Quizzes & Puzzles2 mins ago
Damage claim
Can anyone advise me on how I stand with claiming damages from my Housing Association . Water damage to my LCD tv when they failed 5 times to fix a leak through my lounge room ceiling . ? I have written to them and not sure whether to expect a brush off or indeed any reply . x
Answers
1 to 8 of 8
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by bigmamma. 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.
Hopefully, the tv is insured. If so, then you have no problem since the Insurance Company should do all the work for you by way of compensation.
On the other hand, if the tv is not insured, you may need to prove a case for some compensation through the courts, and for this you will need to prove your case of negligence on the part of the Housing Association. Presumably, you will have a record of the calls you made to them and details of any correspondence.
On the other hand, if the tv is not insured, you may need to prove a case for some compensation through the courts, and for this you will need to prove your case of negligence on the part of the Housing Association. Presumably, you will have a record of the calls you made to them and details of any correspondence.
Housing associations sometimes have a policy where they pay out for damage to tenants property caused by failure to repair leaks,if your HA is the same then it should be a very straightforward procedure.Many years ago a leaky radiator in a HA house I was in ruined my carpet after they failed to fix the leak in the time stated in the tenancy agreement,they paid for me to have a new carpet and they paid for fiitting.
Thank you voltr , I do have all the dates in my diary . I do have home contents insurance . When I rang them they were going to put a claim in for me but I can't get together the excess fee . They suggested I write to the housing first .
Hi Cheeky Chops , erm...I'm not stupid ..lol...it got a good soaking overnight the first time the leak occurred and they made 5 attempts sending workmen up ladders to fix it , saying the leak was fixed before finally fixing it .
Thank you daffy , I'll hope they have something like that in place. xxxxx
Hi Cheeky Chops , erm...I'm not stupid ..lol...it got a good soaking overnight the first time the leak occurred and they made 5 attempts sending workmen up ladders to fix it , saying the leak was fixed before finally fixing it .
Thank you daffy , I'll hope they have something like that in place. xxxxx
Actually bigmamma, Cheekychops may have a point.
The rule of 'volenti non fit injuria' may apply. I'll be honest enough to admit that I am unsure if this principle extends to property loss since I've only read of it in cases of personal injury. So if the ceiling had fallen on you because of the leak, you would have no claim for any personal injury (even death [dependents]) that may have occurred.
The volenti principle basically means that you have accepted the risks. You knew there was a danger and by continuing to live there and have valuable property there at risk to the leak, you accepted that risk.
Personally I think the volenti principle is extremely unfair, but you should be aware that it exists.
The rule of 'volenti non fit injuria' may apply. I'll be honest enough to admit that I am unsure if this principle extends to property loss since I've only read of it in cases of personal injury. So if the ceiling had fallen on you because of the leak, you would have no claim for any personal injury (even death [dependents]) that may have occurred.
The volenti principle basically means that you have accepted the risks. You knew there was a danger and by continuing to live there and have valuable property there at risk to the leak, you accepted that risk.
Personally I think the volenti principle is extremely unfair, but you should be aware that it exists.
Ah, I see. :-) In that case some clarification is required.
You basically need to prove two things for a negligence claim to succeed:
1. That the HA owe you a duty of care; and,
2. That the damage was forseeable.
Point 1 won't be a problem but point 2 may be. If the leak and damage occurred unexpectedly with no reasonable opportunity to inspect and repair the leak I think you would struggle to establish that the HA were negligent.
Perhaps your insurer could pay out less the amount of the excess?
You basically need to prove two things for a negligence claim to succeed:
1. That the HA owe you a duty of care; and,
2. That the damage was forseeable.
Point 1 won't be a problem but point 2 may be. If the leak and damage occurred unexpectedly with no reasonable opportunity to inspect and repair the leak I think you would struggle to establish that the HA were negligent.
Perhaps your insurer could pay out less the amount of the excess?
1 to 8 of 8
