10

To what extent (if any) is a private UK landlord responsible to his tenant for issues outside of a flat he rents, but within the whole block?

If a private investor buys a flat and rents it to a tenant, he would normally be responsible for any issues within the flat itself. Looking after the wiring, plumbing, ventilation, drainage and central heating inside the flat would all be his responsibility.

But what about issues relating to the block of flats as a whole? For example, if the waste pipe between the apartment and main sewer is blocked, then since this is part of the whole block (not the individual flat), the landlord wouldn't be allowed to work on it even if he wanted to. Similarly, if the weather-proof cladding on the outside started to leak, then this would affect the inside of the flat, but wouldn't be something that the landlord could work on.

Under normal circumstances, drains, cladding and other building issues would be taken care of by the management company that runs the block, using funds from the monthly service charge that the landlord pays into. However, in practice it can be hard to twist their arm to force them to take action. Excuses include "we don't have the funds", or "it's only a minor issue" or "it only affects a couple of apartments" or "it's going to be fixed as part of our refurbishment plan in 3 years time".

Where does this leave the landlord/tenant relationship? From the tenant's perspective, they have the right non-stinky drains and no damp-patches on the walls; from the landlord's perspective, he wouldn't be allowed to do work on the super-structure of the block itself, and the body that ought to be fixing the issues isn't actually doing anything.

terdon
  • 858
  • 8
  • 23
ConanTheGerbil
  • 3,701
  • 1
  • 21
  • 39

1 Answers1

22

Consider an analogy. You walk into a shop and pay £10 to order an item that they don't have in stock. You return to collect it and they refuse it hand it over. Their reason is that they paid the manufacturer £5 for the item and the manufacturer refused to deliver it. Clearly in this scenario you don't just lose both the item and the £10 you paid. The shop is in breach of its contract with you and you can sue for your money back. The shop can try to recover the £5 they paid to the manufacturer but that's between them and has nothing to do with you.

In your example, the landlord owes duties to the tenant under a contract (the tenancy agreement) to keep the flat in good repair. The freeholder owes duties to the landlord under a contract (the lease) to keep the building in good repair.

If the flat enters into a state of disrepair then the tenant can sue the landlord for breach of contract. If the state of disrepair within the flat is caused by a state of disrepair in the building then the landlord can sue the freeholder for breach of contract. This could include a claim by the landlord to recover the same damages that he had to pay to his tenant.

In exceptional circumstances the landlord might be able to avoid his responsibilities to the tenant, but that's unlikely to apply in the case you describe.

JBentley
  • 12,609
  • 32
  • 60