I have an appeal hearing on 21 Dec regarding an award against me for mould and mildew $600 plus failure to repair $125.
In short I had a roof leak which was attended to by the Roofers immediately. As it turned out they didn't quite get the leak but the tenants did not notify us and instead notified the council (re substandard building). By chance we discovered it was still leaking 3 weeks later but the tenants demanded we give 48 hours notice before going inside, in that time they contacted the council again and also made a claim to tenancy services for compensation. They obviously didn't want it repaired.
The roofer had placed some butynol in the guttering to repair the leak. On inspection it appeared to have been moved or shifted. The carpet in one bedroom had a big wet patch around a bucket as though it had just been poured there. We replaced the butynol in about 5 minutes which fixed the leak and then arranged Chem Dry to go and clean and dry the carpet.
The tenants then got awarded a total of $1025 for "quiet enjoyment" and immediately moved out leaving rent arrears, hair dye stains on the carpet, clothes dried on the nitestore heater, holes in the wall, broken shower tray etc, and mould on walls and curatins. The adjudicator said our claim against the bond was to be offset against the tenants claim pending the appeal - the bond dept has since paid out to the tenants.
I have appealed their compensation as $125 was awarded for failing to repair a hole the size of a 50c piece in the ceiling. Our handyman made arrangements to do this and the tenant failed to show. We could not get access because the locks had been changed and we did not receive a key.
The $600 was awarded for mould and mildew caused by failing to maintain the roof (quiet enjoyment was the term used). When the tenants vacated it was discovered they were drying clothes on the nitestore heater - I had to get the cover re painted and the heat fuselink repaired.
The windows were jammed shut so I doubt they had ever been opened.
Part of their reason for not opening windows was a security thing although all the windows have security locks so they can be left partially open.
On top of this there were 6 people living there and also using an LPG heater.
Unfortunately the courts seem to think that the mould has been contributed to by the leak in the roof and hence the compensation. They have ignored the fact that we were denied access by changing locks, and that the tenants had failed to mitigate any damage by at least opening a window.
Any suggestions for me to take to court would be appreciated. I know I'm being scammed and if they get away with it once they'll do it again.
Cheers
In short I had a roof leak which was attended to by the Roofers immediately. As it turned out they didn't quite get the leak but the tenants did not notify us and instead notified the council (re substandard building). By chance we discovered it was still leaking 3 weeks later but the tenants demanded we give 48 hours notice before going inside, in that time they contacted the council again and also made a claim to tenancy services for compensation. They obviously didn't want it repaired.
The roofer had placed some butynol in the guttering to repair the leak. On inspection it appeared to have been moved or shifted. The carpet in one bedroom had a big wet patch around a bucket as though it had just been poured there. We replaced the butynol in about 5 minutes which fixed the leak and then arranged Chem Dry to go and clean and dry the carpet.
The tenants then got awarded a total of $1025 for "quiet enjoyment" and immediately moved out leaving rent arrears, hair dye stains on the carpet, clothes dried on the nitestore heater, holes in the wall, broken shower tray etc, and mould on walls and curatins. The adjudicator said our claim against the bond was to be offset against the tenants claim pending the appeal - the bond dept has since paid out to the tenants.
I have appealed their compensation as $125 was awarded for failing to repair a hole the size of a 50c piece in the ceiling. Our handyman made arrangements to do this and the tenant failed to show. We could not get access because the locks had been changed and we did not receive a key.
The $600 was awarded for mould and mildew caused by failing to maintain the roof (quiet enjoyment was the term used). When the tenants vacated it was discovered they were drying clothes on the nitestore heater - I had to get the cover re painted and the heat fuselink repaired.
The windows were jammed shut so I doubt they had ever been opened.
Part of their reason for not opening windows was a security thing although all the windows have security locks so they can be left partially open.
On top of this there were 6 people living there and also using an LPG heater.
Unfortunately the courts seem to think that the mould has been contributed to by the leak in the roof and hence the compensation. They have ignored the fact that we were denied access by changing locks, and that the tenants had failed to mitigate any damage by at least opening a window.
Any suggestions for me to take to court would be appreciated. I know I'm being scammed and if they get away with it once they'll do it again.
Cheers
Comment