Tenant arranging repairs

Isn't this the first time you have told us details of the emergency electrician had been provided to the tenant in the lease? Because that does change the position a bit.

 

Ahh the old special or agreed terms. I can assure you there are thousands if not tens of thousands of leases in this country with illegal or unenforceable special or agreed terms. The fact each party agreed to them means nothing if they are unenforeceable or not legal.

Really? I think that clause is very clear, particularly in your circumstance.

- Luke

 

So they ring your PM, no answer. They ring the emergency repairer (instead of their own), they come and fix it, PM/you finds out after. How is the answer no due to a clause? It is precisely the same scenario, just with a different repairer.

- Luke

 

How so? The tenant did not use the electrician as provided in the lease, they used another electrician chosen by them who charged double what the electrician in the lease would have charged.

 

No it is not the same scenario. The ability to call the electrician in the clause is an additional option given to the tenant - the same option the PM would choose for emergency repairs. This is an additional benefit for the tenant so they do not have to wait 24 hours for repairs. The lessor agrees to the clause in the knowledge that the electrician will charge a reasonable rate. There is no way I, or any other rational lessor, would sign a clause which gives a tenant the right to immediately call any electrician and, as in this case, end up with a bill that is twice as expensive.

 

I give up. You are missing the point - The tenant has two options in an essential repair situation, call the PM who then has to organise repairs within 24 hours or call the electrician in the agreement. if the tenant followed the latter option then the tenant followed a process we both agreed in writing If I then wanted to challenge the tenant for calling the nominated electrician in the agreement it would rightly be dismissed out of court. However, the agreement does not provide for the tenant to call any electrician and that can be challenged in the court.

On a more practical note, it is always expected that the PM is the first point of contact. However, the tenant does not have to in an emergency and it is not always possible to contact the RE in a short time. So the additional clause is there for the tenant's benefit, ie not having to wait up to 24 hours for the essential repairs to be arranged.

As a lessor, I don't have to agree to this condition (and then it would not be included in Part C) as I could save money in these situations by ensuring repairs are only carried out during working hours. So this is more to benefit tenants as it gives an option for repairs to done out of hours. It is therefore not unreasonable to add to the condition that only the nominated (and trusted) repairer can be used in that situation.

 

Seriously mate , a very loud band with smoke has just come from the meter box , with a total loss of power , and you want the tenants to go looking around inside for the rental agreement , they have done the right thing and tried to ring the PM and then proceeded to arrange an electrician to come out.
If you were so particular about them using certain tradies , just get a few fridge magnets made up with your plumber and electrician numbers on them .
Thats what our PM does for emergencies.
They hand them out freely during inspections , and only for emergencies when they cannot contact the PM.

 

Option or requirement?

If it is in fact an emergency repair. Or are you happy for the tenant and repairer to determine that? I imagine not, as you clearly made the points previously that 1) the clause could be confusing as to what is or isn't an emergency repair and 2) that the tenant should have engaged with the PM prior to arranging repair instead of doing it so hastely (in fact I think that was your main point). Now you seem to be saying they don't need to apply the 24 hour period or contact the PM/lessor (or at least give them 24 hours to respond) if it is your repairer. All of which it appears to me is in contravention of the requirements of the Act.

- Luke

 

Option = either PM organises or the tenant can use the electrician as stated on the lease agreement.

Yes happy for the nominated repairer to determine if it was an emergency. They are a trusted company used by us for many years. The reference to confusion on what is an emergency was a reference to tenants as some have no idea. As for the rest, read my earlier replies - this is taking up more of my time than dealing with this issue!

 

Aside from the fact they can't, seriously???

As soon as practicable is not solely based on your cost.

A statement that could just as readily be applied to some landlords (not a reference to you )

I don't think we will see eye to eye but that is ok! All the best with it and let us know how it works out.

Cheers,

- Luke

 

Well you know what they say WA stands for? - Wait Awhile - yikes!!

 

Gee, seems like a lot of people panic, a loud bang and some smoke and then you can do as you like, panic, scream, run around like a little girl.....lol.....hope none of these type of people are flying planes, where you would expect a procedure to be followed....

Now, loud bang and smoke does not equal panic and call an electrician, you call the fire brigade if your really fearful of a fire, and you go outside Living 101 it seems ?

It also seems many are electrical experts, maybe you should teach at a TAFE etc ?

Tenant should not just do as they want & may come down to how they come across if going to tribunal, I think they should have just waited for PM or used the nominated trade, but at same time I would not be too confident on which way this would go when yet another person makes the decision, cause the tenant may be a bit thick and was genuinely concerned & more to the point, not trying to cost you extra, however I would explore if they know or knew this electrician at all.

Are you having a third party decide ? It will be interesting. A normal local court threat would be just that I imagine, this would be a matter for the tribunal ?

 

I don’t understand how do one expect tenants to search emergency electricians contact details from RE website/ lease papers in the dark with no wifi no lights no charge in cell phone perhaps to continue browsing websites!!!
If I were renting and LL did this to me (where LL pays pretty much the same for sending PM to court), i would never renew my lease at the end of tenancy. I dont want to live in a place where the owner has so much enemocity against us as tenants.

As a LL I could offer to pay (with a lecture that it’s my generosity and will not be tolerated in future)

 

Its in WA, they don't have tribunal there.

 

I thought that too, but apparently it was only the HWS that was on that circuit?

 

It blew the main switch as well so at the time you would have to assume that the entire board was damaged, at the same that live power is still entering the property and cannot be isolated by the occupier.
In many cases the wiring behind the board all starts to melt from the heat generated by the faulty fuse untill exposed wires make contact with each other and things start to go bang.
In the worst cases , the entire house will burn down as it the wiring overheats , starts to smolder then turns into fire , in the roof cavity.

 

I wouldnt expect a magistrates going to lean for the landlord here. Something went bang. Power outage - Who knows maybe something smouldering away. Only a sparkie can tell what the issue is. Reasonable efforts taken by the occupant and a reasonable person would say suck it up.

Call outs on a Sunday evening will always be a minimum call out fee. Thats just owners bad luck. Murphys law says its going to fail at night or on a holiday. Its possibly even insured if there is fusion cover and the excess is the only loss.

Magistrates can make determinations about what they consider reasonable. If laws were black and white we wouldnt have magistrates. And they can be cranky and vindictive after hearing endless issues

 

I would imagine they may be worse than a dedicated tribunal, anyway, would not be worth it for 700 odd dollars unless it was clear cut.

 

Yup - as i said back on first page, don't like their chances. But am watching with anticipation because I like learning about what arguments are brought up.

 

Wonder what people did before WiFi, internet and mobile phones & trades that were so accessible .... back in the dark ages

Well, they managed to either look up and phone another electrician, or maybe it was a mate or mate of a mate, either way, they managed to call them and PM, it appears they may have been a little impatient.

If it were me renting, I would be very careful so I would not be made to wear the bill, as it stands, it is between the tenant and the trade, and I think any tenant that does this without very good & legit reason would be happily seen off by LL and PM.