Should Landlords Pay for Repairs in Flat?

Thanks for posting in Chat, I have updated the title so it gives more information to what this topic is about.

It all depends on what the repairs are for and for what is covered in the tenancy agreement.

If accidental damage, say to furniture or fixings, thats for the tenant to fix.

If its the boiler, a window that has blown or even a fence panel being blown over for example, that would be down to the landlord to repair.

If youve damaged it , fix it yourself otherwise they should be paying for repairs

Damage should be covered in the security deposit and most tennents want that back so they fix it there self.

repairs to the flat e.g. boiler electrics should be the landlords issue

You need to check your lease, whether it's a repairing lease or a non repairing one. Generally it shows in the rent payable, obviously one is less costly than the other

I think you should say what’s broken and if you damaged it or if it’s wear and tear.

If its the bits owned by the landlord or plumbing then yes. If its a sofa no. If the tenant broke it then the tenant should fix it. Though we've fixed things ourselves but that's cos the oh had the bits so was able to fix it. He is a chippy. Landlord knows if he gets a phone call it's an professional job. I. E. Electrician.

It should be the landlord but if it's in my case he won't do anything so it's down to me

Depends if it’s from general wear and tear or damage the tenants have caused. For me if i broke something i would happily pay as it’s only fair whereas if something broke that wasn’t my fault I’d expect the landlord to pay and fix it in a timely manner

If the tenant causes serious damage then they should pay but everything else should be the responsibility of a landlord. Rent is so expensive already, they should not be placing further burdens on the tenants.

I think we’re wasting our time making suggestions as the poster has never replied to any of us.

It depends if it's general maintenance of necessary upgrades then yes the landlord should pay, as they get rental income and it's their asset. But if it's damage done by the tenant then the tenant should pay.

I remember speaking to a cleaner who cleaned buildings once they had been built ready for the tenant or new owner to move in. She spoke about property where some buildings were being rented by the local housing association and others sold in the same block. The housing association properties had much better doors, kitchen units and other parts because the tenants would treat the property badly so had to be more robust. The people buying properties clearly wanted a good price so had cheaper kitchens, doors etc. Just seemed strange that housing association tenants would get upgraded houses despite having subsidised rent. It was the opposite of what you might expect.

I've visited rental properties and seen it from both sides. Tenants that treat the property horrifically and landlords who won't fix property who should. I have to say though that my gut feeling is tenants are worse than landlords mostly. Especially vindictive tenants forced to leave due to non-payment who also purposely damage the property. These people should be criminalised and imprisoned in my opinion and that debt should stay with them until paid both for the rent and damage with interest on top and legal fees.