Paul Fay
Paul Fay
Registered with Property118.com
28th August 2015
Total Posts
0
Total Comments
35
Registered with Property118.com
28th August 2015
Total Posts
0
Total Comments
35
20th March 2020, 6 years ago
Unless you were negligent in some way you have no liability to the upstairs flat owner and your insurer should have declined their claim against you. If there is blame there is a claim but in the absence of blame,...
Read More →Reply to comment left by Steve Masters at 15/11/2019 - 11:26
Reply to the comment left by Steve Masters at 15/11/2019 - 11:26For there to be a contract there needs to be consideration (payment). Requiring a potential tenant to source information at no cost is not requiring them to enter into...
Read More →13th September 2019, 7 years ago
In the absence of demonstrable negligence on the part of the leaseholder from where the leak has occurred., there is no claim against the leaseholder. If they let a bath overflow that would be negligent however if pipework simply failed...
Read More →Reply to comment left by Mick Roberts at 12/03/2019 - 15:19
Reply to the comment left by Mick Roberts at 12/03/2019 - 15:19Why dont you add £15 a week to the rent to cover the cost and if a tenant complains point them in the direction of the tax collector? You...
Read More →26th October 2018, 7 years ago
Try companies like magicman or plastic surgeon. Send them photos and they will tell you if they can restore.
Read More →26th October 2018, 7 years ago
It's 60 mins fire protection between tenancies. Envirograf produce a paint that can increase resistance in a single plasterboard layer from 30 mins to 60 avoiding the need for an extra layer of plasterboard.
Read More →13th October 2018, 7 years ago
Interesting comment re the restriction of tax relief for low rate mortgages and it makes no sense. The lower the interest rate the higher the tax take.
Read More →Reply to comment left by Ian Narbeth at 16/03/2018 - 10:13
Reply to the comment left by Ian Narbeth at 16/03/2018 - 10:13@ Ian Narbeth There is no liability on the 3rd party unless they have been negligent in some way or there are unreasonable repeat occurrences.
Read More →16th March 2018, 8 years ago
The burden of proof for a civil case is 'balance or probabilities' rather than beyond reasonable doubt. It's a significantly lower standard.
Read More →Reply to comment left by Ann Shaw at 13/03/2018 - 11:59
Reply to the comment left by Ann Shaw at 13/03/2018 - 11:59Under DPA you should not be releasing tenants personal data to anyone unless you have their written authority.
Read More →Reply to comment left by Chris Daniel at 07/11/2017 - 16:48
Reply to the comment left by Chris Daniel at 07/11/2017 - 16:48If you were proceedings in contract, the freeholder may be the target but not in negligence. In practice i suspect that it would be the management company on the...
Read More →7th November 2017, 8 years ago
I don't believe that the freeholder is liable. Prima fascie there is no negligence on his part. If there is a case, it is for possibly him to pursue even if funded by the leaseholders. That said, it's the lease...
Read More →Reply to comment left by Ian Narbeth at 06/11/2017 - 10:11
Reply to the comment left by Ian Narbeth at 06/11/2017 - 10:11Ian - I disagree with this comment: A latent defect is a defect caused by a fault in design, materials or workmanship, that existed at the time construction was...
Read More →Reply to comment left by Laura Delow at 05/11/2017 - 07:58
Reply to the comment left by Laura Delow at 05/11/2017 - 07:58Definitely worth looking into. I'd try the NHBC in the first instance but the contract (for the original leaseholders) was with the builder. Under the supply of goods and...
Read More →7th November 2017, 8 years ago
Again I have to emphasis that I am in no way linked to the legal profession, however, I have come across the following which may be of potential relevance re economic loss: Losinjska Plovidba v Transco Overseas Ltd, The Orjula...
Read More →Reply to comment left by Jerry Jones at 24/10/2017 - 08:49
Reply to the comment left by Jerry Jones at 24/10/2017 - 08:49The fact that only you and the journalist had been to see the MP is possibly an indication as to the extent of landlord ignorance as to what is...
Read More →Reply to comment left by Giles Peaker at 04/11/2017 - 17:44
Reply to the comment left by Giles Peaker at 04/11/2017 - 17:44Excellent point about economic loss. Case closed!
Read More →Reply to comment left by Giles Peaker at 04/11/2017 - 13:45
Reply to the comment left by Giles Peaker at 04/11/2017 - 13:45Giles, my point is that it's worth looking in to rather than simply accepting the management companies decision that the leaseholders are responsible for the costs; which we both...
Read More →Reply to comment left by Giles Peaker at 04/11/2017 - 12:14
Reply to the comment left by Giles Peaker at 04/11/2017 - 12:14Giles. You may unlimitedly be correct but I don't see this as a case not worthy of further investigation. The management company should have all the paperwork associated with...
Read More →Reply to comment left by Giles Peaker at 04/11/2017 - 09:31
Reply to the comment left by Giles Peaker at 04/11/2017 - 09:31That's assuming that the cladding was certified to meet the standard. Building regs state that the work shall adequately resist the spread of fire over external walls. My question...
Read More →Showing 20 of 35 comments