Jump to content

wayne

Members
  • Content Count

    76
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by wayne

  1. Sorry...you want to make money by renting out houses / flats / rooms / houseboats...then make sure they are safe. If you want to make inroads into preventing terrorism do the courses join MI5 or the Police but you will still have safety rules to follow...believe me I know.
  2. You may well be happy to live there...I wouldn't...especially having to pay for the privilege...without certificates stating it was safe to do so prior to me living there! If you think electrical safety of your tenants is secondary to bringing in the folding stuff I've made my point....on a par with my daughters association.
  3. My thoughts on that are.......if a Landlord has done his best and can prove that he/she had done all in their power to make sure electrical systems in their houses had been checked and tested at SOME point prior to a tenant moving in then discretion should be used if problems occur........BUT if a landlord has a fire at his rented premises and it is proven that a simple inspection as per a PIR/ECIR of the electrical equipment WOULD have located the fault and then tries to cover the facts up that the property had not had any electrical inspections in 21 years then it deserves all what's coming to it. My only down to earth advice for any landlords that have electric storage heaters installed in their properties is get them and the consumer unit inspected regularly.
  4. I suppose the argument being...if I own a house or houses and I want people to pay to live in them then they ( the houses ) must be safe for them to do that. If I or my family die or are injured as a result of a fire caused by an electrical fault that could have been diagnosed and fixed for the want of spending out a little money then it would be on my conscience and no one else's. If someone is fortunate enough to be in a position to have a surplus house / flat and they want to make a living from it then to my mind it must be kept in a safe condition. My daughters housing association boasted of having 22000 houses on it's books...I wonder how many of those are ticking time bombs?
  5. Early days as yet sometime in New Year.....
  6. I totally agree....I've had one done and paid for my old man to have one done at his.
  7. Hi all.... Back in January I posted a question about criminal negligence by a Housing Association. I remember that it caused a stir with some of you. The crux of the matter being my daughters house caught fire and when the forensic guy's had finished looking and examining the debris they both concluded that the fire was started because a screw had been left loose in the storage heater consumer unit. This unit was installed in 2002 with a recommendation that it be tested again in 2007....never inspected. The house had, as we found out later, never had a thorough electrical safety inspection in 21 years. ( PIR or ECIR as it is now called) Any way the bottom line is, after many months of jumping through hoops and requesting various documents the associations insurers capitulated and paid my daughter for her losses....just as the County Court papers got to them!! This was after it was shown by our family that the association had lied about electrical inspections. Basically they tried to palm off Domestic Installation Certificates as Periodic Inspection reports. The saga got to the ears of the BBC somehow and on Monday my daughter and I wil be interviewed by Dom Littlewood with a view to get the electrical side of tenanted property in line with the Gas regs in that rented accomodation will have to be certified by law every 5 years to be sure that tenants like my daughter are not occupying a ticking time bomb. I'm sure it will raise the hackles of some but hey better to be the owner of a safe house than to have somebody's death on your mind for the sake of £140. Cheers for now. Britz.
  8. I got some heartbeats racing early in the year when I asked if a landlord who ignored the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 as regards electrical safety was guilty of neglect? Boy did I get some of you hot under the collar. Any way....today after a long fight my daughters social landlord have put their hands up and have settled her compensation claim rather than go to court. ( I was quite looking forward to the court case actually but never mind). cheers Waspie.
  9. Well the HA has to the end of this week to say yes or no and it's then to stage 4..ombudsman and then to court. This particular HA is already in difficulties with various overseeing bodies so I don't expect it to go on much longer. We'll see. The 167 days refers to the fact that she still 'aint back in her house...no electric...not form of heating...all repairs done...workmen in house all told number of days...11.
  10. Goodwill or not I'm sure my daughter won't mind....£4845 to my mind aint' no small change...but if that is how it is who are we to argue at least she will be able to get her life back on track. The HA will a bit late with the goodwill but we'll take the gesture....167 days and counting.
  11. Don't get ya back...I was trying some humour...forget it.
  12. Melboy you've bamboozled me there... Miss B has no contents insurance...she is claiming for her losses against the HA's liability insurance. Surely if she had her own insurance and claimed and her insurance has settled that claim then her insurance company would surely have instigated a claim against the HA's company bearing in mind that they are at fault...or at least their equipment was at fault. and that equipment caused the losses! Makes sense to me...but what do I know...........don't do it COR!!
  13. As a complete outsider to your profession I can only offer this advice about this civil court. It is informal..no bowing and scraping. Be honest...have your facts infront of you. Do not embelish them. Make sure your witness is ofay with the facts as you see the case. Dont be like CORand be a smart arse....it won't do you any good. Have you submitted your evidence pack or are you not at that stage yet? It was a little while ago when I went there, but each of the parties had to supply the other with facts of their side of the dispute..is that not so? Any way best of luck.
  14. No union for me...I couldn't strike even if I wanted to before I retired. If I make a mistake I am humble enough to say sorry. I protect my offspring and I will not let them be crapped on by any money making machine that does not play fair. It may have intimidated others but not this Joe Soap. If the top Johnny of the HA says " The payment of £158 is for safety checks and not Periodic checks " what is he talking about? and it is not to do with Gas! Play by the rules and all's well.....try and squirm out of one's responsibilities and you get found out then prepare to pay the consequences. If you want to be a LL of any size, keep your tenants safe and you will not have the likes of me making things awkward for you, and being a pain in the arse and making waves. If your contract stipulates that the tenant MUST have their own insurance then so be it. Question...if Miss B had had her own insurance and got her claim for lost beds etc etc settled...and all this stuff had come out regarding faulty electrics...do you think her insurance would claim against the HA's insurance? Yep I think it would... Up the workers...keep the red flag flying....don't let the bas***ds grind you down...
  15. Correct...I didn't. But it's been most enlightening.....and what ever the link is...I'm sure it will not be anything to do with the thread.
  16. What is it with you COR.....I am alerting you and others to a fiddle...if you want some one to do job in your house do you want them to fiddle you out of 50 notes???.... Blimey I have really got your back up....is it because you think I'm against LL's or something? AND yes it will be my daughter paying....why do think her rents gone up by £300 a year....because the fiddle's are paid for by the customer...like the shoplifting is paid for by you and me. Say something constructive...your always flippant.
  17. I 'spect you would COR if you were on the receiving end.....being done out of £50...or do you applaud that sort of fraud?..Don't answer that.
  18. Well I can only comment on the one time I have been to a County Court....it was informal.....and not intimidating. Solicitors are there to earn. They don't really care about you...at the end of the day they have their folding stuff win or lose. Keep clear of them if you can. Trickery is easy to see through...providing you are honest...if you start to tell porkies...don't moan if you lose. Naive....definitely not......I was giving evidence in court from 1971 for 30 years all courts all sorts of cases.....if you say what you did/saw/acted on without embelishment and true to the best of your recollection then if you are not believed that is british justice. I know this thread is jumping ahead and surmising the hypothetical but I honestly don't think it will go that far.....I want an honest answer....If you were the Service Director of this HA would you want this in the open with all the possibilities that would bring for your Ltd company? A little off shoot....a small firm was contracted to paint the rooms with a special sealing paint to stop the smoke debris coming through after cleaning. This paint £72 per 5 Lts!! We turned up at the house on a Saturday morning to find two youths painting these rooms. They had been dropped of by Dad who had gone on to another job. This special paint turned out to be Dulux Trade Undercoat mixed with turps. The lady at the Stage 3 complaint meeting when we brought this up said..." we have spoken to the firm and they assure us that the Zinsser paint was used"...." really " I said and produced pictures of the paint and turps outside the front door next to the paint kettle and step ladders. She went quiet for a while. If the firm is not used again I won't lose any sleep. Night night..
  19. Hi Melboy...........at least we can argue the case...yes? Like my mate COR says a barrister wouldn't get involved in a county court job...not enough folding currency to be made!!! So all I will say about a county court is that I have been there, presented my case honestly with my evidence and the other chap lied and wriggled but with aplomb. The judge considered the evidence and made his decision after a 10 minute fag break in our favour......and the other chap walked out cursing before he learned that he would be unable to sell his house...which was on the market already without paying his debt to us first. Basically what I'm saying is.....so long as you have your facts straight and you don't bullshit you will win. COR and others will argue that because this EICR is not backed by statute it is useless...but on the contrary.....I think a sensible judge would take into consideration...Firstly common law and thence Common sense...then he would consider the Electrical safety Council and it's input....then perhaps The Consumer Protection Act 1987...where Landlords and Agents do have a statutory duty to ensure that electrical wiring and equipment present in a rental property is safe for use and maintained adequately. My argument to the court would be this.....if the HA had followed the advice is promotes on it's website and carried out a EICR in 2005 when Miss B moved in to the property and the fault in the Con/Unit had been found and no fire had happened then we would not be in court. If the HA had carried out a EICR when she moved in in 2005 and the fault developed afterwards, we would not be in court because the HA would have carried out it's statutory duty of care and could prove same. BUT it can not do that....it can not go to court with or without whoever and produce any evidence that it has maintained the electrical equipment in Miss B's house any where any how. It can not produce any certificates that show the electrical system in the house has been maintained to any degree in 21 years. It can produce an Installation certificate that shows the faulty con/unit was installed in 2002 and that certificate indicates that in the opinion of the competent person who installed same estimated it should be inspected AND tested again in 2007. Because Miss B moved in in 2005 she can say to the judge that from that day in 2005 no person has been in her property and carried out anything of an electrical nature whatsoever. You are the Service Director of the HA, present your defence......YOU PROVE YOU HAVE ADEQUATELY MAINTAINED THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM OF MISS B's PROPERTY......!!! As an aside Melboy...what are the safety checks you speak of?? I ask because the lady across the road from my daughter ( also in HA house owned by same HA ) has just had a EICR and her old fused unit ( you know the one's with the big fat fuses in ) has been condemed as not satisfactory? Waspie..now off to watch footie.
  20. Too true....have you read and digested what was said to me in the original threads?....including your last......give as good as you get. I came on here to tell the facts of a horrendous episode back in December and to see how some LL's regarded the facts and all I got was ' so what... your daughter wasn't hurt. it was her fault she had no insurance. we don't have to do electrical inspections cause they 'aint law. tough luck.' Well we'll see and if replies are patronising towards me I'll give it staight back..ok Laters.....
  21. Hey I'm playing along with Caravanj... he introduced the barrister....Grampa joined in....who pricked your balloon.....this will never reach any court..mores the pity. The HA will show the white flag...they don't want to go to stage 4 and involve the ombudsman in a million years. You don't like the old insurance stuff do you COR? Well now she's got new windows she will be able to afford some contents insurance....probably. But she wasn't liable for the fire starting so she's going to claim on the HA's who were responsible....simples...fact of life....take ownership of your failings! For those interested..not you COR....the new Homes and Communities Agency...( taking over from the TSA ) under the heading.... Handling serious detriment referrals.....The Home Standard...makes interesting reading. It's not for the normal run of the mill LL but interesting non the less.
  22. and the opposing barrister will say "so assuming that it was tight and then became loose between 2002 and December 2011 if the HA had followed advice by the various bodies in relation to tenants safety and carried out a periodic inspection prior to when Miss B moved in in 2005 we must assume that if the screw worked loose after 2005 ie after the PIR then the HA would have carried out their duty of care, and be in the clear yes? FI...." I am not quailified to say but that makes sense." Barrister for the plantiff..." so if the HA had never carried out ANY inspection of that screw although it was recommended that it did so in 2007, and had failed to carry out ANY inspection of that screw ever would you say that it had failed in it's duty of care to that tenant?" Judge to barrister...." I think you have made your point mr barrister...at least to me you have." laters.... lol
  23. Dan on a serious note....forget Grampa's effort at humour...he doesn't really live in the Outer Hebrides and he's already promised his euro's to someone else..... What will happen if I have the same fault he decribes and I don't get it fixed?
×
×
  • Create New...