What occurs if a landlord includes a problem of a significant water leak inside of a rental property? Picture the buy-to-let property in query was a leading floor flat. The outcome was that harm had not simply been caused to the carpet in their flat but also to the carpet in the tenanted flat below. Along with the carpet, the ceiling inside the flat below had also been damaged resulting inside the plaster bubbling up and falling off.
The property investor who owned the downstairs flat, the landlord was told by him that the structural harm to the flat below was covered by their buildings insurance coverage but meeting the cost of a fresh carpet will be the upstairs landlord’s responsibility.
Who really is responsible for the repairs and which landlords insurance coverage policy ought to be claimed against?
Legal responsibilities in the landlord
Firstly just before acquiring in to the specifics in the Landlord Insurance policy a landlord ought to be clear about their responsibility for maintenance of their buy-to-let property beneath the terms of any tenancy agreement.
Probably the most important pieces of legislation governing repairs is the fact that contained inside of Section 11 in the Landlord & Tenant Act 1985 and which applies to leases or tenancy agreement granted on or after 24th October 1961 for less than seven years.
The vast majority of Assured Shorthold Tenancy Agreements are periodic or for terms of less than seven years and therefore Section 11 applies to these tenancy agreements.
The landlords implied obligations beneath Section 11 are:
* To keep in repair the structure and exterior in the dwelling (including drains, gutters and external pipes) to fulfil the tenancy agreement.
* To keep in repair and proper working order the installations inside the dwelling for the supply of water, gas, electricity and sanitation (including basins, sinks, baths and sanitary conveniences) to fulfil the tenancy agreement.
* To keep in repair and proper working order the installations inside the dwelling for room and water heating to fulfil the tenancy agreement.
In the example given above the landlord will be responsible for the repair in the ceiling as it is part in the structure in the building. The reality is the fact that the ultimate responsibility may not lie with the owner in the leasehold flat. This is because the landlord themselves may only be a leaseholder and it could properly be that it is their landlord, the freeholder or any appointed management company that will ultimately be responsible for carrying out the repair work.
Beneath s.11(2) in the Landlord & Tenant Act 1985 the landlord is not responsible for works or repairs for things which the tenant includes a duty to use in a tenant-like manner such as carpets or decoration. However, the exact responsibilities may be set out in any explicit terms contained inside of the Assured Shorthold Tenancy Agreement. Therefore, unless otherwise stated inside the Tenancy Agreement; if the water harm resulted inside the carpet or decoration becoming shabby it is the tenant who is responsible for the repair. The reality though is the fact that when faced with a shabby property and an uncooperative landlord most tenants will ultimately give notice and leave.
Who pays?
The next step for the landlord is to establish who pays for the repairs in both flats.
For a start any landlord insurance coverage on the (upstairs flat) will only cover harm to the landlords flat unless there is block insurance coverage scheme in location. This is likely to be the case where a freeholder and a management company exist who arrange the building insurance coverage for the entire residential block and then recharge each leaseholder for their share in the insurance coverage costs.
Contents insurance coverage is the responsibility in the individual flat owner or leaseholder. Therefore, providing the landlord has contents cover they is going to be able to claim against the harm caused to the carpet in their leading floor flat. The landlord is likely to have liability cover included in their buy-to-let insurance coverage policy, but this is only if it can be proved that they were legally negligent.
This means that beneath the scenario beneath discussion, the only way the landlord in the upstairs flat would have been legally negligent is if the downstairs flat owner “officially” warned the leading floor landlord that they had a leak (or something that may cause a potential leak) that could harm the downstairs flat. Then, following this, the leading floor landlord ignored this warning and then the leak occurred. In practice, there is almost no chance of this happening as by the time a leak is discovered, the likelihood is the fact that the harm has already been caused. This is therefore classed as an accident as far as the buy-to-let insurer is concerned and therefore would not be the leading floor landlord’s fault.
Therefore, the property investor who owns the downstairs flat has several options. Firstly, depending on the terms in the tenancy they could insist on their tenant paying for the repair. The tenant if insured could claim on their contents insurance coverage. It may properly be that the insurance coverage company that provides the buildings cover also includes cover for floor coverings such as carpets inside of the policy. This is the case beneath the policy provided by Alan Boswell’s Insurance.
Therefore, where a residential block insurance coverage policy is in location the costs of both carpets could be claimed for together together with the costs of repair to the ceiling. This would have the benefit for both landlords of not having to get into an argument with the tenant about who is responsible for the costs and then for one of the parties to have to make a separate claim.
Where this extent of cover is not in location then the property investor may decide to claim off their own buy-to-let insurance coverage. In this case the property investor and owner in the downstairs flat is not likely to be happy, but it is down to them to pursue their insurer for further advice. Their insurer could ultimately pursue the leading floor landlord’s buy-to-let insurer beneath the negligence clause. The reality is unless the amounts are large and the case clear cut that it is very unlikely to happen. Landlords really should always remember that a conciliatory approach is likely to produce a more effective long-term solution than an aggressive confrontational 1.
For more information check out Landlord Insurance