Rented House - Fire Damage

coco06

hi

background is that there was a fire started by a fault with washing machine in rented house, that resulted in fire brigade coming and putting the fire out. No major fire damage (except to machine itself) As a result there is smoke in the house, walls and ceiling will need to be cleaned and painted, floors replaced, fire brigade charge which will all be covered by landlord insurance.

what i want to know is who is responsible for smoke damage to tenants clothes/curatins they bought and items like that, is it the landlord or the tenant? tenant does not have contents insurance.

Cheers
C

ABajaninCork

AFAIK It would be the tenant's responsibility to cover any damage to their own property. The LL's insurance should take care of the rest.

Paulw

The tenant should have their own contents insurance. The landlord would not have insurance to cover property that they do not have insurable interest of.

edanto

I agree; presumably the landlord has their property (house) insured, and it will be repaired. It's up to the tenant to have their property (clothes/curtains) insured.

From the way you asked, it sounds like this unfortunate event might have happened, and perhaps the tenants don't have insurance, which would be a real pity. Hopefully they can get back on their feet soon enough.

murphaph

Yup. Tenant should have their own contents insured like any home owner. If they don't then it was a false economy for them. Hard way to learn a lesson just after xmas as well.

Victor

Was the landlord aware of a problem with the machine before the fire and can they be held responsible? It would be a public / product liability issue rather than a property insurance issue.

murphaph

I think to be able to hold the landlord liable you'd have to not only establish that he knew there was a fault but also that he had sufficient time to remedy it and failed to do so and ALSO that he would/should have known that the reported fault could lead to a fire.

Example: Tenant reports heating system not working. LL delays getting it fixed and it turns out the problem is a pump that overheats and catches fire, destroying the tenant's belongings. The LL should have fixed the heating, but he could not have been expected to know that non-working heating system == fire hazard so really couldn't be held liable.

If people could be held liable in this way then your liability for anything you do is essentially unlimited, regardless of how innocuous the action/lack of action may seem.

IANAL however.

coco06

yes building was insured with landlord - the cause of the fire was a freak incident with the washing machine which the adjustor will inspect and deem if it needs to be followed up with manufacturer. It couldnt be foreseen.

checked with threshold too and landlord doesnt have an insurable interest in tenants contents so cant cover it with their insurance..

thanks for replies..