Sunday Times General Knowledge (Gk) Name...
Offers & Competitions13 mins ago
Damage To Flat Below
I was planning to retire shortly from my warehouse job and I moved into some shared accommodation, which was just meant as a temporary move before I move into a single flat when it comes available. Not long after moving into the shared accommodation I accidentally caused some water damage which then leaked into a room in the flat below.
Some students are sharing below and the water leak I caused damaged some of their property. One student had her MacBook damaged beyond repair as well as some of her furniture. It also damaged an iPad and an electronic keyboard belonging to the other student. She also had some clothes that were ruined. They also had to temporarily move out while the damage to the flat was repaired.
I had tenants insurance but had not relalised it was not valid for shared accommodation and my claim for the damage was denied. The students below had no insurance at all. I do accept that it was my negligence that caused the damage, but the students asked for £5000 for their damaged property, the damage put together could total up to be expensive but I think £5000 may be a bit excessive. They say they have receipts to back it up and will be suing me in the small claims court for the full amount.
If I have to pay for all of this, it could well mess up my retirement plan. I know the students would need to show evidence of their damage, but even if they can, I wondered as they were uninsured, should they be suing me?
Some students are sharing below and the water leak I caused damaged some of their property. One student had her MacBook damaged beyond repair as well as some of her furniture. It also damaged an iPad and an electronic keyboard belonging to the other student. She also had some clothes that were ruined. They also had to temporarily move out while the damage to the flat was repaired.
I had tenants insurance but had not relalised it was not valid for shared accommodation and my claim for the damage was denied. The students below had no insurance at all. I do accept that it was my negligence that caused the damage, but the students asked for £5000 for their damaged property, the damage put together could total up to be expensive but I think £5000 may be a bit excessive. They say they have receipts to back it up and will be suing me in the small claims court for the full amount.
If I have to pay for all of this, it could well mess up my retirement plan. I know the students would need to show evidence of their damage, but even if they can, I wondered as they were uninsured, should they be suing me?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Texman. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
neveracrossword, I did not mean that, sorry if it came across that way. I only meant that if they had offered to go halves then I would have accepted that. It’s certainly not been the case as the students both want to sue me for the full cost. The only thing I’m possibly disputing is if £5000 is excessive, it might not be but I will know that when they show me their evidence.
Thanks, Texman. I think it'd be totally unrealistic to even think that the injured party, parties would ever offer to pay half. They have done absolutely nothing wrong. You may feel that they should have had insurance, but that's irrelevant really. I'd have gone down the Small Claims Court myself, after I'd given you the option to pay immediately for the damage.
Yes I do agree with you neveracrossword that it would be totally unrealistic to even think that an injured party would ever offer to pay half. For their own good they should have had insurance but it was my fault that I screwed it up.
I think it s quite understandable that you would want to take a situation like this through a small claims court after giving me the option to pay in full.
I have been asked to pay £5000 and unfortunately I can't pay this up front so both girls have said they prefer to take the small claims route and sue me for the full amount. This might be a bit excessive but again I can understand that if this is the true amount of damage then they have the right to be suing me for it.
I think it s quite understandable that you would want to take a situation like this through a small claims court after giving me the option to pay in full.
I have been asked to pay £5000 and unfortunately I can't pay this up front so both girls have said they prefer to take the small claims route and sue me for the full amount. This might be a bit excessive but again I can understand that if this is the true amount of damage then they have the right to be suing me for it.
You could make an offer to them (explain that if they take you Court and win, you will apply to pay by instalments anyway). As long as you have a settlement agreement which is in full and final settlement of any loss or damage arising out of the incident, trying to sue you thereafter is going to be the devil's own job.
You do want to get receipts from them or proof of purchase (ie bank statement, credit card statement etc). BUT remember that the aim of damages in negligence is to put the injured party in the position they would have been if if the negligence had not occurred. Unless the equipment was brand new, you need to argue for "betterment". Ie if the Macbook was 3 years old, you should offer the price of a 3 year old Macbook. You will also need them to prove that it was damaged beyond economic repair. In terms of the clothes, you might want to ask them what they were. MOST clothes would wash. Ask them to produce the clothes. Ask if they were washed or dry cleaned before they chucked them. (Remember they have a duty to mitigate their loss - so just bunging stuff in the bin without even trying might not be mitigation). Do not be afraid to ask for ALL their evidence on which they rely.
I would suggest making a pre action offer. Costs CAN be claimed in the SCT but they are very limited. If you google CPR Part 27, there is chapter and verse in there as to how it all works.
You do want to get receipts from them or proof of purchase (ie bank statement, credit card statement etc). BUT remember that the aim of damages in negligence is to put the injured party in the position they would have been if if the negligence had not occurred. Unless the equipment was brand new, you need to argue for "betterment". Ie if the Macbook was 3 years old, you should offer the price of a 3 year old Macbook. You will also need them to prove that it was damaged beyond economic repair. In terms of the clothes, you might want to ask them what they were. MOST clothes would wash. Ask them to produce the clothes. Ask if they were washed or dry cleaned before they chucked them. (Remember they have a duty to mitigate their loss - so just bunging stuff in the bin without even trying might not be mitigation). Do not be afraid to ask for ALL their evidence on which they rely.
I would suggest making a pre action offer. Costs CAN be claimed in the SCT but they are very limited. If you google CPR Part 27, there is chapter and verse in there as to how it all works.
jennyjoan, the landlord had the buildings insurance but contents is the tenants responsibility and that's where I screwed up. I totally understand that you would want go through the legal route, after all it's not just a matter of a few quid, it is £5000!
They are both young student girls and they probably feel that if they don't do this legally I might try to take advantage of that and miss payments and even stop paying which I'm sure does happen with some who agree to pay in instalments if it is not done legally. Both of the girls have made it clear that they feel they should go through the legal route and sue me for the full amount.
They are both young student girls and they probably feel that if they don't do this legally I might try to take advantage of that and miss payments and even stop paying which I'm sure does happen with some who agree to pay in instalments if it is not done legally. Both of the girls have made it clear that they feel they should go through the legal route and sue me for the full amount.
Thank you for your detailed reply Barmaid. They have kept the damaged clothes and I have looked at them, I would think that if they were professionally cleaned they would then be wearable again and others have advised me that she probably won't get very far with trying to claim they were ruined. The most expensive items would obviously be the computers and keyboard and I know MacBooks in particular are an expensive item. They claim most of their stuff was nearly new but they haven't yet shown me proof of this.
They are asking for £5000, have asked them to show me proof of that and said I would pay them in some instalments though I would of course want to see their proof before agreeing to pay.
They did not want to just accept an offer to pay in instalments even though they know that if they sue me they will still only be paid in instalments, but they feel suing me is a more reliable way of ensuing that I will pay.
They are asking for £5000, have asked them to show me proof of that and said I would pay them in some instalments though I would of course want to see their proof before agreeing to pay.
They did not want to just accept an offer to pay in instalments even though they know that if they sue me they will still only be paid in instalments, but they feel suing me is a more reliable way of ensuing that I will pay.
// That's usually building insurance, JJ, not insuring tenants private property.//
that is universal and not usually - landlords have building insurance altho I would be tempted to go after TM just to show he cant play fast and loose and cheap, and then bleat about it when the whole cheap and cheerful solution goes up in smoke....
I also habitually go after people who have a bright idea: oh you have insurance for dat - so you make da claim - yeah!
said with a ( widda - sorry ) happy smile as they think about how much money they have saved (themselves)
Landlords cannot insure tenants possessions - because they are unable to mitigate the loss ( mitigation of loss and the duty to do so is mentioned in passing earlier )
and if they accept the insurance contract and premiun ( the insurer that is! ) they then repudiate it - see TMz OP - and decline to pay
that is universal and not usually - landlords have building insurance altho I would be tempted to go after TM just to show he cant play fast and loose and cheap, and then bleat about it when the whole cheap and cheerful solution goes up in smoke....
I also habitually go after people who have a bright idea: oh you have insurance for dat - so you make da claim - yeah!
said with a ( widda - sorry ) happy smile as they think about how much money they have saved (themselves)
Landlords cannot insure tenants possessions - because they are unable to mitigate the loss ( mitigation of loss and the duty to do so is mentioned in passing earlier )
and if they accept the insurance contract and premiun ( the insurer that is! ) they then repudiate it - see TMz OP - and decline to pay
// anyway insurance companies never ever pay full amount.//
why is that?
because loss adjusters are crooks - worse than .... pimps running child..OK I will calm down
The first thing they say is - Oh you are 30% underinsured but we will pay for everything .... ( wivva 30% discount of course )
if they havent screwed someone that day ( you know like their own widowed grandmother ) then they cant sleep at night
You know what they do to Badgers - well,,,,,,
why is that?
because loss adjusters are crooks - worse than .... pimps running child..OK I will calm down
The first thing they say is - Oh you are 30% underinsured but we will pay for everything .... ( wivva 30% discount of course )
if they havent screwed someone that day ( you know like their own widowed grandmother ) then they cant sleep at night
You know what they do to Badgers - well,,,,,,
Latest Posts
News16 mins ago
ChatterBank28 mins ago
Film, Media & TV29 mins ago
News35 mins ago
Crosswords36 mins ago