*****Thank you for your input, I am going to replace the toilet.*****
Hello forum members,
I find myself in a perplexing situation regarding a rental property, and I would greatly appreciate your advice and insights.
Around a year and a half ago, I rented out my house through a real-estate agent. Prior to the rental, the toilet in the house was in good condition and had passed the inspection conducted by the agent. I have received two inspection reports, one during the first tenant's stay and another after they vacated, and both reports indicate that the toilet was in good condition.
However, the second tenant, who moved in three months ago, is now requesting a replacement for the toilet. They have sent me photos showing a broken toilet base and claim that it needs to be fixed. I have been arguing with the agent, asserting that it is not our responsibility as the damage was not present during the inspections.
In response, the agent insists that it is the owner's duty to cover the cost of repairs. I have gone as far as challenging the agent and threatening legal action, as I possess evidence to support my case.
Now, the agent is suggesting that the house is old and toilets can naturally crack and break, and that the authorities will typically side with the renters in such situations.
At this point, I am uncertain about the best course of action. Should I simply accept the cost and proceed with fixing the toilet, or should I continue to contest the matter?
Bikies