Issue with high emergency repair cost from tenant

[kennyboi]

Hi,

My tenant has reported to my managing agent there was a leak in the bathroom one night last week and they have got someone in to fix it as emergency repair. The cost comes to around $1050 that they want me to cover. At no point in time did they try to contact my agent or the listed services on the rental agreement.

My agent has enquired about the same emergency job with their service people and their quote was around $490. My agent further enquired to the service people tenant has used to get details of the quote to see why they are so high, but they hung up on them.

I think the tenant has got ripped off. But since they made no effort to contact us prior, I am wondering what I should do? My feeling at the moment is to only cover the first $490.

Thanks

 

[EN710]

Ask you PM and fair trading on the rules.
I think in Nsw max repair is $1000 and tenant should be able to prove that they have attempted to contact you.

im on my phone and can't paste link from on tab, but you can easily Google search the rules for emergency repair

 

[Scott No Mates]

Alot of the 'emergency' plumbers/sparkies etc are worse than ..... They have a ridiculous call out rate and that doesn't include doing any work. They then charge some out of the world rate.

 

[Perp]

See s 19 of the lease agreement.

I think the law nearly always favours the tenant, but in not contacting the emergency contact numbers, getting an emergency repair for something that doesn't sound like an emergency, and spending over $1,000, they've violated a few clauses of the lease.

How bad was this leak? If it really was something that needed urgent attention, I'd be inclined to give a little more leeway, because maybe they were flustered and one doesn't pull out the lease in such circumstances.

If it wasn't that dramatic a leak and the tenant decided to just do whatever they wanted, then I think your offer to pay $490 is reasonable.

 

[Nikoletta]

It is correct, the tenants may ask for reimbursement up to $1000 in NSW, however, they have to prove that they tried to contact the agency's emergency tradespeople and the PM.

This is also a good opportunity to talk to the PM and ask about their emergency repairs procedures.

I find it very helpful to provide the tenants with an emergency repair guide, including the nominated trades and the step by step instructions.
Most tenants will file their lease and wouldn't know where it is when it comes to emergencies so I recommend to keep the guide on the top of their fridge, should they ever need it.

But back to your current issue, if the tenants were provided with adequate information by PM (when commenced the tenancy) about urgent repairs (what to do, who to contact) and they made no attempt to contact the nominated trades and/or the PM, I would ask the tradie to provide the PM with a written quote how much the work would have costed (if they attended after hours) and advise the tenants that they are being reimbursed for that cost, within 14 days.

If there is no evidence that the tenants were educated and had the necessary info, I would pay the full bill and would take it further with the agency.

 

[Salvatore1]

Hi everyone, the tenant could state "I could not find the emergency contact details and in my panic found a plumber that would come out and had the matter fixed!!" This would cover them. May I suggest:
1. What was the urgent call for.
2. If overcharged speak to the plumber that come out and find out why so much.
3. If you feel the plumber has overcharged you and taken advantage of the tenant then take the plumber to NCAT.

 

[Terry_w]

Hi everyone, the tenant could state "I could not find the emergency contact details and in my panic found a plumber that would come out and had the matter fixed!!" This would cover them.

Why do you think this would cover them?

 

[AlmostBob]

• 1090 is so close to 1000
• the tenant is not a plumber and has no way to determine extent
• all plumbing leaks are considered urgent
• the quote is irrelevant, emergency service doubles the cost at least
• vcat is highly biased in favour of the tenant who is not considered a knowledgeable party
• vcat awards penalty, always against landlords, always larger than the disputed amount

pay it, and then make certain it cannot happen again
contact numbers in the lease pack, noted as must use these services, individually signed and acknowledged

all tenants are ignorant except when it comes to asserting their 'rights'
I have noted so many times before, the REI standard lease is crap, and does not protect the landlord​

 

[kathryn d]

I think we need more info from the OP.

What type of leak is it?
Is it the only bathroom?

If it truly was not an emergency, and only an inconvenience, I'd be angry too.

Have you just issued them a rental increase?

 

[Sez]

I had a very similar thing happen recently. A tenant arranged urgent repairs without contacting our office (electrical and was actually urgent but she had done the wrong thing). The person who attended charged the tenant over $500. I spoke to 3 of my trades and the average cost for the job that was done was $350. I spoke to the landlord and the tenant and the tenant was only paid $350 and given a very hard lesson on listening to me and looking at all the information that we give our tenants for after hours contact.

I would be paying only the $490, especially as she didn't try to contact you and it doesn't actually sound like an emergency! Most bathroom 'leaks' are dripping taps and nothing that can't be fixed the next day and with the mains tap being turned off over night.

Discuss with your PM but I think $490 is fair.

 

[Salvatore1]

"

My tenant has reported to my managing agent there was a leak in the bathroom one night last week and they have got someone in to fix it as emergency repair.

My agent has enquired about the same emergency job with their service people and their quote was around $490. "

Hi you wrote in the first two paragraphs that a leak in the bathroom then wrote the agant enquired about same emergency job.

I am confused was it an emergency or just a leak? If leak then not an emergency and you pay nothing! If an emergency we have $300 odd for after hour call out what makes up the other $750?

I dont believe we have all the info.

 

[Ace in the Hole]

Thanks for the thread and sorry for your current issue.

Just emailed my property managers for their clarification on instances such as these, as it's not an everyday occurrence.

It's good to know these things.

 

[kennyboi]

Hi there,

My PM has said:

the tenants had not followed the procedure in regards to reporting urgent repairs. They had contacted another plumber by the name of xxx. The works that got completed down at the premises was to replace burst hot water flexi hose in the bathroom under the vanity. They had charged the tenants $1055.00 for the service and replacement. We had contacted our plumbers and they have advised that they could have repaired/ attended to the burst flexi hose under the vanity between $400 ? $450.00. The charge of $1055.00 is almost triple to what our plumbers would have charged if the tenants had made our plumbers their primary contact.

From the pics sent, it seems it's the leak that flows out from the bathroom on to the carpet immediately outside the bathroom. Carpet has stained and I paid $132 to get it professionally cleaned.

Would you classify this as emergency at all?

Regards, Ken

 

[Perp]

Would you classify this as emergency at all?

I think Tribunal would classify it as an emergency, yes.

 

[Sim]

Would you classify this as emergency at all?

Yes, that would be an emergency.

We had an almost identical problem at the place we rent a few months back.

Hot water flex-hose under the hand-basin in the bathroom broke away from the pipe, causing hot water to spray all over the bathroom.

Less than 15 minutes eariler, the kids had been in the bath which was in the direct path of the hot water - could potentially have been very serious if they were still in there at the time.

I was able to isolate the hot water at the HWS, but this meant no hot water supply to the house.

This was in the evening on a weekend - I was able to get an emergency plumber out.

Total cost: $440 (which was reimbursed to me by the owner)

I do think $1000+ sound completely unreasonable. Perhaps a $250 callout fee, and an hour or two of work at $120 per hour ... let's round it up to $500. Even if they charged $250 per hour, they would need to have been on-site for 4 hours before they charged $1000

I would definitely be challenging the plumbing company over that bill.

 

[Salvatore1]

We had to attend to a burst flexi host in August after hours and our plumber charged a total of $336.29 - $300 call out fee and $5.72 for the flexi hose +GST. I believe your tenant has been taken advantage off. Unsure who needs to take the plumber to NCAT but normally landlords issue.

 

[Sez]

Yes, that is an emergency!

I once had a situation where a tenant had just moved out of a property when the flexi hose burst under the bathroom sink. Flooded the entire house (including the new carpets we had just had put down). Those flexi hoses are awful!!

 

[Ace in the Hole]

When the flexi hoses break, can't you just turn off the tap which is usually right next to it?
Otherwise turn off at the mains?

 

[xanh]

When the flexi hoses break, can't you just turn off the tap which is usually right next to it?
Otherwise turn off at the mains?

I would imagine that the water is pouring out before it even gets to the tap. I'm assuming the flexi hose is just used between the wall and the tap/vanity to save on having to use PVC pipe with elbows?

If the HWS is a tank, turning off the mains won't make a difference until the tank is empty.

 

[wylie]

When the flexi hoses break, can't you just turn off the tap which is usually right next to it?
Otherwise turn off at the mains?

Our little taps are between the pipe that comes out of the tiled wall and before the flex hose starts, so if the flexi hose leaks, we turn the taps off.

It was only about July 2013 in Brisbane that we had to have taps under our new bathroom sink. I remember it clearly because had we installed the sink a few weeks before, we need not have added the taps. So, anything installed before then (in Brisbane) likely won't have a tap to turn off the water to the bathroom sink. Of course, we could have chosen to add a tap had we done our bathroom before the rules changed, and probably would have done so on the advice from our plumber. It is just something I wouldn't have even thought of.

But... I reckon a huge percentage of houses in many parts of Australia won't have such a tap under the bathroom vanity or sink.