Quote:
Originally Posted by CurrentlySober
Regarding the cost of the contractor, I do feel it to be very steep, going by the fact that nothing needed to be done, and that the letting agents are using them on a regular basis, feeding them a steady stream of work.
No, I wouldn't expect them to do it for free, but I do feel that the fee is excessive.
But that's not really the issue. The issue is who should be liable for it, when it was the tenants at fault and not the fault of the equipment itself.
As I said, the letting agent felt that the tenant who had turned off the switch was liable. But they are (imho) playing semantics regarding switches being labelled when they are not supposed to be.
Like I said, I think 50/50 is reasonable - The tenants appear to think otherwise.
|
Market dependent. If the renter has the power, landlord absolutely pays. If the landlord has the power, it's a crap shoot.
At this point I would probably just eat it as it's a small amount of money and too much time is being spent on it, particularly if they are a decent tenant.
Frankly I think the "call fee" is a pretty good deal. It's not the contractors fault that nothing needed to be done. They took the time to drive to the location, check out the issue and then leave to the next job. That time could have been spent working on a different job. Opportunity cost. Getting any kind of contractor to do anything for less then $100 is not too shabby. And if they are a regular contractor, as mentioned, I would not be screwing around with them. Good contractors are hard to find, and somebody that comes out the next day? Shit.
Pay the contractor. Update your lease moving forward to address issues like this if you desire.
__________________
Vacares - Web Hosting, Domains, O365, Security & More -
Paxum and BTC Accepted
Windows VPS now available
Great for TSS, Nifty Stats, remote work, virtual assistants, etc.
Click here for more details.