End of Rent - Reasonable Expectations?

Dr Fruit on 14/04/2022 - 09:45

Hey all,

Was the first tenant at a newly built house, rented for just over year, recently moved out at the end of the contract. Landlord is asking for large amount in addition to the bond, close to $10,000 in total. Going to tribunal soon.

There were some damages, and I won't downplay them: a tile with a chipped corner, 3 holes on the wall (each is approx. 2 dollar coin size), 1 burn spot on the carpet from ironing (approx. 1 dollar coin size), one location of burn mark from the pot on the benchtop, etc etc.

Basically, the amount the landlord is asking for is for replacing everything. Eg. replace that whole area of carpet, cut out the section of the wall to repair, etc.

We tried to send our own tradesman to quote and repair all the damage but was refused, presumably because they'd like to repair (replace) things their own way. The quote they showed as evidence for their claim is from a random no-name "furnishing company" with no information on google, and looking up the registered ABN address is just someone's residential home. Given that the rental agent taking us to tribunal for damages is actually just the landlord's father, so they're basically in cahoots, I wouldn't put it beyond them.

Question for the community: is it reasonable for a landlord to restore everything back to new (especially in this circumstance where we were the first tenant in a newly built house)? Or is repairing the damages (where possible) more reasonable? I'd love to hear from both tenants and landlords. I am actually a landlord myself as well, although I've never owned a brand new home and thus I'm not sure what is "reasonable" expectation for repairs.

Discuss away.

Home & Garden

Comments

  • tikei on 15/04/2022 - 20:22
    +1

    Yes, the amount sounds excessive but it's OP's fault for not fixing it before the final inspection.

    • Dr Fruit on 15/04/2022 - 20:51

      Read my comment below.

  • payton on 15/04/2022 - 20:40
    +2

    Whats more amazing is how did these damages not get spotted during the quarterly routine inspections? Did the RE agent screw up or did you hide them well?

    • Dr Fruit on 15/04/2022 - 20:56

      As I mentioned above, the situation surrounding the move out was contentious. I did not mention these details because I didn't want to skew people's opinions one way or another. Here's the gist of the time line:

      1. We were living there
      2. Landlord wanted to move back in, offered to move us to the granny flat beside the main house we were living in
      3. We said ok, moved. Did the move out inspection where the agent said everything was ok - this is key because people in this discussion kept asking why we didn't fix up everything. We didn't hide anything.
      4. The granny flat turned out to be kinda crappy so we moved out after 2 weeks. Rent was paid. Nothing owing. Obviously they were not happy to see us leave.
      5. Then we were served with paper from the agent saying we damaged the main house and asking for the aforementioned sum of money.

      Seems retaliatory, doesn't it?

      Hope this answers all the people piling on about "oh why didn't you fix the damages" etc. Some of the stuff we didn't really know. Furthermore they literally gave us the ok in the final inspection. Only came back to pursue damages after we moved out of the other property against their will.

      • sir-screwball on 15/04/2022 - 21:07
        +2

        Not a lot of people know this but you can submit a bond refund form yourself, the agent doesn't have to be the one to submit it. Once you submit it, they have a period of time to contest it and raise issues and if they don't, your bond is refunded.

        Agents rarely catch it in time because they're just not used to having tenants do this to them. As soon as they offered to move you to the granny flat you should have requested a lease for the granny flat and applied to move the bond over so that once they okayed the bond release on the house, they couldn't pull this later on.

        That being said, you'd have then been bound by a lease for the granny flat so it's 6 of one, half a dozen of the other in a way.

        • Dr Fruit on 15/04/2022 - 21:12

          I think this wouldn't have stopped them from coming after us anyway. They're of course keeping the bond right now + asking for more money on top.

          Even if we did this, they would've come after us for money through this tribunal process.

      • Dr Fruit on 15/04/2022 - 21:11

        Oh and none of these issues were ever raised at any of the routine inspections. And trust me they were actually fickle and did make some unreasonable demands during these inspections.

      • kaleidoscope on 15/04/2022 - 21:20
        +2

        Seems retaliatory, doesn't it?

        How so? Because you’ve mentioned you have done those damages and landlord is simply seeking compensation…

        Burnt marks from pot / ironing / broken tile/ holes on the walls… Geez dude, I’d be pretty pissed off landlord too if a tenant did those for a new property in the first year of renting…

        For a new property it’s not unusual for whole carpet replacement because if the patch doesnt match up it will affect pricing. Even the burnt marks from pot may be expensive if that requires full replacement

        • sir-screwball on 15/04/2022 - 21:23
          +2

          It does seem retaliatory. Did you read what he said?

          The landlord wanted to move in so offered the tenant the granny flat.

          The tenant moved into the granny flat, out of the house. The landlord/agent inspected and gave the thumbs up.

          The tenant decided that the granny flat was unsuitable and left.

          The landlord/agent retracts the thumbs up and begins chasing for a five figure replacement cost? What changed? Why a thumbs up before, and a thumbs down now?

          That's what the OP means when he says it seems retaliatory. If you take him at his word it absolutely reeks of retaliation for leaving the granny flat.

        • Dr Fruit on 15/04/2022 - 21:25

          Because in addition to the stuff I mentioned, if you look at previous comments, they actually came after us for a lot more. Right after we had the disagreement about continuing to rent their crappy granny flat (which was falling apart with damages, and ironically was previously occupied by the landlord themselves).

          Again, I’m not dodging responsibility here. But if you were a tenant being hurried out by the landlord, who says everything is ok at the final inspection (and it’s not like they didn’t look - they examined the whole place in detail) would you not assume they were willing to overlook some of the stuff?

      • drfuzzy on 15/04/2022 - 22:40

        You don't seem to understand. You should have fixed up the damage before the final inspection.
        Whether the agent said it is OK or not - the damage should have been fixed prior to the agent inspection OR you should be willing to wear the cost from the Landlord's preferred tradies.

        • Dr Fruit on 15/04/2022 - 23:04

          No I absolutely understand. And in hindsight yes we should've patched the wall and polished the benchtop, repaired the carpet etc.

          However, I personally don't agree with the assessment because the move out inspection was nothing short of comprehensive, it's not like they just took 5 seconds and said ok. We went through a proper form to note down all damages and nothing was noted. Unless you're telling me that it's just a formality with no legal standing, then absolutely if they said everything was ok after that inspection, it's not proper to bring up (+ so much excessive) damages; especially in light of what ensued after us being hurried out of the property and the disagreement about the granny flat - makes it feel even more inappropriate. Otherwise what stops landlords from saying everything is ok, then go in and wreck a bunch of stuff, then coming back to us after a few weeks to ask for a bunch of money?

          I saw your comment below and absolutely I agree with you that we should pay for it. I understand the comments of many landlords here about their frustration with damages. And I know my description makes it sound so bad. But I must emphasize again that if anyone reasonable (and we've consulted 3-4 licensed tradies) actually examined the extent of damages, it's absolutely nowhere near the $10k asked. The house is not a high-end build either, with pretty cheap materials (eg. flimsy doors and locks, cheap appliances, cabinets with large gaps). We paid $2000+ for the bond and it's more likely much closer to that number, if at all.

          • drfuzzy on 16/04/2022 - 09:47

            @Dr Fruit: I think one problem is the landlord probably had the agent do the final inspection without them. Then they walked through the property themself later and found the issues. Landlord should attend final inspection if they want to inspect for damage.

            • drfuzzy on 16/04/2022 - 09:50

              @drfuzzy: The other point to make is that the tribunal won't make you pay the full cost, they will pro rata it. For example, if carpet replacement is $3000 and carpet is one year old and expected to last 10 years, then land lord would pay 10% and you would pay 90%.

              • Dr Fruit on 16/04/2022 - 10:00

                @drfuzzy: Thanks for the info. :)

                Also, the agent is just the landlord’s father so… there’s no chance they’re not in this together I guess.

      • payton on 16/04/2022 - 08:33
        +1

        Did the move out inspection where the agent said everything was ok

        Its highly unusual for an agent to forego compensation for damages when its pointed out to them right there. Did they not know about the damages at the time?
        So if you did a move out inspection (for moving into a granny flat at the same address :o ) there would've been paperwork/trail that says they accepted the condition of the house?

        Scusa my skepticism.

        I think you got plenty of expert advice in this thread and IMO most likely scenario is Tribunal will give you opportunity to use your choice of tradespersons to bring the house to same condition it was a year ago, minus fair wear. Of course the LL will try to argue for as much replacement as possible, but least you get to pick the repairer.

        Of course, the critical question for the presiding member is why did you have a dead mouse on a dirty carpet? How long had it been sitting there?

      • hayne on 17/04/2022 - 01:44
        +1

        I think because you managed to cause so much damage in 1 year to a brand new property, the reason why others are skeptical is because we're just hearing your side of the story and you don't really seem to be coming across not a responsible tenant. So your landlord or their agent really missed the extensive damage to their property in the final inspection? Just doesn't seem that likely, and beyond that in principle it seems they're justified in chasing you for damages given how much you managed to mess up their place in 12 months.

        Without knowing the full story it's hard to offer helpful advice, I'm just offering an explanation of why you're not necessarily getting the sympathy you're hoping for.

  • samsonl on 15/04/2022 - 21:22

    Ironing boards are a thing!

    • sir-screwball on 15/04/2022 - 21:24
      +1

      OP said it was a mistake by a youngster. Sounds like a kid was trying to iron and maybe dropped the iron or something. These things happen.

      • drfuzzy on 15/04/2022 - 22:42

        Well OP should be happy the damage is to the carpet and just pay for it.
        Would be more costly and more damaging if it was the child that sustained terrible burns.

        • sir-screwball on 15/04/2022 - 22:48
          +2

          OP has stated numerous times that he's entirely happy to pay for the damage to be repaired. What he's not happy with is the seemingly exorbitant cost that he's being quoted by a dubious process. A fact that appears to be lost on almost everyone replying to him.

          There's a chipped tile, put some holes in some gyprock (2 dollar coin sized), a burn mark on the carpet and some melted benchtop.

          I have rented in the past for decades and I have a lot of experience with tradies and repairing small damage. I cannot see how all of that damage is worth more than $2000 tops at retail value. An argument could be made for $3000, or maybe $4000 if you were going for full on replacement.

          $10,000? C'mon, that's an obscene amount of money for some tile, carpet and plaster.

          • johnno07 on 16/04/2022 - 08:57

            @sir-screwball: Remember the OP is deliberately leaving out other damages that occurred and make up part of this bill. Classic OzBargain forum half-story.

            • Dr Fruit on 16/04/2022 - 10:03

              @johnno07: Read through one of the comments on first page. I listed out the other damages that make up the bill. I didn’t list them in the original post because those things are the ones we’re pretty much denying we did - ie. mould found on all the caulkings within cabinets in both bathrooms + kitchen; water damage to all 3 doors of the property (front, both bathrooms).

            • sir-screwball on 17/04/2022 - 19:30

              @johnno07: The other issues don't seem like they're his fault even a little bit though. The general consensus, even from those absolutely lambasting him for the damage he's admitted to, is that it's bad build. New doors with water damage? Naah. They weren't painted on the ends, so moisture has seeped in over time. That's not his fault.

          • drfuzzy on 16/04/2022 - 09:54

            @sir-screwball: We don't know if it's a $300,000 build or a $3m build. There is a huge difference. The carpet in my rental property cost over $30k and the floorboards and marble cost more than that.

            • bmerigan on 16/04/2022 - 21:56

              @drfuzzy: $30k seems an obscene amount for carpet for someone else to use.

            • sir-screwball on 17/04/2022 - 19:32

              @drfuzzy: Yeah I don't care if it's a $3m build. The guy has stated that his own tradies he's had quote the job have quoted him $2000 for all of it. $2000 from his end and $10,000 from the landlords end and you just assume the $10k is reasonable?

              There is a distinct aura of bias in this forum discussion. At least OP is acknowledging his.

              • Woody982 on 18/04/2022 - 08:41

                @sir-screwball: Well, it could be 2k just to replace the carpet in the room.

                In a new build, you would not be happy or be expected to just patch it. That would look terrible and potentially de-value the house.

                • sir-screwball on 19/04/2022 - 14:37

                  @Woody982: The only reason the patch would look horrible is if the carpet is dirt cheap shit. Anything with any body to it would patch pretty easily and the colour would match pretty well too given it's not very old.

                  If you're going to be precious about your rental property, don't rent it out to people. You're already benefiting from having your mortgage paid off by someone else whilst the value of the property also goes up, to expect it to be lived in and have no sign of anyone having ever lived in it is idiotic and unreasonable.

                  • Woody982 on 23/04/2022 - 08:22

                    @sir-screwball: Of course it will have signs of being lived in. But nothing like this bs after a year of being built lmao

  • rowenaduncan on 15/04/2022 - 22:34
    +4

    I assume you didn't do all of this damage in the last 3 months of tenancy? If I am correct, then you have been purposely hiding the damage at inspection time? Or maybe it was overlooked?…

    Either way, my point of view as an owner - I would be fuming. A brand new apartment. Burn on benchtops and burn in carpet. I've personally never managed to do either. Very lucky you never burned it down. I feel you are either very young or very irresponsible. I would expect that new carpet and new benchtops would still look like new carpet and new benchtops after a short 12 month tenancy.

    • sir-screwball on 15/04/2022 - 22:50
      +1

      New carpet wont look new after 12 months, not in a new build. The benchtop would reasonably be expected to have some nicks or scrapes from utensils and cookware, but not melted.

      And what does it matter if, as an owner, you'd be fuming? Does that give you the right to force the tenant into paying 5-6x the value of having it repaired at market rate?

      • THICKnSLOW on 15/04/2022 - 23:55
        +4

        'New carpet won't look new after 12 months' - have to disagree with you on that one. Depends on the quality of carpet laid, and whether the tenants take care of the apartment or are filthy buggers who don't give a sh!t.

        OP sounds like the latter and he knows it.

        • Dr Fruit on 16/04/2022 - 01:20
          +1

          Actually we are not dirty tenants at all. There were 0 issues about cleanliness. The carpet, other than that burn spot, is in pristine condition. Same as the rest of the house. For example we clean the cooktop and backsplash after every use, clean the windows weekly, vacuum and mop regularly, etc etc. Definitely cleaner than most tenants out there - and not just saying that to self-gloat, but genuinely because I have had several tenants at my home myself.

          Steam cleaned before leaving. Yes the burn spot was stupidity, but no we are not “filthy buggers who don’t give a sh1t”. I actually do agree that the carpets should be nearly new after a year lease. Our proposed solution from the tradesperson is to either find the same carpet to replace that patch, or to take a patch from inside the closet corner to replace it. But the landlord wants to remove the whole room and re-carpet it.

          • Woody982 on 18/04/2022 - 08:44

            @Dr Fruit: Yes replacement and not patching is 100% fair.

            Patching looks terrible (I was in a property that had been patched before we were tenants in there)

  • duluxe2000 on 15/04/2022 - 23:35

    I guess the court will take trade persons quotes as premise to decide, maybe not one but 3 quotes. Who are us (nor the judge) to decide how much it takes to repair?

  • f23lda on 16/04/2022 - 09:58

    You've got to be pretty naive* to rent out a newly built home. You're asking for trouble. Everything will be precious to the landlord. Every mark will be obvious. I'm not saying that you can't get a bad situation from moving out of an old house, but I've rarely, if ever heard stories of rental woe that don't correlate to either an expensive or newer house and I've known people to experience exactly what you're presenting here, from similar scenarios. Including the "revenge quote" from the landlord.

    I wouldn't say you deserve this but moving into a newly built house, with children? Come on. Sounds like you got an irrational quote but I wouldn't worry, you'll only pay what you deserve to pay. The people who handle these situations have dealt with many a jilted landlord, looking for revenge.

    *or impossibly clean.

  • htc on 16/04/2022 - 11:07
    +1

    I almost read it as End of Rant, Reasonable Expectations?

  • pogichinoy on 16/04/2022 - 12:15
    +1

    No one is that busy to repair things. You make the time for it if it mattered to you. Since you didn’t, it obviously isn’t a big deal, therefore the costs incurred shouldn’t be a big deal for you either.

  • dufflover on 16/04/2022 - 13:38
    +1

    Wouldn't surprise me if landlord is going after you hard cos they are pissed that you could do what sounds like negligent, careless damage to a new place. There may be a story behind each like kids or a brain fade (I have plenty of those :P) but for that sort of damage to a new place is a bit of a "what the hell". Gunning for the full repair/replace as a bit of a reset to erase those memories …

  • wozz on 16/04/2022 - 15:24
    +1

    While there is reasonable wear and tear, how did you manage that sort of damage within a year? In almost 40 years of living in different houses I've never caused a hole in a wall, currently have 3 children and still no damage.. i think 10k is excessive, though I'm wondering if their idea is to shoot high then settle for less? They'd be stupid to think otherwise. The holes in the wall are cheap to repair, but benchtop and carpet isnt easy to patch up

    • Dr Fruit on 16/04/2022 - 18:16
      +1

      Holes in the wall + chipped tile are all from one single instance when the movers dropped a sofa when moving in. Tried to pursue it but to no avail.

      Carpet and bench top are single mistakes from a youngster.

      Not sure why everyone in the comments keep thinking we are partying teenagers or kept the place like a pit. Honest mistakes not because we’re sloppy /dirty people who dgaf.

      • wozz on 17/04/2022 - 20:58

        Fair enough and makes more sense. If i was landlord id be frustrated but stuff like that is always possible when renting. I still wouldn't expect a replacement wall!

  • PopCounty on 16/04/2022 - 17:55
    -1

    Did you think of opportunity cost that the landlord would miss; just to rent the house until fixed? The damaged things require different trade persons. Availability might not be just.
    So until then the house would be vacant which would be loss to the owner.

    • Dr Fruit on 16/04/2022 - 18:20

      Read my previous comments/replies: the owners themselves moved back in.

      1. This is a non-issue because they’re not losing out on rent. Can 100% confirm they’re living in there.
      2. Even if that were the case, and I’m not justifying damages or anything otherwise, inability to put new tenants into a place after end of a contract is pretty much never a financial obligation for the old tenants. Unless the place is literally trashed and uninhabitable.

      Can’t justify the costs because “we can’t find new tenants”. The costs are for repairs, plain and simple.

  • Vote for Pedro on 16/04/2022 - 20:32
    +2

    The reason so many property investors try this on is either because they are personally attached to the property and aren’t treating it as a business investment or they have a superiority complex that they are doing tenants a favour and the tenants need to bow to them in appreciation.

    The reality is, if you have caused damage beyond reasonable wear and tear you are absolutely expected to cover reasonable expenses to restore the excess damage. The key word is reasonable cost. You certainly can’t be expected to restore to original condition or at unreasonable expense.

    Take it to the tribunal and let them decide.

    I am making no comment as to whether the damage you caused in 12 months is excessive or not because it is irrelevant. The question here is what you are reasonably expected to pay for repairs that are in excess of reasonable wear and tear.

    The timing of this article is handy: https://www.news.com.au/finance/real-estate/renting/why-this…

  • jtc13 on 16/04/2022 - 20:52

    How much was the bond? I had similar once where the bond was quite high in the first place. I considered the damage fair wear and tear but the owner disagreed. I said keep the bond and sue me for the rest… Never heard from then again.

    To be fair my "fair wear and tear" was some scratch marks on polished floorboards so not exactly the same.

  • Ciderfizz44 on 16/04/2022 - 20:56

    Go do the tribunal dance, based on what's mentioned above the 10k will probably become 2k. Argue the quotes are excessive & they would not permit you to seek additional quotes,

  • FareEvader on 16/04/2022 - 22:51
    -1

    Sounds like you brought these troubles upon yourself… why didn't you just repair it?

  • Paki Packer on 17/04/2022 - 01:38

    I have paid $800 to get laminate burn mark repaired. it took 4 months as the repairer was the best at his game.

  • burns13 on 17/04/2022 - 02:06
    +1

    I'm not going to judge how you treat other folks property but I will say that landlord is having an absolute laugh if they try claim 10 000 worth of damage. Take that to the tribunal. And the landlords dad as your agent, how could that go wrong…

    One other thing….FK renting a brand new house. Asking for trouble

    • JimB on 17/04/2022 - 09:00
      +2

      To the OP’s defence, I’m sure they didn’t know the agent was the father.

      And in terms of ‘ FK renting a brand new house. Asking for trouble’. Is this from the LL or tenant’s perspective?

      • burns13 on 17/04/2022 - 09:35

        Tenants

        If the house is in brand new condition, there isn't much leeway in arguing with a rental manager. Any kind dent or defect is yours. And an overzealous property owner might expect to see a brand new house at the end of the agreement. I'm just looking at it through liability pov

        • JimB on 17/04/2022 - 11:50

          True but if you’re careful, it’s fine.

          Normal Wear and tear is fine.

  • JimB on 17/04/2022 - 08:58

    What material is the benchtop? Do you have a photo of it?

    I dare say the holes in the wall is very little compared to the benchtop and carpet?

    1yo carpet vs 10yo carpet makes a material difference.

    Can’t really replace just a 10x20cm section of carpet and call it a day.

    FYI I’m a reasonable landlord. Over 15 years of renting and only had bond withheld over a timber door and door screen that a dog scratched the hell out of. And of course I’ve evicted a tenant due to non payment. Kept the bond but wasn’t worth claiming LL insurance

    Seems to me what is reasonable is somewhere in the middle of what you and the LL want.

    Your biggest fault (other than the damage itself) is not fixing it before you moved out.

    Take it to the tribunal, it will be less than $10k

  • DiscoJango on 17/04/2022 - 09:21

    Home owner rents house out to op

    Op trashes house, leaves

    Home owner wants their house fixed, op is confused

    Home owner is not happy

    Ozbargain.

    • Vote for Pedro on 18/04/2022 - 15:47

      No. Op admits causing damage and wants to remedy. Owner has unreasonable expectations.

      • DiscoJango on 18/04/2022 - 16:30

        If i were the landlord (i own the house) then i certainly wouldnt want some random tenant to be dictating how major repair works are to be carried out to my house, especially if they are the type to cause that much damage in the first place.

        Its like getting into a car crash and then the other party decides which repairer to use to fix my car, sorry, doesnt work like that.

        • Vote for Pedro on 18/04/2022 - 17:49

          Thats why a tribunal exists. To ensure fairness if there is a disagreement. As a tenant, I would definitely expect an itemised quote from a legitimate business as opposed to a random figure plucked from thin air.

          Also, all tenants are random, thats the nature of the business.

  • Seraphin7 on 17/04/2022 - 09:37

    Fair dinkum.

    Sounds like you treated the joint like an animal enclosure.

    You then say you're a landlord! I hate to think of the state your properties are in if this standard of behaviour is acceptable.

    Whether or not $10k is the right number is debatable, but the two burn marks will require total replacement (IMO) and the other matters are dependent on the actual damage.

    • chriskq on 17/04/2022 - 21:21

      animal enclosure… nice troll post mate

  • SydBoy on 17/04/2022 - 11:11

    very tricky situation and everything depends upon how bad is the damage and what impact it could have potentially on property price.

    I rented my property once and the tenant had wooden floor damanaged and also had tile broken in the kitechn. Now, I could have asked them to replace all timber floor but it isn't fair as the demage was small but if fixed then required entire flooring to be removed and then re-installed with new floor board. I get $400 i think from bond and i am ok with that considering that if i was in the same situation as tenant then what would i have liked.

    however, another tenant in the property broke the wall of the garage … which isn't acceptable so they end-up buying new garage door and built new wall and replaced everything as bond wasn't good to cover all cost. they were bit sneaky and used good brick i had in the house for something else to do new wall for garage and also they didn't bother dumping rubbish to the tip which i could have asked them to do but i wasn't at the property at the time of them leaving property so agent didn't do his job and i trusted agent so it costed me to tip those material unfortunatley.

    so in nutshell everything depends upon how bad the damage is and does something like that happens by everyone or it is normal wear and tear.

    in your case going through legal is much better and also tribunal even though you end-up paying all cost because this helps you avoid feeling for rest of life that you could have gone to legal or tribunal to avoid paying for it.

  • rave75 on 17/04/2022 - 16:44

    Tenant left a burn mark on the benchtop of my kitchen near the stove and also the kitchen island. Both can't be polished away.

    The kitchen island can be safely replaced but cost 4k inc labour.

    The one near the stove can't be safely replaced because most likely it will damage the surrounding furniture and mirror.

  • Esky85 on 28/04/2022 - 17:06
    +1

    I once accidentally placed my lizard's heat globe on the carpet and it melted (it was off, just not for long enough). Patched it myself with a spare piece that was left in the shed, probably 10cm by 10cm was the patch. Lived in the house another 3 years and nobody was ever the wiser. It was a brand new house.

    Repainted an entire wall once with a $10 sample pot from bunnings colour matched from a small scraping in a closet corner that nobody would have ever found unless they were looking for it.

    I guess what I'm trying to say is you run the gamble of not organising these things to be fixed yourself at the time the damages happen. You've already lost because now you either have to fight it or pay when you could have been proactive in the first instance.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join