Property damage by tenant upon moving in

It dosent matter if they have cameras they can take a million photos. If an agent has a photo of a kitchen bench intact and in good condition before tenant moves in, tenant damages it, takes a photo and says that’s how it was, it will not hold because agent has original photo.

 

Best do it now.

If you do at the end of lease, they may say it is fair wear and damage?

 

As much as I like to be an optimist, this thread has made me realise that there is much that can go wrong between now and end of lease, so hopefully we can get it sorted this coming week.

 

Following up - Tenant received a quote and baulked at the cost, however acknowledged that they need to fix it, and will do so when leaving. Not an ideal situation, but that's how PM left it.

 

I'd prefer the damage fixed asap rather than risking further damage or the tenant doing a runner and leaving you holding the baby.

Leaving it may void a warranty or cause further damage.

 

Get the tenant to fix it now.
While you're at it, get a new PM
A good PM would not let this happen.
Be grateful it's happened now and the PM has shown what they are really like.

 

PM has indicated that they can't do anything to force it to be fixed now.

Agreed, I have now found out that the PM isn't managing the property but just acting like a middle-man to me with all the issues. Unfortunately, I'm contracted for another 4.5 months with the PM.

 

The tenant's car insurer should pay this out (car hit garage door). I guess a LL could get their insurer to pursue the tenant. I don't know why this has gone on for so long.

 

This question was posted in March 2018! Does seem to be dragging on.

 

This isn't the responsibility of the PM. You need to follow up with the tenant as it's a car insurance related matter. You may want to get your home and content insurer to contact the tenant though.

 

Well it mostly is in my opinion.

Its damage caused in breach of the tenancy agreement. The PM or LL both have a few options to deal with it, most of which don't need to wait until the end of the tenancy.

Breaches, termination notices potentially, and financial claims for damage.

 

Would repair it. That way you have invoice and before / after photo to prove yourself in case it happens again.

Simultaneously pay bill and invoice to tenant for the same amount. Payable in 14 days.

 

I certainly would not wait until the end of the tenancy to deal with it. It did occur to me that it could be argued that it is damage breaching tenancy but I would try and resolve the matter via car insurer first as it's likely to be the easiest, and quickest, way to resolve it.

 

Thankfully I've never had to do a claim like this. If the LL knew who the insurer was, and preferably a claim number, then they could talk to the car insurer about sorting the matter out.

The car insurer will not usually do anything though unless the tenant has contacted them with the details of the accident and paid their premium. They could also get their house insurer to potentially mediate with the car insurer if that's done and a claim number is available.

The tenant would need to tell them who they are insurer with. Given enough incentive I'd get on the phones and ring around the majors, just takes time.

Really, it would be absurd if the LL doesn't know the insurer by now, as it's one of the first things I find out in the event of a car accident (are you ok? name? ph? insurer? rego?).

I've been in enough car accidents though to know that insurers tend to act professionally.

If the tenant did not provide me with a claim number within 24 hours of the incident (just need to make a phone call) I would be looking at other avenues. Leaving this matter until the end of tenancy would be unprofessional in my opinion.

 

It's not my case. I'm just commenting on the case.

 

It's considered a single vehicle accident where a car hits an immobile object. I'd do what you say.
You are correct, unlikely to get details from an insurer. They might, given a careful approach, confirm that they are the insurer for a person though.