Shutterstock
Imagine moving into an apartment with a finicky toilet. It has given you problems for as long as you lived there, and one day, it finally stops working.
If the plumber found something in the toilet that shouldn’t have been flushed, who do you think should be responsible for paying to fix the toilet: you or the landlord?
In this story, one tenant is in this situation, and she’s positive she didn’t cause the problem with the toilet. She thinks the problem existed before she moved in. However, the landlord thinks she needs to pay for the repairs.
Keep reading to see who you think should pay.
AITAH for refusing to pay my landlord who says I broke the toilet by flushing something?
I rent a student property with an en-suite that has a macerator toilet (the kind that grinds up waste before pumping it away).
I’ve lived here for my tenancy which has been since September and have always been told that only toilet paper should be flushed.
I’ve been really careful about that because I know macerators are expensive and easy to damage.
Uh-oh!
Yesterday, my landlord sent a plumber out because the macerator had stopped working.
Today I received an email saying the plumber found the remains of something that wasn’t toilet paper inside the macerator. My landlord says this is “misuse,” that the macerator is beyond economical repair, and that a replacement will cost **£725**, which he expects me to pay in full.
Here’s why I’m refusing.
I haven’t bought the item the plumber claims he found in the toilet, so the item could not have come from me. No one else has access to my en-suite bathroom, and I’m careful to lock my flat whenever I leave.
She thinks the issue existed before she moved in.
On top of that, this toilet has had problems for as long as I’ve lived here. It has never flushed particularly well, and I’ve repeatedly had issues with drain flies coming from it, which made me think there was an underlying issue with the system long before it finally failed.
The plumber sent a photo of what he says he found, and honestly it looked really degraded, not like something that had recently been flushed.
As a tenant, I obviously can’t inspect the inside of a macerator when I move in, so I have no way of knowing how long it had been sitting there or whether it was already in the system before I even moved into the property.
She’s a rule follower.
I also have diagnosed OCD, which makes me extremely strict about following rules.
If I’m told “only toilet paper goes down the toilet,” then that’s exactly what I do. I’m probably more cautious than the average person because I’m constantly worried about accidentally doing something wrong.
I’ve always looked after the property, paid my rent, and tried to be a good tenant.
I just don’t think it’s fair that I’m being asked to pay hundreds of pounds based solely on the fact that the plumber found a degraded item inside a system that has had ongoing problems for years.
She’s not sure what to do.
My landlord’s position is basically: “The plumber found it, therefore you misused the toilet, therefore you owe £725.”
My position is: there’s no proof it was flushed during my tenancy, the toilet had a history of problems, and I don’t believe there’s enough evidence to hold me liable.
So… AITA for refusing to pay the £725? And if you’ve dealt with landlords or tenancy misuse and damage disputes before, I’d really appreciate any advice on what you’d do next.
It sounds like the issue probably did exist before she moved in, but there’s probably no way to convince the landlord.
Let’s see if Reddit has advice.
This person thinks insurance should cover it.
Another person thinks she might have to move.
This person thinks she might need legal help.
Another person shares something pretty crazy that the plumber found in a toilet.
She shouldn’t be responsible for paying for it. It’s the landlord’s responsibility. He may choose not to believe her, but I still don’t think she should have to pay.
At least the plumber found the problem.
It’s really annoying to be accused of doing something you didn’t do.