Tweet
Subject: Leak and subsequent replacement of kitchen ceiling due to negligence
I am once again requesting a full payment of £2082 for payment repair my ceiling (attached invoice from 09/06/2022) on the grounds that my kitchen ceiling in my home - needed replacing due to a leak from your upstairs shower unit in your leasehold -.
When entering the flat on 22nd Jan 2022 there was dripping and a big stain.
Your tenant invited me to look upstairs and there was barely sealant or grout remaining around the base of the very mouldy shower unit such that I was able to fit fingers between the tray and the wall. It had worn away. Additionally, the bathroom was very mouldy.
It was not caused by fair wear and tear and was something a layperson could notice immediately, without any struggle. It was not unforeseen, and it was preventable and negligent. It is not acceptable that I should have to replace my ceiling just because you do not maintain the shower unit. You should have known about it.
The lease says you are to regularly inspect and maintain and keep in repair your leasehold. This should be done whether or not there is tenant in situ and it should not be my concern if you don't have the time to inspect and should read the terms of the lease to check you are complying.
Upon moving in on 5th February 2022, I refrained from initiating any significant renovations in my kitchen until I obtained clarity on the situation. On 1st March 2022, you communicated via email that the shower was repaired and leak free. Despite this, the ceiling continued to exhibit signs of damage, notably bowing in the centre.
You offered £200 in goodwill said you fixed the cause of the leak and said your builder would contact me about the ceiling and so I waited. You were still saying he would contact me on 22nd March 2022 and requested that I send you pictures of the ceiling for them. I kept waiting until it got to April 2022. He was finally put in touch with my dad and the quote done which I sent to you.
During this time, I assumed that your offer of a goodwill payment, offer to have your builder get in touch with us, quote the ceiling, that I should keep you updated, alongside with your continued reassurances that you are property professionals signified your acknowledgment of liability and intention to rectify the situation.
Therefore, I was taken aback when you later communicated your refusal to cover the costs associated with the repairs. This abrupt reversal contradicted all the expectations I had formed based on our prior interactions.
Nuisance caused to me:
The builders only replaced 1 layer of ceiling; it would be more expense to replace all 3 layers which I couldn’t afford which is further nuisance etc as it doesn't provide the same noise proofing as before.
Also that it was probable the reason leak went unnoticeable in the downstairs flat for a while as soaked into all 3 of the ceiling layers over a time period.
As a result of the ongoing repair work, I endured considerable inconvenience. Until the first week of May 2022, I refrained from having a washing machine delivered, and stored my fridge in in my hallway to prevent potential damage from plaster dust resulting from the repairs. This necessitated the inconvenience of doing laundry at my parents' or friends' houses.
To mitigate the effects of the ongoing repairs and damp from the ceiling, I resorted to running a dehumidifier for three months, incurring additional costs.
When the ceiling was replaced, instead of the ceiling being lifted away in one piece , 3 layers of plasterboard fell down in pieces and they had to evacuate due to the dust and clean it the next day after it settled so that was another extra day I couldn’t live in my flat which was additional nuisance. I also had to give it another clean afterwards after more settling of dust and to this day I still find pieces of plaster behind the radiator or in oven crevices etc.
Building Survey:
There was no evidence of any leak in the Level 2 building survey by a registered chartered surveyor on 23rd September 2021. The report said the kitchen was at risk of damp due to poor ventilation as there was a leaky lean-to attached against the kitchen wall. There was no evidence of ceiling leak on all other viewings. I asked the previous owner if he had painted over anything, and he had just painted it fresh but not to cover any leaks.
Insurance:
You informed me in December 2021 that you had buildings insurance coverage in place due to the previous freeholder's failure to arrange it, and because you were unable to secure a mortgage on your own flat without. Despite my persistent inquiries before the exchange, you did not confirm the cancellation of your policy, leading me to seek legal advice.
My solicitor emphasized that maintaining concurrent insurance policies would be inappropriate. After lack of communication from your end and other mitigating circumstances, I proceeded to arrange insurance on 13th January 2022. Your own policy remained active until May 2022, at which point you cancelled it and finally agreed to contribute to the insurance I arranged.
Unfortunately, the discovery of small ceiling stains was first made on 12th January 2022 when I picked up the keys. At that time, it was not presumed to be a leak from upstairs. It was presumed to be condensation or other issue caused from the attached lean-to. Regrettably, my insurance claim was later denied on the basis that my policy was only active from 13th January, and the insurer to inferred that the leak predated my coverage.
The insurance company representative reviewed the photos of the shower unit and addressed my concerns regarding the unconventional invoice. They advised me to pursue reimbursement from the upstairs leasehold independently, as their policy does not cover this expense because of the date.
You suggested that I reframe my explanation to the insurance company, although the specifics were unclear.
They informed me that they would only reconsider looking at the claim again if I provided a formal invoice from J- complete with accurate contact details on it, confirming the completion of repairs. Unfortunately, you will not provide me with - contact information beyond an email address, which has yielded no response. Despite my attempts to contact - independently from the business address online I have received no reply.
In Closing:
Throughout our interactions, I am mindful of your extensive property holdings. Additionally, I have noted Malcolm's affiliation with 'all four inns of the court plus numerous chambers,' as referenced in his email footer link. While previously willing to defer to your expertise as professionals, I find it necessary to revisit this matter in 2024 following yet another leak in February this year from your leasehold. The recurrence of such incidents has become untenable for me.
I would like a reply as soon as possible so that I know you have received this letter. If you don't agree could you please then send me a detailed response saying why you don't agree.
To avoid taking court action, I am willing to use Alternative Dispute Resolution to resolve this problem.
If I do not receive a satisfactory response from you within 14 days of the date of this letter, I intend to issue proceedings against you in the county court without further notice. This may increase your liability for costs.
I refer you to the Practice Direction on pre-action conduct under the Civil Procedure Rules, and in particular to paragraph 13-16 which sets out the sanctions the court may impose if you fail to comply with the Direction.
I look forward to your acknowledgement.
Yours faithfully,
p.s
Sincere apologies for the previous letter before claim which was not signed and did not include Direction on pre-action conduct under the Civil Procedure Rules and other errors please disregard it, I have never written a legal document before.
Comment