ChumpusRex

Question About Water Leaks In Flats

24 posts in this topic

Just wondering what the position is.

I'm renting a flat in a big house converted to flats for the last year or so.

Years ago, a big water leak in this flat, caused serious damage to the under-neighbour's flat, for which the buildings insurers (block policy) paid.

Recently, a slow water leak developed in my bathroom (not visible in the bathroom).

Eventually damage starts occurring to the under-neighbour's ceiling.

I identify a leak and repair it, after smashing down a wall which appeared slightly damp, to reveal the leaking pipe. LL grateful.

Buildings insurer pay for extensive repairs to replace the smashy-smashy, rotten floor-boards, and wall battens and other.

Neighbour's ceiling drys out, but no formal repair undertaken or claim lodged with insurer.

During bathroom repair work, under neighbour sees water coming through the ceiling and tells plumbers. They take a look, can't find a leak, don't take any action to stop it, and anyway, the water had been turned off at the main stopcock. Water eventually stops dripping.

Neigbour threatens legal action against the plumber for damage to the ceiling.

Independent surveyor and the plumber's surveyor attend and thoroughly inspect my flat and the neighbour's flat. They find no evidence of a leak in my flat, and a possible leak in the neighbour's flat which would not correlate with the location of my bathroom. The surveyor's report speculates that this may be a weather sealing problem on a boiler vent.

Neighbour is now trying to sell, so is trying to get somone to pay for ceiling repairs. She is now threatening both me and my landlord with legal action to recover the cost of a new ceiling - on the basis that we are refusing to fix a leak.

The problem is that all the pipework is installed either in the walls, or under glued-wood or tiled floors. There is very limited access to get to the pipes, and no signs of damp anywhere. I had to smash down a plasterboard wall to find the leaking pipes in the bathroom (and at that time, there was an active leak, and careful inspection did reveal damp on the wall). It'll be even more difficult in the kitchen, or in the now refitted bathroom (there is no active leak at present, and no visible damp anywhere).

Is this legal claim likely to be spurious? What would be the best thing to do? Surely, the neighbour should be approaching the buildings insurers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wondering what the position is.

I'm renting a flat in a big house converted to flats for the last year or so.

Years ago, a big water leak in this flat, caused serious damage to the under-neighbour's flat, for which the buildings insurers (block policy) paid.

Recently, a slow water leak developed in my bathroom (not visible in the bathroom).

Eventually damage starts occurring to the under-neighbour's ceiling.

I identify a leak and repair it, after smashing down a wall which appeared slightly damp, to reveal the leaking pipe. LL grateful.

Buildings insurer pay for extensive repairs to replace the smashy-smashy, rotten floor-boards, and wall battens and other.

Neighbour's ceiling drys out, but no formal repair undertaken or claim lodged with insurer.

During bathroom repair work, under neighbour sees water coming through the ceiling and tells plumbers. They take a look, can't find a leak, don't take any action to stop it, and anyway, the water had been turned off at the main stopcock. Water eventually stops dripping.

Neigbour threatens legal action against the plumber for damage to the ceiling.

Independent surveyor and the plumber's surveyor attend and thoroughly inspect my flat and the neighbour's flat. They find no evidence of a leak in my flat, and a possible leak in the neighbour's flat which would not correlate with the location of my bathroom. The surveyor's report speculates that this may be a weather sealing problem on a boiler vent.

Neighbour is now trying to sell, so is trying to get somone to pay for ceiling repairs. She is now threatening both me and my landlord with legal action to recover the cost of a new ceiling - on the basis that we are refusing to fix a leak.

The problem is that all the pipework is installed either in the walls, or under glued-wood or tiled floors. There is very limited access to get to the pipes, and no signs of damp anywhere. I had to smash down a plasterboard wall to find the leaking pipes in the bathroom (and at that time, there was an active leak, and careful inspection did reveal damp on the wall). It'll be even more difficult in the kitchen, or in the now refitted bathroom (there is no active leak at present, and no visible damp anywhere).

Is this legal claim likely to be spurious? What would be the best thing to do? Surely, the neighbour should be approaching the buildings insurers.

You should have never tried to repair it, it should have been left to the landlord, there maybe a possibility that she could sue you.Then again services act 1982 you could claim from the plumber if it wasnt fixed as it should be.

Edited by crash2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have a quiet word with your neighbour and tell them about what happened to your friend. The one who complained about a leak upstairs so the people upstairs left their taps running while they went out for the day. Rather than just the ceiling having a problem it dropped onto the floor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You should have never tried to repair it, it should have been left to the landlord, there maybe a possibility that she could sue you.Then again services act 1982 you could claim from the plumber if it wasnt fixed as it should be.

The leak occurred on a Sunday night. I contacted the landlord, who said that as it was an emergency and as I was competent to do the job, that I could go ahead. I made a temporary fix. The landlord got an independent plumber in as a non-emergency on Monday, to check and properly fix my temporary repair.

Things were fine, until about 8 weeks later, when major renovation works started to repair the hidden damage. It was during these renovation works that a 2nd leak was alleged to have occurred.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wondering what the position is.

I'm renting a flat in a big house converted to flats for the last year or so.

Years ago, a big water leak in this flat, caused serious damage to the under-neighbour's flat, for which the buildings insurers (block policy) paid.

Recently, a slow water leak developed in my bathroom (not visible in the bathroom).

Eventually damage starts occurring to the under-neighbour's ceiling.

I identify a leak and repair it, after smashing down a wall which appeared slightly damp, to reveal the leaking pipe. LL grateful.

Buildings insurer pay for extensive repairs to replace the smashy-smashy, rotten floor-boards, and wall battens and other.

Neighbour's ceiling drys out, but no formal repair undertaken or claim lodged with insurer.

During bathroom repair work, under neighbour sees water coming through the ceiling and tells plumbers. They take a look, can't find a leak, don't take any action to stop it, and anyway, the water had been turned off at the main stopcock. Water eventually stops dripping.

Neigbour threatens legal action against the plumber for damage to the ceiling.

Independent surveyor and the plumber's surveyor attend and thoroughly inspect my flat and the neighbour's flat. They find no evidence of a leak in my flat, and a possible leak in the neighbour's flat which would not correlate with the location of my bathroom. The surveyor's report speculates that this may be a weather sealing problem on a boiler vent.

Neighbour is now trying to sell, so is trying to get somone to pay for ceiling repairs. She is now threatening both me and my landlord with legal action to recover the cost of a new ceiling - on the basis that we are refusing to fix a leak.

The problem is that all the pipework is installed either in the walls, or under glued-wood or tiled floors. There is very limited access to get to the pipes, and no signs of damp anywhere. I had to smash down a plasterboard wall to find the leaking pipes in the bathroom (and at that time, there was an active leak, and careful inspection did reveal damp on the wall). It'll be even more difficult in the kitchen, or in the now refitted bathroom (there is no active leak at present, and no visible damp anywhere).

Is this legal claim likely to be spurious? What would be the best thing to do? Surely, the neighbour should be approaching the buildings insurers.

As an estate caretaker for some years I have seen this sort of issue crop up many times.

If you have a leak in your flat your first duty is to attempt to stop it. That is why your land lord has to have building insurance or the Freeholder should have. All you need to do is join in the effing and blinding at the inconvenience of it all. You attempts to stop a leak is your liability but no court would expect you to bear costs. You should claim from your household insurance for the damage needed to find the leek. Your household insurance should if it is in your name should protect you from legal issues. If it doesn't go to the Prudential next time .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an estate caretaker for some years I have seen this sort of issue crop up many times.

If you have a leak in your flat your first duty is to attempt to stop it. That is why your land lord has to have building insurance or the Freeholder should have. All you need to do is join in the effing and blinding at the inconvenience of it all. You attempts to stop a leak is your liability but no court would expect you to bear costs. You should claim from your household insurance for the damage needed to find the leek. Your household insurance should if it is in your name should protect you from legal issues. If it doesn't go to the Prudential next time .

I had in the past a problem with dampness in a bathroom, I was doing work in the bathroom anyway and though the local authority was unable to track down a leak, I did by taking down part of the partion wall to see into the risery. However, I was unable to see any leakages and I left the hole open and discovered that when it rained there was rain water running on the outside of the drain pipe. The pipe had vertical cracks in several sections, it cost many thousands for the council to repair by running an internal pipe sleeve inside the original pipe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an estate caretaker for some years I have seen this sort of issue crop up many times.

If you have a leak in your flat your first duty is to attempt to stop it.

Er, nope. Your first duty as a tenant is to report it to the landlord for him to attempt to stop it. Tenant not liable. Tenant no touchy watery fountain. Tenant duty to pay rent only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Er, nope. Your first duty as a tenant is to report it to the landlord for him to attempt to stop it. Tenant not liable. Tenant no touchy watery fountain. Tenant duty to pay rent only.

+1

Love it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Er, nope. Your first duty as a tenant is to report it to the landlord for him to attempt to stop it. Tenant not liable. Tenant no touchy watery fountain. Tenant duty to pay rent only.

Yup this.

You made a temporary repair by the acquiescence of the landlord. After that the LL 'made' a proper repair. Your duty in all of that was precisely zero. You just did him a favour as it were. You have zero liability. If it was not fixed properly after or another leak occurred then that has nothing to do with you - the landlords responsibility and liability. You should tell the below stairs owner of this, save you and him a lot hassle, when he wont get anything from you in the end anyways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an estate caretaker for some years I have seen this sort of issue crop up many times.

If you have a leak in your flat your first duty is to attempt to stop it. That is why your land lord has to have building insurance or the Freeholder should have. All you need to do is join in the effing and blinding at the inconvenience of it all. You attempts to stop a leak is your liability but no court would expect you to bear costs. You should claim from your household insurance for the damage needed to find the leek. Your household insurance should if it is in your name should protect you from legal issues. If it doesn't go to the Prudential next time .

We had a leak in our flat and contacted our insurers of our contents to find out what the situation was re damage to our household items. The first question they asked was whether the leak was due to negligence on our part, e.g. leaving the bath water running and it overtopping the bath. In this case clearly not, since it was to the roof. They then said the landlord had to fix it, and any damage to our goods had to be covered by the landlord. Of course, the landlord refused, so we went back to our insurers who wrote to the landlord, who duly paid up. OH yes, and they said on no attempt were we to attempt to fix the leak even if we felt competent to do so and even if the landlord said we could.

Moral of this story? Renting is cheap compared to buying, but you get what you pay for and it can be a real hassle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup this.

You made a temporary repair by the acquiescence of the landlord. After that the LL 'made' a proper repair. Your duty in all of that was precisely zero. You just did him a favour as it were. You have zero liability. If it was not fixed properly after or another leak occurred then that has nothing to do with you - the landlords responsibility and liability. You should tell the below stairs owner of this, save you and him a lot hassle, when he wont get anything from you in the end anyways.

True. But the landlord is doing everything they can.

I've already had builders, plumbers, surveyors, various representatives of the building management company, etc. visiting and poking around. None can find a leak in this flat, and while they have found water leaking in the flat below, they say it's unlikely to be coming from this flat, and is probably coming from an inadequately sealed boiler flue in the damaged flat. They also say it is unlikely to be anything in my flat, as at the time the 2nd alleged leak occurred, the water supply to my flat was shut off.

The problem is that if any additional leak finding work is going to need to be done - it's going to be massively disruptive; floors ripped up, kitchen appliances removed. The LL doesn't want that, and I certainly don't want that - but if the buildings insurer wants to pay, then we'll both put up with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wondering what the position is.

I'm renting a flat in a big house converted to flats for the last year or so.

Years ago, a big water leak in this flat, caused serious damage to the under-neighbour's flat, for which the buildings insurers (block policy) paid.

Recently, a slow water leak developed in my bathroom (not visible in the bathroom).

Eventually damage starts occurring to the under-neighbour's ceiling.

I identify a leak and repair it, after smashing down a wall which appeared slightly damp, to reveal the leaking pipe. LL grateful.

Buildings insurer pay for extensive repairs to replace the smashy-smashy, rotten floor-boards, and wall battens and other.

Neighbour's ceiling drys out, but no formal repair undertaken or claim lodged with insurer.

During bathroom repair work, under neighbour sees water coming through the ceiling and tells plumbers. They take a look, can't find a leak, don't take any action to stop it, and anyway, the water had been turned off at the main stopcock. Water eventually stops dripping.

Neigbour threatens legal action against the plumber for damage to the ceiling.

Independent surveyor and the plumber's surveyor attend and thoroughly inspect my flat and the neighbour's flat. They find no evidence of a leak in my flat, and a possible leak in the neighbour's flat which would not correlate with the location of my bathroom. The surveyor's report speculates that this may be a weather sealing problem on a boiler vent.

Neighbour is now trying to sell, so is trying to get somone to pay for ceiling repairs. She is now threatening both me and my landlord with legal action to recover the cost of a new ceiling - on the basis that we are refusing to fix a leak.

The problem is that all the pipework is installed either in the walls, or under glued-wood or tiled floors. There is very limited access to get to the pipes, and no signs of damp anywhere. I had to smash down a plasterboard wall to find the leaking pipes in the bathroom (and at that time, there was an active leak, and careful inspection did reveal damp on the wall). It'll be even more difficult in the kitchen, or in the now refitted bathroom (there is no active leak at present, and no visible damp anywhere).

Is this legal claim likely to be spurious? What would be the best thing to do? Surely, the neighbour should be approaching the buildings insurers.

Have you looked for an answer on Wikileaks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Er, nope. Your first duty as a tenant is to report it to the landlord for him to attempt to stop it. Tenant not liable. Tenant no touchy watery fountain. Tenant duty to pay rent only.

Tenant get chucky outie y two months time. Tenant has duty of care and should mitigate the problem if he is aware of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tenant get chucky outie y two months time. Tenant has duty of care and should mitigate the problem if he is aware of it.

All tenant need do is turn off stoppy cocky.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All tenant need do is turn off stoppy cocky.

True, If it's not seized and take the risk of destroying it while attempting to force it off. I called my land lord to free mine off the other day as I was in the position of not being able to stop a leak. My wife answered the door and he said "Stopcock madam" She replied I certainly shall not there is nothing in the tenancy agreement about that :D

Edited by Rain'ard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tenant get chucky outie y two months time. Tenant has duty of care and should mitigate the problem if he is aware of it.

Tenant not own place. Tenant no care. Tenant knows no binding obligation under statute. Tenant find new place lower rent. Landlord still got problem. Landlord not rent place no more. Landlord sadface. sad.gif. Tenant happyface biggrin.gif.

Edited by Sir Sidney Ruff-Diamond

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tenant not own place. Tenant no care. Tenant knows no binding obligation under statute. Tenant find new place lower rent. Landlord still got problem. Landlord not rent place no more. Landlord sadface. sad.gif. Tenant happyface biggrin.gif.

If you have a leak in your flat you are renting and the water is damaging the property below and the person complains to you. this becomes a civil issue beside a statutory one. You are the one who is depriving the person below peace and enjoyment of their of their home not your landlord or any agreement between you and him. Nobody would be very happy with your attitude. In fact of all the inter flat issues I dealt with, I never experienced anyone being so uncooperative as not wanting to see a

speedy solution to a conclusion of a problem. Don't some people want to make life difficult for themselves, the only outcome in my view sad faces all round. Although Sidney I wouldn't mind some BTL character having you as a tenant. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have a leak in your flat you are renting and the water is damaging the property below and the person complains to you. this becomes a civil issue beside a statutory one. You are the one who is depriving the person below peace and enjoyment of their of their home not your landlord or any agreement between you and him. Nobody would be very happy with your attitude. In fact of all the inter flat issues I dealt with, I never experienced anyone being so uncooperative as not wanting to see a

speedy solution to a conclusion of a problem. Don't some people want to make life difficult for themselves, the only outcome in my view sad faces all round. Although Sidney I wouldn't mind some BTL character having you as a tenant. :)

The issue is, of course, a tenant can cooperate but they do risk liability by doing so and they are under no obligation to do so. So ... taking the line that both the landlord and EA would take under similar circumstances ... no fixey problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue is, of course, a tenant can cooperate but they do risk liability by doing so and they are under no obligation to do so. So ... taking the line that both the landlord and EA would take under similar circumstances ... no fixey problem.

Should I encounter such problems my boss the managing agent who represents the freeholder would get me to call the water authority to insist that a leak is stopped they would do it and charge or even prosecute if I remember correctly and I wonder who that would be. In fact on one occasion a water board official saw one of my residents with a piece of hosepipe attached to an overflow so it took the stream from running down the wall and into a drain. He came up to me and said "Get that off that's not legal. So its seemed to me that anyone in the line of sight was in the frame, but really he meant the person who put it on in the first place. There's nothing more interesting than disputed wet patches In fact I've only just twigged the Wikileaks joke LOL :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the 1980s a lot of houses around where I live were built with plastic water pipes rather than copper to save a few dollars. The pipes (more precisely, the joins) are now coming to the end of their lifespan.

My stepfather just sold a 1980s house. The first join burst last year. We had another go whilst it was on the market. We've been lucky. The rest of the houses on the street have either had to replace their pipes or have numerous holes in their plaster to fix joins as they have cracked up. This has cost the owners many thousands of dollars in replastering, repiping and redecorating.

If you plan on living in a new build house for a long time, make sure you get good pipes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the 1980s a lot of houses around where I live were built with plastic water pipes rather than copper to save a few dollars. The pipes (more precisely, the joins) are now coming to the end of their lifespan.

My stepfather just sold a 1980s house. The first join burst last year. We had another go whilst it was on the market. We've been lucky. The rest of the houses on the street have either had to replace their pipes or have numerous holes in their plaster to fix joins as they have cracked up. This has cost the owners many thousands of dollars in replastering, repiping and redecorating.

If you plan on living in a new build house for a long time, make sure you get good pipes.

Plastic pipes are not inferior to copper - they both have advantages and disadvantages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wondering what the position is.

Is this legal claim likely to be spurious? What would be the best thing to do? Surely, the neighbour should be approaching the buildings insurers.

If you want a knowledgeable answer have a look on Landlordzone, there are lots of posts covering very similar issues to this situation. Several of the contributors are solicitors who have considerable experience with law of property. Not only are they experienced with the legal position they will have dealt with tenants, landlords, insurers and others involved and give pragmatic advice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Easy answer never buy somewhere where an independent household live above your property.

Or, in the case of the bank, never lend money to the previously mentioned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plastic pipes are not inferior to copper - they both have advantages and disadvantages.

The advantages to plastic over copper would have to be extreme to make up for having to rip out half your walls every 25 years.

Edited by Tiger Woods?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.