As above! We have new tenants who moved in yesterday. We went through the inventory which they signed. Today they have asked for a TV. When we said it wasn’t included they have said it was in the photos of the advert so should be. It was never discussed. The photos for advertisement were taken when somebody was still living in the property, there were a few personal belongings in the pictures as a result!
Can we refuse? Not sure where we stand.
This is a very easy one firstly they are clearly not the kind of tenants that you want in and I advise you to get them out as soon as possible.
However it is very clear what is in the agreement as all you have to do is look at the inventory if it is not in the inventory it is not included if you have not done the inventory then I personally would strongly suggest to seek better tenants ones that don’t want to fight from the outset
When you see a beautiful woman, half naked posing on the bonnet of a sports car advert for sale then do you expect to get the gal with the car you may wish to ask the con tenants maybe…
I ve just sent off for a new car, I thought you got both!!
Was the tv there when they viewed ?
There was a different TV as there was another tenant living there.
This is not even worthy as a valid question.
Just tell them there was never any TV deal & your not responsible for them perceiving anything otherwise.
What if you got the woman and no car!
Hi Laura, if you never agreed to furnish a TV in writing, and the inventory is signed by all parties and makes no mention of a TV, then my understanding is that a TV would not be considered to be part of the furnishing of the property.
You do not need to provide TV, if they are still keen just get them an old 80’s TV which does not work with Sky/Virgin and they will refuse it!
TOTALLY WRONG sadly!
If you supply a TV ,it is YOU who is responsible for the licence-which your tenant will gladly advise the TV inspector when he calls
You “dress” your flat -for ads,and, inspection
If your like me you make it clear upon 1st inspection that the bedding (for example) will be removed before a tenancy is signed
Most tenants don’t want to use your bedding anyway but it can “lift” a flats first impression
If a TV is left (by former tenant) I explain its probably broken,however, in any event neither will it be listed on inventory otherwise LL will be liable for licence
Always emphasise that inventory is key,read it ,confirm it-and- noe anything you may need to provide eg crockery etc
Dr David Noble
do not leave anything from a previous tenant ,dump it all
I think that’s wrong, your tenant is responsible for the TV license - TV licensing have to prove YOU were yourself watching live TV to prosecute and if you have a tenant that would never stand up on court.
I agree with that, its the tenant who pays… if I am wrong I will pay all my tenants car taxes!!!
I am afraid you are wrong
History,and, case law says so
Of course if your confidant you can try argueing that with TV dedection -I have!
Dr David Noble
I’m not sure exactly who you’re talking to David but if it’s Colin then I can assure you that you are not correct and the simple reason for this is that there is no law forcing anyone to obtain a TV licence in any event.
However the TV licence is not anything to do with who purchases a TV as simply someone’s mother could purchase a TV themselves and then perhaps send it to their student child for instance.
You should listen to Colin as whoever physically has the TV in operation at the premises is responsible unless it is a HMO with other arrangements
you seem to be replying to a completely different proposition
I made the point (as a commercial lawyer) if you list a TV- on your inventory- TV licensing will generally take the line of least resistance when a tenant demurs on responsibility
Your not living there counts for little
Case law is there if you care to look!
My original point was in regards to a TV left by a previous tenant
Normally its left because its broken and their too lazy to throw it out
If you offer to let the new tenant try it simply put nothing in writing,so, a tenant cannot claim (as he will) that you supplied the TV,so, he understood you had arranged the TV licence
There is case law,but, no hard and fast law
In simple terms,and, if unsure -TV or not
Just throw out anything that’s left with no exception
I will not be replying to any further comments
Dr David Noble
Crikey - for a lawyer and a Dr. your grammar is terrible.
If you supply a cooker (not in a hmo) are you responsible to pay for the electric that runs thru it? no its the tenant. If they park their car in your driveway does the landlord pay for the petrol? If you give them a tv are you going to pay the license . I have heard some claptrap ,this beats the lot (as a commercial builder)
i am incredulous that this chat is still alive, just give them what they want or tell them to take you to court but its not worth all this time of yours with all this worry on chat forums as its almost as bad as self harming