To sue the arse off my landlord

[FlickeryWicket]

TWO years we've been asking him to replace the loose stair carpet. All requests logged through the agents. He came round and ummed and ahhed. Hit it back on the carpet rail with a hammer despite me telling him we do that everyday and it just comes back off again. Logged at all inspections.

I've tried fixing it numerous times. It's so frayed around the edge it won't attach. I've tried with carpet glue, it still won't stay out for more than a few days.

The carpet is at the top of the stairs, if you aren't careful and step on the edge of the top stair the whole carpet comes with you.

DD stepped on the edge yesterday and went flying down the stairs (along with the fucking carpet). Possible fractured coccyx (they weren't sure) in so much pain, will miss her netball tournament and a dance competition. Hurts when she goes to the loo for a poo, sits down for too long, can't walk to the bus for school.

I am bloody furious and feel like suing the tight bastard. I don't bloody care if he evicts us!

soloman properties are In England. If you sue a LL that is a sure way to end your tenancy. I would never renew a lease with a tenant who sued me. There is talk here about LLs having insurance to cover costs of being sued. My insurance covers the buildings only. A tenant who sues me is hitting me in the pocket.

With my way what is the LL going to do? If they say you haven't paid you have proof that you have paid via the carpet being replaced. If they try to withhold from the deposit, good luck to the LL wining against the deposit scheme. They would side with the tenant.

No doubt the LL should have replaced the carpet. I would have replaced it a long time before now. The advice to go to a solicitor is also not great advice if the tenant wants to stay in the home. You can threaten it, remind them of their legal situation but by actually doing it I would fully expect the LL to kick them out.

user if she got new carpet and it didn't match the landlord could rightly recover the cost to replace to match.
Not to mention if she's on a rolling contract she could pay £200 for new carpet for the next day the landlord serve notice and youve got 2 months notice to move. Your only ever 2 months away from having to move on a rolling contract.

Renting it's never really your home.

Yes the landlord is an arsehole. Yes it was the landlords responsibility. Yes it is the landlords fault,

But. At what point do you take responsibility too and address a very very dangerous problem. Trip hazard at the top of the stairs? For two years?

You're only ever 2 months away from eviction at all the times anyway. I would have taken the risk. Got new carpet (same if possible). Kept the old one in case LL wants it put back.

Evidence documented of reports to LL. Pictures taken etc. Would be very very surprised if you got evicted due to putting new carpet down. All our carpets always got trashed when we were LL, so new carpet would have been welcome.

But if it got to that, you could then put the carpet back, so it's in original condition. But then I would be looking to move anyway away from arsehole LL.

I am so sorry for your DD. I really hope she makes a full recovery without lasting damage.

But both me and DH said after reading the OP, no way would we have left it like that. The LL was in breach of his responsibilities before your potential breach of replacing carpet.

OP - I'm really sorry about your DD and that is a terrible accident to happen.

However, there are a lot of random opinions being given on this thread without sufficient knowledge of the facts. My advice is to READ THE TENANCY AGREEMENT - this (and only this) will tell you whether the landlord is responsible for the carpet or not.

For residential tenancies, there is a statutorily implied repairing obligation on landlords to repair the structure and exterior of the premises plus the installations for the supply of water, heating, electricity and sanitation (s.11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985). Carpets don't fall within this automatic repairing liability. You therefore need to read the tenancy agreement to see whether there is any claim against the landlord or not. Fairness and the question of who has the economic benefit of the property/the carpet doesn't fall into it. If the landlord doesn't have that repairing obligation I struggle to see how a personal injury claim will succeed. The Defective Premises Act linked to above only applies where the defect is a relevant defect for which the landlord was liable to repair.

Do take legal advice though as no poster here can give you definitive advice on your specific situation.

We viewed a council property before Christmas and the carpets were bad. Rotten full of holes. It was made clear if we took property they would either leave carpets or pull them out. They were ultimately our responsibility though.

boring old facts.

council properties are different - there the tenant provides and maintains the flooring. In private rentals the landlord does. What a landlord provides, they maintain.

Landlord has a responsibility (England/Wales) to keep the property in a basic safe condition. Worn out stair carpet reported umpteen times is not that.

report to environmental health. That means no eviction, assuming you want to stay of course.

replacing a carpet at intervals is part of the cost of maintaining a rental.

and with a year long tenancy agreement, the OP is NOT '2 months away from eviction at all times'.

I don't understand why you would leave an obvious serious hazard in your home, no matter whether it might cost you a little money eventually (although how the LL could get much from you over a ratty bit of carpet, I don't know).

You knew it was dangerous and you did nothing about it (personally, once it was clear the LL wasn't doing anything). Isn't safety more important than possible future costs?

I think if the OP had written: Carpet ripped, trip hazard at top, asked LL to fix 2 weeks ago, said he wouldn't - then DD fell down the stairs, I'd say totally LL fault.

But it's been going on for 2 years. At any point did the OP phone LL or write asking if she could fix it herself? If he turned around and said, fix it and I'll have you evicted, I could see the problem. But it's all if I fix it, I could be evicted.

I know it's not the point to fix it yourself, but it's a safety issue and family safety before money always.

Whilst I'm not sure what I'd do about the carpet, I find it hard to be interested in doing extra to maintain a property when the LL is not helpful.

In our old flat, we made a few improvements at our own cost as we had a nice LL.

Right now, our HA really doesn't give a shit so we're taking decent care of it, but no more.

Also, it's a matter of safety over money provided you have the money. If you don't, you're stuck with hoping for the best.

Where are you getting your info from Rogue? LLs cannot charge for wear and tear. I'm quite high up at work.. on the 19th floor...

Also, it's a matter of safety over money provided you have the money. If you don't, you're stuck with hoping for the best

Not in this case, because removing the carpet costs nothing at the time. Its the anticipation of possible future costs (which would actually be unlikely) that stopped OP from doing it.
Which is frankly insane. Two years of a dangerous trip hazard on the top of the stairs is ridiculous, both from the LL and the occupier.

If the carpet is loose, u can remove it and store it safely while telling the landlord in writing that u have done so due to a safety risk. He can the. Refit it securely, or replace it, but he'd be hard pressed to justify charging u for that (especially when a child has fallen due to the problem).

I had tenants do exactly this, except they didn't ask me to fix the problem first - I just found the carpet missing on a visit! Easily solved tho, and much better to be safe than risk injury.

I think it's a bit harsh to suggest the OP should replace it herself, not everyone has the money, and as a tenant, there's no guarantee she'll get to stay and benefit from it for years.

OP, after you've spoken to the landlord and a solicitor I'd love an update. I hope your dd is ok.

Op. I'm really sorry that your DD is injured, and I 100% hope your shut landlord I'd penalised for this.

However. I would have removed the carpet from the stairs and dealt with the consequences another time. You would have had evidence etc.

If it was a faulty gas cooker, would you have kept using it until it blew up?

NB. You still have a completely terrible landlord.

Your LL is responsible for replacing the carpet but you need to take some responsibility for the accident. You are living there and no matter what a dick your LL is you must make sure your home is safe for your family. I can't believe that you lived with a potential death trap for two years because 'it isn't your responsibility to sort out'. You risked the lives of your family. What if your DD (or DH or you) had fallen, broken her neck and died? Blaming the LL wouldn't bring her back. Being in the right wouldn't bring her back. Yes, your LL could have prevented the accident but so could you.

What I would do now (and would have done before the accident) is make the carpet safe by cutting the top part away, taking pictures first if you are going to sue. Keep the piece of carpet as evidence but at least the stairs are safe going onwards while you pursue your LL.

I do hope your DD recovers okay.

Nachocheese - hope your recovery post-op is better than post-accident!

OP - I do think there is something in what people are saying about you should maybe have thought about removing the stair carpet completely.

My tenants have asked to remove certain things that they didn't need (internal doors being one of them!) and I have agreed to it, so long as they store them safely and in a fit state to return them to their hinges should said tenants leave. They have agreed to this.

In your case, removing the trip/slip hazard and storing the carpet safely should not have affected the T&C of your contract, given that you had warned the agents and the LL of the dangers - but again, I don't see why the agents didn't advise you that you could do this. I feel that your agents have also let you down (not as badly as your LL) by not giving you alternate options since the LL so spectacularly failed to do anything sensible - but I do think, in your place, I would have at the very least considered removing the damn thing entirely. Did you ask if you could? Were you told categorically that you could NOT?