Quizzes & Puzzles18 mins ago
Criminal Damage By Smoking
21 Answers
Could smoking within private premises (dwelling house) amount to criminal damage. The dwelling was occupied by paying tenants who declared at the start of their tenancy that they were non-smokers - indeed, it was a requirement that they were so. However, the property, including furnishings etc., now smell of smoke; an obvious accumulation over the time of their tenancy (the full period of their tenancy was 12 months) and not just lingering as it might from a casual cigarette by a visitor, for instance. The tenants were quite obviously regular smokers, judging by the smell. Time and a great deal of cleaning and redecoration will be needed to remove all traces of smoke residue. Aside from the tenancy agreement issues, answers should be limited to the offence of criminal damage.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Landlord2010. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Result - This isn't quite how I imagined events, but I'll settle for what's on the table, particularly because I don't have to put my hand in my pocket to achieve it.
Having decided to pursue all matters via the civil route, encompassing all breaches of various contracts involving the tenants and the managing agent, a shot was fired accross the bow of the legal department of said agent (high street household name) to see what they had to say. Whilst our case to them was not unreasonable, it was robust and sufficient enough to provoke a swift response. Very swift, in fact.
I won't reveal precise content, but I think their offer is reasonable, in that it adequately covers restitution, which is really all I can ask. I think they understand quite clearly that I am not wanting to make a profit, but importantly that they are as much at fault as the tenants and that I might seek to cause them public embarrassment if they were to contest matters.
After several telephone calls from senior management, and the like, I will receive appropriate paperwork by the weekend - apparently! It's worth noting that one caller uttered, "ex-gratia" and "gesture of goodwill", though it wasn't mentioned again and he was sent packing with a sore eardrum. Pillock!
I saw matters in court being bashed about, but it's not to be - shucks! (Sorry, DH, no case law this time)
It goes to show; make a nuisance of yourself; state your case, but be reasonable.
Having decided to pursue all matters via the civil route, encompassing all breaches of various contracts involving the tenants and the managing agent, a shot was fired accross the bow of the legal department of said agent (high street household name) to see what they had to say. Whilst our case to them was not unreasonable, it was robust and sufficient enough to provoke a swift response. Very swift, in fact.
I won't reveal precise content, but I think their offer is reasonable, in that it adequately covers restitution, which is really all I can ask. I think they understand quite clearly that I am not wanting to make a profit, but importantly that they are as much at fault as the tenants and that I might seek to cause them public embarrassment if they were to contest matters.
After several telephone calls from senior management, and the like, I will receive appropriate paperwork by the weekend - apparently! It's worth noting that one caller uttered, "ex-gratia" and "gesture of goodwill", though it wasn't mentioned again and he was sent packing with a sore eardrum. Pillock!
I saw matters in court being bashed about, but it's not to be - shucks! (Sorry, DH, no case law this time)
It goes to show; make a nuisance of yourself; state your case, but be reasonable.
