Damp and Mould ...here comes the hysteria

[Pat ex]

From a laymans point of view black mould is caused by 'the building' & therefore it must be the 'responsibility' of the buildings owner.

Anyone who has ever tackled the problem of black mould will have learned that it isn't 'the building' that causes the problem, it is down to the way the building is used.

I am no longer involved in residential letting for many of the reasons already exposed (& I can add a few more).

As a landlord, am I responsible for how a tenant uses a building? Am I responsible for their H&S standards, the COSHH & HAZMAT compliance & all the other 'rules' that users of commercial & industial buildings are responsible for . . . .

I would argue that if the building does not automatically (i.e. built-in) prevent such deterioration (and it is deterioration to the fabric of the building), then the landlord has a duty of care, to ensure sufficient awareness is provided to the tenants in the proper regime of housekeeping, along with any required updates to the building.
When that deterioration descends into a real health hazard that duty of care can be diversified to and include other agencies.

 

[Pat ex]

Our police are very understanding when they come across the culture of sh*gging minors, so it's not all bad news if your culture doesn't tally with the natives.

Not just our police, our royal family, the various churches, many LA funded children's homes, etc, tend to gloss over such issues
And it's not just sex with minors that don't interest them, it's also abuse and even murder. Then there's the forced adoptions, even transportation, etc.
But this isn't the topic of this debate.

 

[Dork Lard]

I would argue that if the building does not automatically (i.e. built-in) prevent such deterioration (and it is deterioration to the fabric of the building), then the landlord has a duty of care, to ensure sufficient awareness is provided to the tenants in the proper regime of housekeeping, along with any required updates to the building.
When that deterioration descends into a real health hazard that duty of care can be diversified to and include other agencies.

One of my HMO projects ended up populated mostly by alcoholics. To what extent does a landlords 'duty of care' to alcoholics extend to?

 

[Pat ex]

One of my HMO projects ended up populated mostly by alcoholics. To what extent does a landlords 'duty of care' to alcoholics extend to?

Perhaps you should ensure the building will primarily be conducive to their health. If their behaviour prevents the building from meeting its primary function, there's either a problem with the building, with the tenants' behaviour, or a combination of both.
As a landlord, you have a duty to ensure it's not the building that is at fault, or the building is not contributing to the tenants' ill health by a combination of the tenants' behaviour coupled with the building construction.
In such cases something needs to change.
If a combination of the building construction and the tenants' behaviour is causing the problem, then they aren't the right tenants for that building.
Or the building is not the right type of accommodation for those tenants.

 

[Dork Lard]

Perhaps you should ensure the building will primarily be conducive to their health. If their behaviour prevents the building from meeting its primary function, there's either a problem with the building, with the tenants' behaviour, or a combination of both.
As a landlord, you have a duty to ensure it's not the building that is at fault, or the building is not contributing to the tenants' ill health by a combination of the tenants' behaviour coupled with the building construction.
In such cases something needs to change.
If a combination of the building construction and the tenants' behaviour is causing the problem, then they aren't the right tenants for that building.
Or the building is not the right type of accommodation for those tenants.

So, can a landlord evict an alcoholic tenant who's behaviour causes regular property damage & harrassment, alarm & distress to other tenants???

Can that same landlord evict a family that is causing black mould???

Should I evict the company running a bodyshop on one of my premises because they don't follow the rules surrounding their spray booth?

To what extent should I as a landlord become involved in the lives of my tenants?

 

[Odds]

So, can a landlord evict an alcoholic tenant who's behaviour causes regular property damage & harrassment, alarm & distress to other tenants???

Can that same landlord evict a family that is causing black mould???

Should I evict the company running a bodyshop on one of my premises because they don't follow the rules surrounding their spray booth?

To what extent should I as a landlord become involved in the lives of my tenants?

A landlord is responsible for maintaining the quality of the house/flat they're letting out. If tenants break the rules of occupancy then it's up to him to sort the problem out, using whatever legal means are available.
If one of your properties had rampant damp and mould you'd do something about it, right?

 

[Dork Lard]

If one of your properties had rampant damp and mould you'd do something about it, right?

I'll give you a theoretical scenario based on one of my experiences.

A tenant contacts you to inform you their toilet is broken. You treat a broken toilet as though an urgent response is needed so you contract a plumber to visit the property & replace the toilet within hours. The feedback from the plumber is that the tenant appears to have smashed the toilet with a hammer.

A week later, same tenant same problem, same response. The feedback is again that the tenant appears to have smashed the toilet with a hammer.

A week after that, same tenant, same problem.

How would YOU tackle the problem???

 

[Odds]

Well, if it's based on one of your experiences, how did you deal with it?

 

[diy_fun_uk]

Poor luvs.

Especially when it comes to the private rental sector (PRS for short) this is unfortunately quite a common attitude to have towards landlords. I think some (much?) of it is influenced by media reports of sky high rents in major city centres (especially London) and reports of dodgy landlords.

What people forget (or simply don't know) is that the PRS provides an important part of the housing stock across the UK. Most landlords aren't raking it in, most have 1-3 properties that aren't in major city centres with rents that are (usually) more realistic.

It was interesting watching the housing minister give an update in the house of commons recently. They mentioned that a shortage in the PRS (partly caused by landlords selling up) was having a detrimental effect on the availability of housing. He went on to mention the important role the PRS plays.

Up here in Scotland our useless SNP and Green coalition are squeezing landlords ever more. The result? More and more are selling up. The result of that? There are very few properties available for people that WANT to rent in the PRS for whatever reason. Yes, believe it or not, for some people (e.g. doctor working in an area for 12 months) renting privately is the ideal choice. Social housing models often don't work for these people.

Another consequence of landlords being squeezed and fewer properties being available is it often drives up the monthly rental charge for properties that are available. Supply and demand. Landlords are not charities, they provide a service.

It makes me laugh when folk spout their anti-landlord rhetoric. If every PRS landlord sold up tomorrow, the situation for many people would be dire. Also makes me laugh when folk say that it's disgusting for landlords to make a profit from property. I wonder if they think the same when they find out their own residential property has increased in value and they can make a profit when selling? MMmmm, probably not.

Yes some rents are ridiculous e.g. £1800 a month for a cupboard in central London. Yes some landlords take the p1ss and/or are dodgy. However they are a minority and it doesn't represent the entire PRS model in a fair light.

p.s. although not PC to say so these days, tenants can also be dodgy and take the p1ss I'm experiencing that situation now with one of my tenants.

 

[Dork Lard]

Well, if it's based on one of your experiences, how did you deal with it?

I know how I would deal with the problem. How would YOU tackle the problem???

 

[^woody^]

Usually occurs in poorly constructed, low quality, cheaply presented properties.

Whilst condensation may be more likely to occur in certain properties, and equally valid counterargument (which is more of a fact than just a proposition) to your assertion is that another occupant in the same property may not experience the same issues. Which indicates that the use of the property, rather than the property itself is a factor, often a significant or only factor.

Generally, it all comes down to whether there are structural, or property related defects which may cause damp and mould- and that is defects not deficiencies. Eg, a broken fan or inoperable window is a defect but lack of a fan or an operable window is a deficiency.

Then there is the overriding obligation, a concept, of a tenant acting in a "tenant-like manner". Using the property and its fittings correctly and cleaning the property is acting in a tenant like manner, and so expected of any tenant.

 

[^woody^]

'Wipe it down and clean it up'?

Are you ****ing kidding me?

Even the rats had moved out.

It's all very well trying to be 'rational' about this case but the coroner leaves no room for doubt where the blame lies.
Two years spent trying to find someone to fix this out of control mould is unacceptable and experienced tradesmen on this forum must be well aware the problem has to be caught early to stand any chance of curing the wall before it gets beyond hope.

And it isn't made clear whether the problem existed before the family were housed at the property: you'd think someone from social services would make sure the place was fit for living.

The only cure for that toilet is a can of petrol and a ****ing match.

This family were let down by the landlord for not explaining the importance of ventilation in the house. They were let down by the RBH for not resolving the issue quickly, and let down by medical services for not backing up the families claims for proper care.

That mould did not occur overnight. It has been allowed to increase and to spread to get into that condition.

There is an expectation that a tenant would not let it get in to such a condition in the first place.

 

[Odds]

I know how I would deal with the problem. How would YOU tackle the problem???

I'll let you know when i have that problem.
And you really should take the hammer from that bog-smasher, he sounds a right nutter.

 

[Odds]

That mould did not occur overnight. It has been allowed to increase and to spread to get into that condition.

There is an expectation that a tenant would not let it get in to such a condition in the first place.

As i said, it doesn't say if the problem was already established before the family moved in - and judging by the many reports from other tenants at the site i'd say it was. What say you?

 

[^woody^]

First and foremost, outside walls should be well insulated to prevent cold surfaces in the first place.

Next - adequate heating.

Zero drafts. Keep the surfaces up to temperature.

Controlled ventilation mixed with passive ventilation.

You will achieve much more with insulation that you will with ALL the other remedies put together.

I get involved with properties built from over 100 years ago to ones built a few years ago, and see mould in the new ones as well as the old ones.

It's true that mould is less likely in the older uninsulated draughty houses.