A.Renter

Will given that Timothy Taylor Ltd v Mayfair House Corporation and another (2016) stated that tenants should be told of planned major works at the time of signing the lease, it appears the law agrees with me. And if you seriously think renters have any real power in today' market you're living in cloud cuckoo land. Maybe if landlords weren't such greedy leeches tenants would be less antagonistic?

ps. as for the legal side a case a similar case a few years ago was decided in favour of the lessee (Timothy Taylor Ltd v Mayfair House Corporation and another [2016]). Though I guess owning a gallery in Mayfair helps when it comes to asserting your legal rights

Thanks for these replies. I've got a busy few months ahead and really cba dealing with another house move atm so would rather just stay for convenience's sake, but on principal I'm not paying full price for inferior goods. Your point about due diligence is a good one. The lopsided market is to blame largely. At the time of agreeing the let I had been sleeping on friend's sofas/Air bnbs for several weeks - the city I'm in has a tight rental market, and so it was taking a lot of time and energy, and time was a factor. The flat itself is fine, and the letters had good reviews online, so I agreed. Market conditions dictate this - why should a letter waste their time as a potential tenant nitpicks them to the nth degree about every possible issue, when someone more biddable will be along in few hours time? Moreover many people have been burned several times by dishonest landlords and so don't trust what they say anyway, and obvs for a rental you're not going to waste money on an independent assessor. So lets are agreed, the tenant is legally bound for a year, and them the problems emerge. They're in there with all their stuff, and now faced either wasting their time and money on a legal battle which even if they win any compensation will be wiped out by legal fees, or to move out and go through the stress of house hunting all over again. And if they stay the relationship with the landlord is ruined and you can bet there'll be a fight over the deposit. Unfortunately, the chronic shortage of housing for rent or purchase in this country had encouraged a lot of unscrupulous, penny-pinching people to enter the property market, which has given landlords a bad rep.

I started renting a ‘studio apartment’ (i.e. a bedsit) in January this year in a three-storey 1930s block – residents are a mix of renters and leaseholders. I am considering asking for rent reduction due to two main issues: Upon moving in I noticed that there is no way to turn off the radiator, as it is controlled centrally, making for an overly hot room. The landlord and their letting agents did not inform me of this (I would not have agreed to rent it if they had). They said that that ‘may’ install a thermostat before the winter comes and they turn it back on. I was willing to chalk that up to ‘live and learn’, until… The landlord is now engaged in an extensive external repair programme on the roof, meaning that the entire block will be covered in scaffolding for at least three months - this is preventative rather than urgent as far as I know. The builders are here from 8-4 every day and the noise from drilling, shouting, hammering etc. is incessant... they've been here 3 weeks already and now the landlord informed us that they'll be there another months at least. I work from home and it’s borderline unbearable (my nearest company office is 50 miles away, and as it’s all confidential legal stuff I work on I’m technically not supposed to work in a coffee shop or library). Moreover, the way they have laid out the scaffolding means that I can only open my windows about 1/10 of their full capacity, this in the hottest period of the year. There is also the loss of privacy as the builders are constantly walking past my window (flat is one room, open-plan), plus the loss of natural light due to the scaffolding planks. Though letters/emails were sent warning of the works, I was not informed of the works before I signed the lease and again would not have moved in had I known. Given the above, I do not see why I should pay the full rent for the months the works are taking place, given as they are violation of the ‘quit enjoyment’ clause and ability to use the flat as intended upon signing the lease. That said, the landlord will likely push back saying the works are essential (covered in the lease) – I understand there have been recent cases found in favour of the lessee, but that these were extreme cases (e.g. noise so deafening noise plugs were needed). As for misrepresentation, I’m not sure about the law on that. The landlord could say I should have known that an older block would have centrally controlled heating (news to me) and that building works could take place at any time. I was happy staying here for a year whilst I save for a deposit but really I feel I’m been completely taken for ride (£650 a month to live in a tiny bedsit which is a construction site in the summer and a sauna in the winter). Stupidly I didn’t insist on a break clause (was stuck in couch surfing hell at the time). Any advice here would be helpful - assuming the landlord refuses to discuss compensation, is the legal route worth it? Even if successful any compensation gained would likely be cancelled out by legal fees. Thanks, A Renter

Thank you for these replies, though it is clear there is no obvious answer on this. Yes, the floor is just a cheap laminate 'wood' floor - I've checked the local hardware shops and it is very cheap to buy even in bulk. I was never given any instructions re. floor cleaning. I have been mopping it for two years with no problem. I gave it an extra thorough clean as there was dog mess on the floor. Again, I am not trying to shirk paying a contribution, even the bulk of it (2/3rds say). However, I do not wish to pay the full amount, given the cheap quality of material and poor fitting, especially if it turns out to be exorbitant. Annoyingly the photos I took when I moved in do not cover the affected section, so I have no proof of the gaps between the joints (I suppose I could bluff but then could get out called on it).

Hello, I rent a house from a landlord (generally pretty decent and helpful). I did a thorough mopping of the floor a while back, which is made up of interlocking wooden plywood slats. Unfortunately some of the water must have drained below, causing some of the slats to 'bubble' and rise at the edges, and now about 3-4 planks need replacing. As I mopped the floor, I am happy to pay towards it. However, one of the reasons the water leaked is that the slats had not been fitted properly, there being gaps between some of the slats. In this case, would the repair costs be a joint landlord/tenant responsibility? My fear is that the LL will say that as I did the mopping, I should pay the full costs (still waiting to hear back). Any help on this point much appreciated. thanks, A. Renter

Thanks for your reply. I've seen conflicting things on this. Surely as 'The Tenant' is defined the in the AST as being comprised of both parties, then both of us must sign the break clause for it to be valid? 1/2 the tenant, so to speak, cannot just do things over the head of the other 1/2..? If so, this of course gives my flatmate the advantage, as he could just refuse to sign and I'd still be legally liable to pay my half of the rent (and he'd then also get the whole house to himself for a few months). ps. atm this is just theoretical - there's no point potentially panicking my housemate when I don't even know if I'll be leaving town for certain yet.

Hello, I’m on a year-long AST in a flat share with 1 other person. I’m currently unemployed and have been looking at jobs outside my current city. As such I might find myself position of needing to move out, yet being stuck in an AST which doesn’t end until July. The AST does have a break clause: For reference, the specific wording of our break clause is “The Landlord and Tenant agree that they have the right to terminate the Tenancy after the first 7 month period…[with] the Tenant giving 1 month’s notice in writing in line with the rental payment date. When the notice period expires the Agreement shall cease.” The ‘Tenant’ in the AST is defined as both of us forming forming ‘one person’. My question is - what options do I have to enact the break clause unilaterally? My flatmate’s a decent guy, and we will likely be able to come to some sort of agreement. However, what if he decides to play hard ball and refuses to leave until the AST ends? The above would suggest that the break clause has to be signed by both of us to be valid and that I cannot do this unilaterally. For reference I plan to move out in July anyway, so this situation would merely bring forward the inevitable. My worry of course is that I get a great opportunity elsewhere, but my flatmate refuses to agree to use the break clause, thus meaning I have to choose between turning the job down, or taking it and paying the rent on this place until July. Hopefully I’m worrying over nothing, but I want to know how I’d stand in a worst case scenario. Any advice appreciated, A. Renter