Washing machine repair - who pays?

angeldelight

We are renting an apartment at the minute which cane fully furnished; including all appliances. In June our washing machine started making a loud noise and putting great big holes in our clothes! So we called the land lord who arranged for the man from the local electrics shop to come and have a look. The same day I realised that a previously underwired bra was no longer underwired so we know what's stuck under the drum causing the holes! Anyway your man came, span the drum around and said sounds like a bra wire, wash towels for a few washes or wash your clothes with towels around the inside of the drum to protect the clothes - it'll break down in a number of days and you'll be able to take the pieces out of the filter at the bottom.

7 weeks on and it's holding firm! We've spoken to that guy again who just said give it more time but I'm really sick of it - have been carting bags of washing back and forth to my parents and can't afford to replace the clothes that were ripped so am having to do more washing to make up for the smaller wardrobe!

I just lost it earlier and couldn't deal with it any more - contacted Candy online and have booked engineer for Tuesday. My Q is who should pay for it? It was my bra wire but the washing machine came with the apartment and is currently unusable.. And its not like we were doing anything unreasonable with it, just using it for it's purpose?

Graces7

He pays. What a mess... But he pays as you have tried to get him to fix it... Send him the bill...

D3PO

thats very matter of fact Graces. Im not so sure.

What caused the wire to come out and damage the washing machine ?

It could be argued that its the OPs fault. As a bloke Im not an expert on bras :p but Id imagine that the underwire would only come out if the material holding it was damaged / ripped / torn ?

So if the OP put something in that she shouldnt have then it would really be her fault. Id certainly ask the landlord to pay but If it were me Id be prepared to negotiate with him if he said it were my fault.

perhaps splitting the cost of the engineer 50/50 would be appropriate. Its not like the drum just failed.

wyndham

Graces7 wrote: »

He pays. What a mess... But he pays as you have tried to get him to fix it... Send him the bill...

I don't agree. You broke it, you fix it would be my position.

Xiney

underwire escaping from bras is a common problem & it is a common issue with washing machines as confirmed by the repairman.

It is up to your landlord to bear the costs of the repair as this common issue translates into "normal wear & tear".

Since he can offset all expenses incurred in this business towards the tax he pays, he really has no reason not to pay. It's essentially free for him unless he's a) not registered for tax b) not making enough money a year to pay tax which doubtful and anyway isn't really your problem.

Doop

If you damage / break soemthing its up to you to get it repaired. Its the landlords responsibility to maintain and keep the proeprty (and applinaces) in good order.

If the washing machine broke down due to age, then it would be up to the landlord to have it replaced.

Its kind of a grey area, but in this case you know what caused the damage.

Doop

Xiney wrote: »

underwire escaping from bras is a common problem & it is a common issue with washing machines as confirmed by the repairman.

It is up to your landlord to bear the costs of the repair as this common issue translates into "normal wear & tear".

Since he can offset all expenses incurred in this business towards the tax he pays, he really has no reason not to pay. It's essentially free for him unless he's a) not registered for tax b) not making enough money a year to pay tax which doubtful and anyway isn't really your problem.

Its definatly not 'free' for him because he writes off the tax...
Also I im not sure its normal wear and tear... then again... i dont wear bras!

D3PO

Xiney wrote: »

underwire escaping from bras is a common problem & it is a common issue with washing machines as confirmed by the repairman.

It is up to your landlord to bear the costs of the repair as this common issue translates into "normal wear & tear".

Since he can offset all expenses incurred in this business towards the tax he pays, he really has no reason not to pay. It's essentially free for him unless he's a) not registered for tax b) not making enough money a year to pay tax which doubtful and anyway isn't really your problem.

Firstly just because a repairman says its a common issue doesnt make it so. It might be common for him to come across it becasue of course thats his job to repair things so he would perhaps see this regularly. You have to understand somebody working on repairing washing machines perception is skewed by what they see in their line of work.

if you asked army personnel if being shot at was unusual you would probably hear its common. That doesnt mean it really is though ....

I work in IT and our engineers regularly tell people that X is a common fault. I remember one instance where an engineer said that about a particular hard drive failing. Now of course when the data from quality was reviewed it was seen to be a failure in 3 of every 10,000 systems. But as he saw it on a daily basis it was common to him.

Secondly just becasue you can write something off against tax doesnt make it free. Thats not how expenses work. It would have less impact on the landlord yes but its not free.

Xiney

it's normal wear and tear associated with using the washing machine to wash clothing, which includes underwire bras and things with buttons and zippers etc... all things that can get caught in the drum if they fall off.

If a shelf in a fridge breaks because you had a turkey in there? Landlord's problem. Yeah, you put the turkey in, but you have to put it in the fridge. You are entitled to store a turkey in your fridge if you want to. The OP is entitled to wash her bra if she wants to. It is all within the realm of normal behaviour - which leads to normal wear and tear.

It's a common issue as far as issues go - distinction is that issues may not be common.

wyndham

Xiney wrote: »

underwire escaping from bras is a common problem & it is a common issue with washing machines as confirmed by the repairman.

It is up to your landlord to bear the costs of the repair as this common issue translates into "normal wear & tear".

Since he can offset all expenses incurred in this business towards the tax he pays, he really has no reason not to pay. It's essentially free for him unless he's a) not registered for tax b) not making enough money a year to pay tax which doubtful and anyway isn't really your problem.

Nonsense, normal wear and tear relates to the expected useful life with regard to appliances, not breakage caused by the tenants careless usage. For example, if the landlord bought a brand new washing machine and on the day of delivery, the op broke it with an underwired bra, is that normal wear and tear?

Your second point is even worse nonsense, unless the landlord has a tax rate of 100%.

astrofool

There's bags you can get for washing bra's in that makes sure they don't get caught up in the machinery.

This is definitely the OP's cost to bear, her clothes caused the damage to the washer, she needs to fix it. If the machine broke down due to a manufacturing defect, the landlord would have to pay up.

D3PO

Xiney wrote: »

it's normal wear and tear associated with using the washing machine to wash clothing, which includes underwire bras and things with buttons and zippers etc... all things that can get caught in the drum if they fall off.

.

I think thats very black and white. If clothing that was in less than prestine condition was put in (not saying this is the situation in this case) and caused damage thats not wear and tear.

e.g if the wire was already protruding or a button on a pair of jeans was hanging off, it wouldnt be very unfair to apportion blame to the washing machine / landlord.

Like I said Ive never heard of underwire coming out in the washing machine to it cant be that common. Logic to me says that it would only come out if the garment was damaged.

if the garment was damaged then it shouldnt have been put in the machine.

As its a grey area I would think splitting the cost 50/50 sounds like the appropriate action with both parties taking some responsibility.

Xiney

astrofool wrote: »

There's bags you can get for washing bra's in that makes sure they don't get caught up in the machinery.

This is definitely the OP's cost to bear, her clothes caused the damage to the washer, she needs to fix it. If the machine broke down due to a manufacturing defect, the landlord would have to pay up.

Those bags are for protecting the clothing from zips and velcro- they are generally mesh bags that would allow underwire to come through.

Xiney

OP, I suggest you contact Threshold and see what they have to say.

Dymo

Graces7 wrote: »

He pays. What a mess... But he pays as you have tried to get him to fix it... Send him the bill...

With that attitude why not buy a brand new washing machine. :rolleyes:

OP your the one that booked the engineer without the consent of the landlord so you should have to pay for it considering you were the cause of the damage to the machine

pooch90

Majority of bras aren't meant to be put in washing machine anyway, most are handwash. Guess this points out why....

maria gstones

I was going to say something similar, Underwire bras are handwash only for 2 reasons... to protect the bra and keep it in good condition and to prevent damage to a washing machine. It would be normal wear and tear if it broke if you were following the washing instructions correctly, not normal wear and tear if it could have been prevented by appropriate use.

It has happened to me before though and if you leave it long enough the wire eventually dislodges and comes back out of the machine!

Xiney

I have non-underwire bras that are handwash only - it is mainly for the bra's protection & also because north american style top-loading washing machines are a lot harder on delicate clothing items than our european front loading type.

The front load type is actually fine for the vast majority of "hand wash only" clothes.

conorhal

Xiney wrote: »

underwire escaping from bras is a common problem & it is a common issue with washing machines as confirmed by the repairman.

It is up to your landlord to bear the costs of the repair as this common issue translates into "normal wear & tear".

Since he can offset all expenses incurred in this business towards the tax he pays, he really has no reason not to pay. It's essentially free for him unless he's a) not registered for tax b) not making enough money a year to pay tax which doubtful and anyway isn't really your problem.

I'd totally disagree, normal wear and tear would be damage due to lime scale buildup or the motor burning out, something like that.
A careless tenet that forgets to remove the under wire from a bra when washing it is directly responsible for the damage caused, as were I and my flat mates the time we lost patience defrosting the freezer and attacked the ice with a carving knife and unknowingly punctured the inner casing of the fridge…. We came down stairs the next morning to a Freon gass filled kitchen turning the room into an unbreathable toxic waste exclusion area… damn that was a costly mistake…

Xiney

conorhal wrote: »

I'd totally disagree, normal wear and tear would be damage due to lime scale buildup or the motor burning out, something like that.
A careless tenet that forgets to remove the under wire from a bra when washing it is directly responsible for the damage caused, as were I and my flat mates the time we lost patience defrosting the freezer and attacked the ice with a carving knife and unknowingly punctured the inner casing of the fridge…. We came down stairs the next morning to a Freon gass filled kitchen turning the room into an unbreathable toxic waste exclusion area… damn that was a costly mistake…

The wire isn't supposed to be removeable. It sometimes falls out - but it has a tendency of doing so without notice. It's not always obvious that it's about to come out because it's a wire - so it can make a hole in the bra in a short time.

Stabbing your fridge to death isn't the same :P

seamus

It's hard to say whether this is wear and tear. "Tear" implies that everything gets the odd knock and scratch every now and again, for which the tenant is not responsible to pay.

In this case, it's an accidental occurence - nobody is technically at fault. On the face of it, it looks like the landlord would be liable, but in reality the washing machine itself hasn't actually broken and is not faulty. Therefore the landlord is not liable.

Sounds like the guy from the local shop just couldn't be arsed sorting it out for you. It should be a simple enough matter to pop the back off, locate the wire and remove it. Half an hour's work maybe, but it would fix the problem.

conorhal

Xiney wrote: »

The wire isn't supposed to be removeable. It sometimes falls out - but it has a tendency of doing so without notice. It's not always obvious that it's about to come out because it's a wire - so it can make a hole in the bra in a short time.

Stabbing your fridge to death isn't the same :P

I beg to differ, that fridge had it coming..... :pac:

ztoical

What did the washing instructions on the bra say?

omega666

As a tenant i dont think this could be covered under normal wear and tear.
the landlord cant be responsible for what the tenant puts in the washing machine.

tenant should be paying at least 50% of the cost.

astrofool

I'd see this the same as the tenant overloading the machine and causing a problem, the tenant is clearly at fault for putting something unsuitable in the washing machine, the instructions for the washing machine will no doubt point this out, and the bra itself will be marked as handwash only. It is also fairly common sense not to put a metal wire (say a coathanger) into a washing machine.

How can the landlord be liable for a tenant ignoring these instructions and causing the problem? It's just stupidity to think otherwise.

Graces7

Dymo wrote: »

With that attitude why not buy a brand new washing machine. :rolleyes:

OP your the one that booked the engineer without the consent of the landlord so you should have to pay for it considering you were the cause of the damage to the machine

Well, that is what happened here

The first time I used the washing machine here, it blew the fuses, twice.. Then it died and ate my washing.

The landlord apparently knew there had been problems and had done nothing; finally the machine would have cost over a hundred E to repair so he bought a new one.

All that took weeks of course.

In this case, the landlord has not effected a repair; his engineer has given a wrong verdict and clothes are being damaged. I also then would call in an efficient engineer. And would, yes, send the bill to the landlord.
And a bill for damaged clothing.

Presumablythe engineer who he sent did not blame the tenant. The landlord is playing for time simply.

Interestd to see what eg Threshold say; but I am sure I have read something re that if a landlord fails to get something fixed a tenant can do this? Am sure re that.

drBill

seamus wrote: »

Sounds like the guy from the local shop just couldn't be arsed sorting it out for you. It should be a simple enough matter to pop the back off, locate the wire and remove it. Half an hour's work maybe, but it would fix the problem.

Unfortunately its not so simple. You need to get at the cavity between the spinning drum and its housing which often means splitting the drum housing.
So the flexible rubber seal between drum and door has to be removed without damaging it, the drum housing has to be split - again hopefully without damaging the rubber seal - which may require lifting it out of the machine first which will mean disconnecting all hoses and wiring from it. Then you have to put it all together again, possibly replacing any seals/pipes/hoseclips which didn't survive the dismantling process, and then test it to ensure there are no leaks.

It's been a few years since I last had the pleasure of doing this, but I remember it took a good few hours!

kennethsmyth

1. Underwire bra in washing machine - not recommended
2. Underwire breaking out and getting caught in machine - accidental (not wear and tear)
3. The first repair man was called out to investigate problem, this is at the landlords cost - no issue there. After investigation underwire was found to be the problem - therefore not wear and tear hence issue is no longer landlords.
4. Any clothes put into washing machine that get damaged is at the fault of the bra owner, and she (i assume she) is responsible for those costs.
5. Once it is known that putting clothes into washing machine will result in damage to them it is up to the individual to decide if they are willing to risk it at their own expense.
6. Second engineer is not landlords responsibility as cause of damage is now known and it was not from wear and tear.

Advisement - to talk nicely with landlord to see if they would do a 50/50. They do not have to in this case.

Graces7

kennethsmyth wrote: »

1. Underwire bra in washing machine - not recommended
2. Underwire breaking out and getting caught in machine - accidental (not wear and tear)
3. The first repair man was called out to investigate problem, this is at the landlords cost - no issue there. After investigation underwire was found to be the problem - therefore not wear and tear hence issue is no longer landlords.
4. Any clothes put into washing machine that get damaged is at the fault of the bra owner, and she (i assume she) is responsible for those costs.
5. Once it is known that putting clothes into washing machine will result in damage to them it is up to the individual to decide if they are willing to risk it at their own expense.
6. Second engineer is not landlords responsibility as cause of damage is now known and it was not from wear and tear.

Advisement - to talk nicely with landlord to see if they would do a 50/50. They do not have to in this case.

And all this is the LAW accoring to whom?

Graces7

NB the first engineer said the machine would break down ?? So the landlord knew it would do that? So the engineer was wrong?

Xiney

Graces7 wrote: »

NB the first engineer said the machine would break down ?? So the landlord knew it would do that? So the engineer was wrong?

No, you misread. The repairman said the wire would eventually break into pieces and come out.