landlords liability

[Chestnut]

Quoting Waspie: "Page 334 of the 17th edition from the IEE makes interesting reading....."

But I bet not half as interesting and exciting as this ever extending thread!

Seriously....

I'm no expert but as I try to read the guts of this I'm inclined to think this case is NOT about whether or not a loose screw which (may have) caused the fire should have been tight at the time. Forget the loose screw. That looks impossible to prove. And forget the ins and outs of IEE 17th ed, NICEIC, and whether public or private trade assocs. how they should perform etc. etc.

I think it's simply about whether or not the HA carried out the electrical inspections that they claim they should have done, which to my mind might reasonably have reduced the probability of Waspie's daughter's loss. If Waspie can prove that they didn't, concentrate on a case for some compensation?

Read Trenners 20/5/12 again!

[wayne]

Well the meeting went well....after we explained in simple terms to the 3 on the panel that Domestic Electrical Installation Certificates ARE not periodic Inspection reports and got the point over that NOT carrying out any safety inspections/checks/tests for over 21 years in a property

that they are letting is not best practice and duty of care and pointing out the FACT that a FORENSIC EXAMINER.....conludes that the fire was a result of a faulty consumer unit that should have been inspected 4 years before the fire started and wasn't, they could see that they were on a loser.

" we'll take on board what you have said and the evidence you have produced and get back to you within 5 working days, but what is the bottom line that you want us to do?"

They got the appropriate answer about claim and rent and we all parted amicably.

Obviously if they boot it into touch...it's off firstly to the ombudsman...but in reality I can't see the HA wanting to go down that route.....far too dangerous in respect of fines etc....we'll see.

Off for a beer and some sun.....

Laters....

[caravanj]

Quote:" so when the forensic guy says it may have been loose at time of installation who can argue with that?"

Err, the highly trained barrister will when he says to the forensic examiner "so if you are only able to say that it may have been loose at the time of the installation then this court has to assume that it could also have been tight at the time of the installation"

Lol!!

[wayne]

Quote:" so when the forensic guy says it may have been loose at time of installation who can argue with that?"

Err, the highly trained barrister will when he says to the forensic examiner "so if you are only able to say that it may have been loose at the time of the installation then this court has to assume that it could also have been tight at the time of the installation"

Lol!!

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

[Carryon Regardless]

I see no mention of criminal proceedings so we're not in the Crown Court with this scenario.

No intelligent person would employ a Barrister for the County Court as the costs aren't recoverable.

How much are we paying a Barrister to 'attempt' to recover in the High Court here. I've seen mention of a few hundreds.

The guy at the top of the table:

"What the frick are we doing here wasting all our time on something so petty. It would have been easier and cheaper to buy some insurance. Go away before I bang your heads together you're like bloody kids."

"But you're honour someone could have died."

"I'm not interested in what might have been, nobody did."

[wayne]

I see no mention of criminal proceedings so we're not in the Crown Court with this scenario.

No intelligent person would employ a Barrister for the County Court as the costs aren't recoverable.

How much are we paying a Barrister to 'attempt' to recover in the High Court here. I've seen mention of a few hundreds.

The guy at the top of the table:

"What the frick are we doing here wasting all our time on something so petty. It would have been easier and cheaper to buy some insurance. Go away before I bang your heads together you're like bloody kids."

"But you're honour someone could have died."

"I'm not interested in what might have been, nobody did."

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.

[wayne]

Quote waspie :what makes you a LL the font of all knowledge in respect of this thread....

I am not , that's why I didn't offer advise, but others did and were told :

You are taking the urine..arn't you?

Grampa....you live in a dream world.

COR....listen you are talking nonsense.

because the screw was loose... , yes I can belive that.

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.....

[Melboy]

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.'

Not strictly true waspie.........I have been following this saga but I don't think I have entered the debate as yet.

I have a property with storage heaters and have had an electrical inspection and certification for the work carried out and I believe most responible landlords would do the same.

It's worth mentioning that the property has an old style, 20 years old in fact, fuse box with the storage heaters running off a separate "white meter" electrical circuit box.

It all passed the safety checks OK.

I am surprised your Daughter did not have personal insurance cover for her contents because it is clearly stated in my tenancy contracts that this down to the tenant to have in place for their own protection but I will add I do have buildings and my own contents insurance in place as will any othe responsible landlord probably.

Regarding court cases I have personal experience whereby a Barrister could not win a cast iron case for me (his words)and I guess like many others it was at this point my faith in the British legal system went down the pan somewhat along with the £2000 it cost to hire this Barrister some 15 years ago now. My point is do not think for one moment think you will win any court case because you are 100% sure you will because Courts are not always on the side of the innocent in this Country and this HA you are dealing with may choose to fight their case and from what I reading from you they will possibly win their day in court.

The "loose terminal screw" Will you have to prove that someone was negligent in the inspection/ maintenance process? I hope not.

That's all I have to say on the subject.

[wayne]

Not strictly true waspie.........I have been following this saga but I don't think I have entered the debate as yet.

I have a property with storage heaters and have had an electrical inspection and certification for the work carried out and I believe most responible landlords would do the same.

It's worth mentioning that the property has an old style, 20 years old in fact, fuse box with the storage heaters running off a separate "white meter" electrical circuit box.

It all passed the safety checks OK.

I am surprised your Daughter did not have personal insurance cover for her contents because it is clearly stated in my tenancy contracts that this down to the tenant to have in place for their own protection but I will add I do have buildings and my own contents insurance in place as will any othe responsible landlord probably.

Regarding court cases I have personal experience whereby a Barrister could not win a cast iron case for me (his words)and I guess like many others it was at this point my faith in the British legal system went down the pan somewhat along with the £2000 it cost to hire this Barrister some 15 years ago now. My point is do not think for one moment think you will win any court case because you are 100% sure you will because Courts are not always on the side of the innocent in this Country and this HA you are dealing with may choose to fight their case and from what I reading from you they will possibly win their day in court.

The "loose terminal screw" Will you have to prove that someone was negligent in the inspection/ maintenance process? I hope not.

That's all I have to say on the subject.

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.

[Grampa]

....so long as you have your facts straight and you don't bullshit you will win. Waspie..now off to watch footie.

That is a very very naive view of the British Justice system you have waspie..

I speak as someone who has been to court a number times and have been gob smacked by the rulings of some judges. Some just get

it wrong and you have to go to appeal.

Other times you just get a a very tricky opponent who will try to tie you up in knots and hearings get put off and put off.

Another time I had a business transaction (contracts) drawn up by 2 solicitors (agreed by both parties) that wasn't enforceable when I took the other party to court for breaking it.

All been said and done I hope you do win.

[wayne]

That is a very very naive view of the British Justice system you have waspie..

I speak as someone who has been to court a number times and have been gob smacked by the rulings of some judges. Some just get

it wrong and you have to go to appeal.

Other times you just get a a very tricky opponent who will try to tie you up in knots and hearings get put off and put off.

Another time I had a business transaction (contracts) drawn up by 2 solicitors (agreed by both parties) that wasn't enforceable when I took the other party to court for breaking it.

All been said and done I hope you do win.

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..

[Carryon Regardless]

Groan

[wayne]

Groan

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.

[Carryon Regardless]

Is it you that's paying ?

[Carryon Regardless]

I know you didn't come here for assistance, guidance or to learn from those less knowledgeable. Please forgive our misunderstanding of your intentions, it's just that most initially join a forum such as this for that sort of thing.

I know you don't need any help but hope you will accept this in the spirit it's meant,

waspie's Paradise

[wayne]

Is it you that's paying ?

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.

[Carryon Regardless]

I don't think I'll get into this new debate or two thanks as fiddling tradesmen under the instruction of a HA 250 miles away and the increase in rents and what is paid by HB or not isn't much to do with electrical inspections or contents insurance.

Thanks all the same.

[wayne]

I don't think I'll get into this new debate or two thanks as fiddling tradesmen under the instruction of a HA 250 miles away and the increase in rents and what is paid by HB or not isn't much to do with electrical inspections or contents insurance.

Thanks all the same.

Thank god for that.

[wayne]

I know you didn't come here for assistance, guidance or to learn from those less knowledgeable. Please forgive our misunderstanding of your intentions, it's just that most initially join a forum such as this for that sort of thing.

I know you don't need any help but hope you will accept this in the spirit it's meant,

waspie's Paradise

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.

[kerbut]

I was just wondering which Union waspie is shop steward for.

[wayne]

I was just wondering which Union waspie is shop steward for.

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...

[Melboy]

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...

No. Provided the insurance policy was in place and premiums paid the insurance company would have paid up.

We had a recent case where a domestic heating boiler caught fire and caused over £3000 worth of damage. The claim was settled in 14 days with a new boiler and property repairs. This is the reason you have insurance surely? otherwise what is the point.

I think you will find that insurance companies can process a claim against a 3rd party but they cannot withold paying out to the policy holder in the event of trying to claim from that third party.

[wayne]

No. Provided the insurance policy was in place and premiums paid the insurance company would have paid up.

We had a recent case where a domestic heating boiler caught fire and caused over £3000 worth of damage. The claim was settled in 14 days with a new boiler and property repairs. This is the reason you have insurance surely? otherwise what is the point.

I think you will find that insurance companies can process a claim against a 3rd party but they cannot withold paying out to the policy holder in the event of trying to claim from that third party.

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!!

[Melboy]

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!

I doubt it waspie......where would they start? This would have been a very small insurance claim to any insurer and not worth their while to pursue the HA either in time or money.

The only reason you are having to pursue this matter is because you have no other avenue to proceed down for financial compensation for the loss of possession's etc. by your Daughter.

This event, had it been insured by all parties involved, would have almost certainly turned into a "no blame claim" by the insurance companies.

In our village we had a property written off due to severe flood damage by a blocked stream. The stream turned into a torrent of rising flood water due to main drain blockage of years of falling leaves from nearby trees.

The property insurance company paid out £100,000 even though the Highway's Agency had never cleared this storm drain and they should have completed this routine work but it was overlooked for decades. It was the contributing factor but nothing was ever followed up apart from the council coming along and clearing the storm drain in fact, they have done it 3 times since 2007.

I think if you do win your claim it will be on a "goodwill" basis rather than a admittance of liability by the HA.

[Carryon Regardless]

Do what ?

What yer pickin' on me for ? Find someone else to fight with there are plenty out there.