BillyShears Posted December 22, 2005 Share Posted December 22, 2005 I note in another thread a reference to OFT actions concerning letting agency contracts. In the very first example it notes one "unfair" clause that "1(: transferred some of the landlord's repairing obligations to the tenant.". In the past we've had to complain about clauses which tried to make us (the tenants) responsible for maintaining the drains, etc. We never accepted these and either didn't rent or had the clauses removed. Our current contract which we more or less had to "take or leave" makes us responsible for repairing the cooker and washing machine provided by the landlord. Is this an unfair clause? BillyShears Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Crunch Posted December 22, 2005 Share Posted December 22, 2005 Yes ignore it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillyShears Posted December 22, 2005 Author Share Posted December 22, 2005 Yes ignore it. Of course this means a big argument should the appliances break down. But at least it's good to know that we will be in the right. Billy Shears Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VacantPossession Posted December 22, 2005 Share Posted December 22, 2005 (edited) Of course this means a big argument should the appliances break down. But at least it's good to know that we will be in the right. Billy Shears The only claim for your liability would be where you abused the equipment or operated it not in accordance with the manual. But as you say, some landlords simply do not rent out properties to potential tenants who qeustion dodgy clauses, which is why OFT and others seeks to protect you even if you signed an agreement with such clauses. It is nearly, but not quite, signing under duress, but I believe courts find as though it was duress. VP Edited December 22, 2005 by VacantPossession Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillyShears Posted December 22, 2005 Author Share Posted December 22, 2005 The only claim for your liability would be where you abused the equipment or operated it not in accordance with the manual. But as you say, some landlords simply do not rent out properties to potential tenants who qeustion dodgy clauses, which is why OFT and others seeks to protect you even if you signed an agreement with such clauses. It is nearly, but not quite, signing under duress, but I believe courts find as though it was duress. VP It certainly felt like duress. I was moving to another city, couldn't find a property to rent, and they didn't even show me the contract until the day I moved in, even though I'd asked to see a copy of it. The agents don't seem as dodgy as they sound from this. The property is cheap though. I suspect that the landlord will want to increase the rent at the end of the first 6 months, and my plan is to try and negotiate for proper terms and a new cooker then. BillyShears Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.