Tenant Refusing to Pay for Damaged Splashback

rubyreds on 13/09/2022 - 17:53
Last edited 13/09/2022 - 18:11

Previous tenant at my investment apartment moved out a couple of months ago. I was told the agent that they have damaged the splash back in the kitchen which is made of glass - I'm not entirely sure how this happened or of the severity.

Agent went to get a quote for repair. Tenant said they want to get a quote themselves - their quote advised that the glass is not toughened. Agent suspected that the quote may have come from someone they know considering their general attitude of not wanting to be responsible of the damage.

Note: I don't understand their reasoning here, it's not toughened/compliant so it's not their fault? Or they only want to pay for non toughened replacement which I'm assuming is cheaper.

After checking with BM, it is confirmed that the glass is indeed toughened however tenant refused the paperwork and demanded a more "official statement".

How can I get them to pay for this ASAP? Currently their bond is still on hold but it's taking too long now. Any other advice would be appreciated. Thanks!

Home & Garden

Comments

  • brendanm on 13/09/2022 - 17:56
    +14

    Isn't this your property managers job to sort out?

    • askbargain on 13/09/2022 - 18:11
      +20

      property manager told him to post here

  • star-ggg on 13/09/2022 - 18:05
    +1

    what's the price difference between toughened and non? Might be worth your while to just take the quote they are saying it is to fix it and pay the price difference yourself.

    • rubyreds on 13/09/2022 - 18:09

      Oh I see, so non toughened glass costs less that's why they said it's not

      • Almost Banned on 13/09/2022 - 18:12
        +1

        I suspect they are saying it is not toughened glass because they will contend that it should be if used as a splashback, making it your fault the glass was damaged (or at least partially so).

        • DashCam AKA Rolts on 13/09/2022 - 18:15

          Exactly.

          • rubyreds on 13/09/2022 - 18:21
            -1

            @DashCam AKA Rolts: But is it like saying there is scuff mark on the wall and it's my fault because the paint is not stain resistant? Or is there a legal requirement. The glass has been there for years and years, yet it's damaged while they were the occupant.

            • DashCam AKA Rolts on 13/09/2022 - 18:28

              @rubyreds: Yeah, your tenant is trying to avoid paying for their damage which is not wear and tear.

            • AustriaBargain on 13/09/2022 - 18:34
              +1

              @rubyreds: If you are fine with a non-tempered glass splashback, then just agree to the quote and get it installed. If you don't want non-tempered anymore and you only want a tempered glass cplashback, then you've got a pickle because it sounds like the tenant only wants to pay to replace it with cheaper non-tempered glass again. The tenant found a quote he is willing to pay, so I guess the only reason you are posting this here as a problem is because you actually want a tempered glass splashback.

            • wizzy on 13/09/2022 - 19:07
              +1

              @rubyreds: Is the tenant actually agreeing to pay for the cost of replacement if regular non-toughened glass is used, or are they refusing to pay anything because they say it's not their fault that it broke because they think it wasn't toughened glass?

              • rubyreds on 14/09/2022 - 11:02

                @wizzy: Trying to get this clarieifed by agent

        • star-ggg on 13/09/2022 - 18:31

          If it was sold as a splashback then it would be glass of sufficient strength to be used as a splashback. The only thing that is contentious is if the glass broke due to wear and tear (ie it cracked from constant heat/reheat) or from physical damage. If the tenant chose to get a quote I would think they had done something to damage it.

      • AustriaBargain on 13/09/2022 - 18:30

        Maybe your agent can convince the tenant to pay the quoted amount to them in cash to settle the matter, allowing you to pay the extra for the tempered glass version. If the tenant insists on paying for the quoted job and getting the itemised receipt, then maybe you could convince the business into letting you pay an upgrade fee for tempered glass.

        If it came down to it would you really make the tenant pay for a ordinary glass one out of spite, knowing you'll just toss it in the trash immediately so you can get the tempered glass one you know you needed all along?

  • wizzy on 13/09/2022 - 18:13
    +1

    Can you get the original specifications or invoices from building management? At some point someone must have paid for that glass. If the building is fairly new, someone might still have the original specifications or invoices?

    • rubyreds on 13/09/2022 - 18:16

      I haven't seen the docs provided BM but they claimed it looks like a "shopping list" and demanded more official docs.

      • wizzy on 13/09/2022 - 19:12

        I would have a look at those documents

  • Ocker on 13/09/2022 - 19:19
    +2

    Tenant is required to make good any damage they occasion. This means replacing like with like. Clear cut and I don't understand what the issue is.
    The agent should handle/resolve the matter, after all that is why you pay them exorbitant fees to manage the property.

    • [Deactivated] on 13/09/2022 - 19:52
      +2

      any damage they occasion.

      Doesn't include fair wear and tear, which this may or may not be.

  • AndyC1 on 13/09/2022 - 19:31
    +5

    Get the REA to refund the bond minus the cost of repairing/replacing the splashback.

    • rubyreds on 14/09/2022 - 11:03

      Tenant will have to approve all deduction from bond

  • WreckTangle on 13/09/2022 - 20:41
    -4

    Its the cost of being a landlord. You happily took their rent money. And probably took a good tax deduction. Claim on your landlord insurance?

  • JimmyF on 13/09/2022 - 20:43
    +1

    How much are we talking here OP?

  • morse on 13/09/2022 - 21:16
    +1

    They are saying that if the glass is not toughened it’s reasonable wear and tear. You’re saying it is toughened so it’s their negligence.

    Both arguments are reasonable.

    If this the only thing they damaged I’d say it’s a genuine accident and maybe the glass isn’t that great quality, fit for purpose or properly installed. If you can damage the splash back during normal cooking activity the problem is with the splash back not the tenant.

    If they damaged it whilst drunk or having a wild party it’s on them - it would be hard to prove though.

    • rubyreds on 14/09/2022 - 11:03

      OK I'll get more info as to how it was damaged

  • Baysew on 14/09/2022 - 01:15
    +1

    Were they using a gas bottle and cooker at the time?

    • ThithLord on 14/09/2022 - 09:00
      +2

      That's an explosively loaded question

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join