If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
I don't know.
All I have read here are opinions whereas I would have thought someone in the know would be able to quote chapter and verse.
I ended up getting the answer from Glenn and ScottSI. Basically it's a bit of a grey area. I don't know if the pm actually asked the tenant in the first instance to at least contribute(would have been fair). The pm said that if it went to tribunal (not that I'd take anything so petty to a tribunal) I'd be unlikely to win. Glenn disagreed with that though. The pm is seeing it as a one off accident, not seeming to be contributed to by general negligence. The tenants are looking after the house well, they are paying a lot of rent (relatively speaking). I'll have to trust the pm and give the tenant the benefit of the doubt. I've hopefully been clear with the pm that I see the tenant as responsible for accidents that they cause and will expect them to pay in future. So the answer's not entirely clear, a bit of a grey area and could go either way, but in this case I'm paying.
I was thinking about this in the weekend (for some reason).
My first thought would have been was it their fault? Did they put the stone on the lawn sort of thing.
Now they may have if they had been doing something odd but generally they wouldn't so it is an accident. Reasonably out of their control.
Not the same as a spill on the carpet - that is also an accident but due to negligence - they could have avoided the situation.
The other thought I had was that it is your lawn they were mowing so your stone ...
I was thinking about this in the weekend (for some reason).
My first thought would have been was it their fault? Did they put the stone on the lawn sort of thing.
Now they may have if they had been doing something odd but generally they wouldn't so it is an accident. Reasonably out of their control.
Not the same as a spill on the carpet - that is also an accident but due to negligence - they could have avoided the situation.
The other thought I had was that it is your lawn they were mowing so your stone ...
Yes, agreed, you can look at it both ways. It's a grey area, I mean if you trip and spill red wine on the carpet is that under your control? Using your argument above every accident could potentially be out of anyone's control = landlord pays for everything.
Yes, agreed, you can look at it both ways. It's a grey area, I mean if you trip and spill red wine on the carpet is that under your control? Using your argument above every accident could potentially be out of anyone's control = landlord pays for everything.
If you trip - yes. You can not carry the glass or be more careful where you put your feet and what you have in your way.
With mowing the lawn, short of scanning the surface for every stone, there is little that can be done.
We strongly advise all tenants in writing at the start of a tenancy that we expect them to hold their own insurance. Then when an accident happens, be it wine or a stone (or heavens forbid, an accidental fire), it is an easier matter to ask them to refer the matter to their own insurance company.
If it is substantial, then the owner also needs to file a claim with their own insurance, but the discussions are then far more clear.
For the record, if the tenant has a good record and no insurance, and probably no means to afford the $200 for the window, then yes I too would be recommending the owner paid.
I ended up getting the answer from Glenn and ScottSI. Basically it's a bit of a grey area. I don't know if the pm actually asked the tenant in the first instance to at least contribute(would have been fair). The pm said that if it went to tribunal (not that I'd take anything so petty to a tribunal) I'd be unlikely to win. Glenn disagreed with that though. The pm is seeing it as a one off accident, not seeming to be contributed to by general negligence. The tenants are looking after the house well, they are paying a lot of rent (relatively speaking). I'll have to trust the pm and give the tenant the benefit of the doubt. I've hopefully been clear with the pm that I see the tenant as responsible for accidents that they cause and will expect them to pay in future. So the answer's not entirely clear, a bit of a grey area and could go either way, but in this case I'm paying.
Grey as you say.
However, the PM "giving the tenant the benefit of the doubt" and "the PM seeing it as a one off incident" concern me.
If it is a one off, all good and well. If it's the start of a trend where the PM is taking the easy path, and effectively biased to the interests of the tenant (or path of least resistance), then further action might be needed. Again, as you say, you have clarified with the PM your expectations, so hopefully plain sailing from here.
As a LL, I expect the PM to take informed and tough decisions. If there is a cost, then I expect the PM to exhaust other avenues before dumping the cost on me. If the quote comes in, I expect the PM to be happy with it, getting alternative quotes and / or cost breakdown, before presenting it to me.
I think there is a bit of a perception that Landlords are rolling in cash, after all, if they can afford more than one house, they must me. If a PM has that mentality, they are in the wrong game. In my humble opinion.
It's only 200 bucks, Eljay, and I think you have it in perspective. However, if it continues to occur..
Comment