have been obvious to the tenants. If it had happened several times during the tenancy you might have a case but a one off is just too hard to pin down.

You can give it a try, of course, but if the tenants take it to the dispute resolution service, I can't see it going your way.

There's no way - I'm betting - you have a documented condition of the pipe at tenancy check-in. This is the proof you need - you saying that it was "all fine" isn't proof.

But I doubt any Landlord would - so you've not done anything wrong... but the approach here is a little grasping, I think. Sure, you can suggest the deduction at Check-Out and you might get them to roll-over. If they don't then isn't a compromise a possibility? I tell you from experience - it always has been possible with my checks-outs... we are talking a large number, over many years here. Sometimes people just accept, sometimes they bellyache - but I'd rather forgo the small amount of money I believe is due me than go through some Scheme's Alternative Dispute Resolution process. That's just a painful waste of time. Try negotiation... even 50% is nice and it's an odd fish who doesn't accept there's a problem and won't go for half-half.

But - reading between the lines - I feel if behaviour like this has been prevalent throughout the tenancy the Tenant's back may well be up. But, again, it's people, not pipes, that matter. You start a conversation about it by telling them you'd like to deduct £X because of "the pipe / ceiling" issue" and you go from there. Ending up in ADR is an admission of failure and abdicates any responsibility and gives-up any influence. Don't do it. Learn how to communicate with people and learn how to take a defeat. It won't be something you worry about in... 2030... or even 2024 I bet. You've had a couple of years of rent, I expect... nice, isn't it?

Quote from: Neil1975 on September 08, 2023, 11:11:25 AM.I'm going to place claim & see where we go - I do not think it unreasonable for a tenant to ensure they keep drains clean & clear from obstructions.

How much time have you spent in the last 12 months ensuring your own drains are clean and clear from obstructions?

I've cleared the hair out of a shower trap and had a plumber  clear a slow draining sink a few years ago, but a) who does more than that and b) even if a drain blocks is a leak reasonably foreseeable? Normally a blocked drain just sits there, blocked.

So you're relying entirely on the contract term for the tenant to have agreed to do much more than a normal reasonable tenant would do. What you think is "reasonable" doesn't really matter, it's what the tenant has contracted to do - because that's what your claim depends on.

Quote from: jpkeates on September 09, 2023, 08:50:19 AM

I've cleared the hair out of a shower trap and had a plumber  clear a slow draining sink a few years ago, but a) who does more than that and b) even if a drain blocks is a leak reasonably foreseeable? Normally a blocked drain just sits there, blocked.

So you're relying entirely on the contract term for the tenant to have agreed to do much more than a normal reasonable tenant would do. What you think is "reasonable" doesn't really matter, it's what the tenant has contracted to do - because that's what your claim depends on.

We're not talking about a blocked drain, (& if I were it wouldn't be unreasonable for a tenant to tackle that either), I'm referring to a partially blocked U pipe under the bath caused by substantial debris including masses of the tenants hair.
Expecting the tenant to take precautions (such as using a hair trap) is not, IMHO, unreasonable & are in fact pretty basic preventative measures.

Quote from: Hippogriff on September 09, 2023, 06:52:32 AM
There's no way - I'm betting - you have a documented condition of the pipe at tenancy check-in. This is the proof you need - you saying that it was "all fine" isn't proof.

But I doubt any Landlord would - so you've not done anything wrong... but the approach here is a little grasping, I think. Sure, you can suggest the deduction at Check-Out and you might get them to roll-over. If they don't then isn't a compromise a possibility? I tell you from experience - it always has been possible with my checks-outs... we are talking a large number, over many years here. Sometimes people just accept, sometimes they bellyache - but I'd rather forgo the small amount of money I believe is due me than go through some Scheme's Alternative Dispute Resolution process. That's just a painful waste of time. Try negotiation... even 50% is nice and it's an odd fish who doesn't accept there's a problem and won't go for half-half.

But - reading between the lines - I feel if behaviour like this has been prevalent throughout the tenancy the Tenant's back may well be up. But, again, it's people, not pipes, that matter. You start a conversation about it by telling them you'd like to deduct £X because of "the pipe / ceiling" issue" and you go from there. Ending up in ADR is an admission of failure and abdicates any responsibility and gives-up any influence. Don't do it. Learn how to communicate with people and learn how to take a defeat. It won't be something you worry about in... 2030... or even 2024 I bet. You've had a couple of years of rent, I expect... nice, isn't it?

No I haven't & you raise some good points so thank you.
Tenant has agreed to pay 50% of the cost in the end which is workable.