Updating post from Reddit.
If its furnished and included on the inventory then reasonable to expect landlord to replace.
If not provided as part of the tenancy then tenants can buy their own but will obviously take it with them when they leave.
Wait what
April fools, guys ..
This is like a tenant who asked me to send a workman to change the lightbulb in the bathroom.
At least your tenant recognised that the bulb had blown.
No, it was dusty.
Hahaha!
Springfield?
as a landlord who did provide a hoover. my tenant informed me after the final inspection that the hoover broke which is why the carpet was so messy. i then informed them that if they have told me that the hoover was broken which was part of the contract i would have bought them a new one so instead i just had to charge them with a cleaning bill when they left
Tenant. Unlikely this will be part of a furnished property.
If it’s an hmo it’ll almost certainly be furnished
This can't seriously be a matter for debate? It falls entirely on the person/people living in the property.
That depends if it was furnished by the landlord or not, if it was then it's on the landlord to replace. Same with e.g. fridge, washing machine etc. If it wasn't furnished then it's on the renter and they obviously can take it with them when they leave.
I honestly don't know anyone who includes a hoover on their inventory. Definitely not classified as white goods so I wouldn't expect it in a furnished apartment. Maybe some landlords do but it's certainly not normal.
Tenant.
If it came with the property, ie it belongs to the landlord then it's theirs to replace.
Think of it this way - if you rent out a property and include a vacuum, which ten years later wears out and a tenant replaces it, when that tenant moves out don't you think they'll be taking their vacuum that they paid for with them?
If they bought it it isn't yours to keep with the property anymore.
Depends on if they provided one in inventory. If so and it’s just failing because it’s old I would probably expect the landlord to replace it if they’re decent, or to at least annotate that it broke during your tenancy due to wear and tear so it isn’t taken from your deposit or is only charged at the rate of how old it was in the first place.
Depends on the situation. Give some context if you want an informed opinion
You’d hope common sense would prevail here
In the inventory and broken through no tenant fault. Landlord replace. Not provided by landlord and so not in the inventory, then it was the tenants property and tenant replace. This is just common sense, and that a landlord or tenant has to ask this shows how clueless much of the population can be. There is no opinions to be had.
Tenant. Who the hell puts a hoover on their inventory? Even in a furnished apartment I wouldn't consider this normal.
Depends who supplied it in the first place. I always provide one. If was provided then it depends what happens to the one that was provided. So no generic answer possible
We did provide one, but they kept complaining its not working etc, only to find it was blocked, we no longer provide one.
Also it's an appliance that may require a pat test or the wiring inspected and noted.
Yes the PAT testing is an issue I agree, The way tenancies are moving, driven by legislation, is that only the bare minimum would ever be provided e.g. it always has to be assumed that pets might be incorporated regardless of contract, and that deposits are basically a waste of time (so no furniture, carpets, curtains, blinds, nice gardens, or basically anything nice). That's the way the powers that be want things to be clearly. Take the humanity out of the equation - by force of law.
If it’s furnished - landlord
If it is part of the inventory as part of the stuff available for the tenants to use then the LL probably should replace it as with other appliances big or small. If it is not part of the inventory then the LL doesnt have to replace it unless the property was specifically advertised as coming with a hoover (very unlikely).
The only exception to this I'd say to this is HMO and similar set up where rooms are let one by one where it might be in LL's interest to have a working hoover in the property unless there is specific agreement in place for paying someone to clean the bedrooms, mainly to encourage tenants to keep their rooms clean.
HMO - yes
Whole house 1 tenancy - no
Tenant. In my contract with them a robot vacuum and a vacuum are included. If either breaks, the tenant can dispose of them and get their own.prices are given. Neither are that expensive. However, I've learned already not to have it on inventory as some people are simply reckless with items like that and when something breaks want replacements.
If you provide something it's on you to maintain or replace it, not your tenant
I would never provide a hoover in the first place.
I need a new TV better get landlord to get it
Fire marshall, you need it to be upto code too. Otherwise the vacuum can spin out of control and kill you. Haven't you seen robot wars!?!