- This topic has 5 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 2 years ago by .
-
Topic
-
I have a small unit in NSW and the hot water system under the kitchen bench bursted few months ago. Tenant informed my property agent, the hot water system was replaced the next day and I as the landlord paid the $1,100 bill.
I then received a notice from tribunal saying that my tenant is seeking a compensation of $7,500 on personal property lost due to the hot water burst. Have spoken with the tenant and the tenant told me that this is based on lawyer’s advice. I am pretty sure my landlord insurance does not cover tenant’s content, and this is the reason why tenants should also purchase content insurance?
- This topic was modified 2 years, 1 month ago by .
-
Replies
-
One can make a claim if one proves negligence.
The onus is on the claimant to prove thst.
You are correct thst tenants should have their own insurance. If they have none they are considered to be self insured. Thst means they accept all the risk.
If you are forced into a court, my best advice is to negotiate a settlement. Even if you are right it’s cheaper than going to court.
if you make a reasonable offer and it’s rejected, at the end of your court case you can bring this up and at least try and get your costs back, even if you lost.
As I understand, Landlord insurance covers landlord’s contents including damage being the result of an “escape of liquid”. It does not cover the renter’s contents.
Cover for damage to a tenant’s contents including by “escape of liquid” is covered through renters insurance. If it is taken out by the renter.
You should call your insurer to confirm.
Also, you Google renters insurance with the name of an insurer so you can read if understanding above is correct.
If the above is correct then your tenants lose little by applying to the Tribunal (only the small application fee). Their claim of lawyer saying you’re liable may just be them seeking to further rattle your cage. Did you receive a letter from the lawyer stating on what grounds you are liable?
Their claim of lawyer saying you’re liable may just be them seeking to further rattle your cage.
Good point. Their “lawyer” might just be someone in the pub who knows someone whose brother-in-law’s mate is a conveyancer. Ask for a copy of the lawyer’s written advice so that you can give it due consideration.
However, if there is a record of complaints about the condition of the hot wwater system (including rust particles in the water) you might be liable due to negligence, as suggested in Kaindub’s post above. Hot water tanks can have a discreet lifespan after which the bottom can just drop out of them, but there may be signs they’re getting to the end, with particles in the water.
The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers.
If the tenant had notified you about issues/concerns regarding the hot water system and you did nothing about it then it is arguable they may have a claim.
If not, then you are not responsible for the damage to their belongings. They are responsible for insuring their belongings. As an aside $7500 sounds like a lot of money, and if there were a claim you would expect it be to itemised with proof.
One other aspect you need to be aware of is that most Insurance Policies contain a clause stating that a Claim will not be accepted if the event is claimable under another existing policy. The tenants contents insurance Co., may be ‘testing’ if the landlord’s insurance does not cover ‘consequential damage’ to tenants property.
You would need to show that your Landlord’s insurance does not cover said damage.
If you are prepared to ‘compromise’ just ask what the tenant’s excess is for a claim and if reasonable, offer to pay that. In that way the tenant bears no cost.
Geoff
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.