Celtic Tiger bites back after 13 years

Maxxfit

Took occupancy of a business premises (that was built circa 2005) in 2010. Premises was an empty shell and the landlord did the fit-out (plumbing included) at the time. The building is shared by another business, with each on our own water meter. Long story short, we recently discovered that there is only one water tank servicing the building being fed by the other business' meter and both of us drawing off that tank. Now the other business wants to be refunded for an amount in excess of €6k (the value of accounts he received over the years). In the two months since discovering the supply problem I've calculated my consumption at about 3m3 per month, or 36m3 per year, which calculated over the 13 years (11.5 in reality, as I was closed for Covid) is only about €1500. I'm happy to pay that. It turns out that water to the tune of the other €4.5k was just being pissed down the drain. This I know, because upon connecting me to the correct meter we discovered the meter running rampant in the absence of any use. We immediately identified that the monobloc valve on the inlet to the hot water cylinder in my boiler room had packed up. Now you'd think that there'd be a tundish on the bypass pipework alerting one to just this eventuality, but no, the pipework was piped directly into a nearby drain, which I believe is contrary to building regulations. Can someone confirm this? Do you think that my offer to pay the €1.5k is fair and that the landlord should pay for the difference? Any other advice?

antoinolachtnai

It’s more of a legal problem then a plumbing problem. Standard ‘rent and repair’ lease? It was really for you to inspect for correct pipe work and compliance with regulations before you took possession and after move-in fixing these things became your responsibility. You probably don’t have any recourse to landlord but you need to look at the lease (with your solicitor, there is potentially a lot to this case but for the amounts involved it is just not worth jabbing a big fight.

on the other hand the same principal applies to the other tenant. It is at least as much his problem as much as yours that the whole thing is mis-plumbed.

In theory you might have a claim against the builder or against your surveyor (if you had one) but in practice this is unlikely to be worth pursuing.

There is a question over how far back in time the other tenant can claim from you. The limit is likely to be six or seven years. Again this is something you would need to take up with your solicitor (but you need to consider whether dealing with the solicitor is worth the cost when the whole thing is relatively small value overall. )

I would offer to pay the value of the water you owe and split the rest for the sake of good relations. Maybe the landlord would be willing to pay towards splitting the supply properly. If you are strapped for cash and maintaining relations doesn’t really matter much you could certainly offer less because of the issue with time limits. It’s really a matter of negotiation.

Sleeper12

Problem is with commercial premises the tenant is responsable for everything inside the four walls. It's not unusual for tenant to be responsible for the roof even. Some leases vary & you might get lucky so a good read of the leas is the starting point for sure

If LL did the plumbing as you took over the lease then you might have a case. If LL did plumbing in 2005 & you took over lease from someone else them LL most likely is off the hook. I would agree with everything antoinolachtnai says in the post above