On Jan 23, 2:05*pm, "
wrote:
On Jan 23, 3:58*pm, Tim Watts wrote:
On Wednesday 23 January 2013 15:20 chellielou wrote in alt.home.repair:
Hi all, I hope someone can help me!
I moved into my flat (rented) approx 10 months ago. When I moved in,
there was a problem with one of the toilets, and we informed the estate
agents immediately. They called their own plumber to come and rectify
the problem.
Now, 10 months on, I have received a water bill for over 500, as the
36 per month I pay the water company won't cover out new meter
reading.
I rung the water company, who said it must definitely be a leak. After
determining the leak was on the property, I switched off the water
temporarily. Whilst investigating, we noticed the cistern from the
broken toilet had completely drained. We have had a plumber acquaintance
come out and have a look, and he said that the work originally done to
the toilet has led the water to slowly drain from the cistern into the
toilet, meaning that the cistern is constantly refilling itself. Due to
the silent but steady nature of this problem, it has gone completely
undetected.
I spoke to the estate agent this morning, who was quick to deny any
fault and refused to absorb any portion of the bill.
Am I being stupid/naive to say that this problem was not something I
should have to pay for completely by myself, and that the estate
agents/landlord should at least offer to absorb some of the costs for
the shoddy work that was initially done by their contracted plumber?
Any help/opinions would be appreciated!
Given you had notified the agents of the problem, I would consider
withholding the water bill from your rent - but it might be best to take
some legal advice first.
--
Tim Watts * * * * * * * * Personal Blog:http://www.dionic.net/tim/
"She got her looks from her father. He's a plastic surgeon."- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Hard to imagine that you could go through that much water
without noticing that the toilet is constantly refilling. *Sometimes
water companies will forgive at least part of
an exceptional bill if you have a plausible story.... *Assuming
the story is accurate, a reasonable resolution might be for
the water company to forgive some, split the rest 2 ways.
Wouldn't it be fun to be a judge on this case...
I'd say Water Company supplies water and 'might' be held accountable
only if the company has a responsibility to alert any user of what
seems like "out of the ordinary" consumption. If consumption is within
boundaries and loss not caused by them - not culpable.
Estate Agent accepted responsibility for the initial repair and
tantamountedly accepted the quality of work done by the subcontractor,
in this case the errant plumber, in two ways. First, accepted
responsibility for thie initial repair by organizing the repair and
second, by supplying a plumber at no charge to the tenant,
subsequently paying the plumber for services, and making it the Estate
Agent's responsibility to monitor the work done by the plumber. If the
landlord wished to avoid culpability, he/she should have allowed
tenant to seek repair and negotiate re-imbursement process for those
costs. THEN monitoring the workmanship would have become the
responsibility of the tenant.
In view of the fact that the tenant had NOT ignored that something was
wrong [in fact, had demonstrated the opposite by the initial
interaction] but simply had no indication of the leaking water, nor
had any other feedback mechanism that he was ignoring as the cost of
the wasted water mounted up, it is NOT possible to hold him culpable
for the water bill.
Any negotiated settlement other than this would simply alleviate some
of the burden to the responsible party, the Estate Agent. If all
parties accept such a settlement that's ok, too. But, if I were the
judge I'd put the whole blame on the Estate Agent.
Thoughts?