Bauexperte
2015-02-16 20:46:54
- #1
Disputes also frequently arise regarding tiles. Whether it is that the surfaces of the new tiles show fine scratches or that a tenant has drilled various tiles against the owner’s wishes. Some rulings on the subject of tiles.
14 anchor holes in the kitchen
14 anchor holes in a kitchen are still quite within the usual range – at least if no countertop was present and the tenant had to install it themselves. The fastening of a countertop is, according to the opinion of the Rheinbach District Court (file number 3 C 199/04), part of the ordinary use of the rental property. The owner must accept that due to the particular spatial situation some of the anchor holes are located right in the middle of the tiles.
Drill holes preferably in the joints
In principle, however, a tenant should make an effort to place drill holes only in the joints. Because there they cause far less damage. The Berlin-Köpenick District Court (file number 4 C 64/12) pointed out to a tenant that he certainly would have been able to mount his wall mirrors and cabinets using drill holes in the joints. However, tiles were cracked. The party responsible for the damage had to bear the costs.
Screed instead of tiles?
If the landlord has tiles removed from the balcony during a renovation and instead chooses the cheaper screed as flooring, the tenant has no right to restoration of the original condition. The Berlin Regional Court (file number 62 S 133/00) pointed out that the residential purpose is not impaired by this replacement. It is quite different, for example, if parquet flooring or stucco ceilings disappear inside the property. These increase the residential value.
Replacement of some tiles
An apartment owner basically had a claim to replace some bathroom tiles after a damage incident. The problem was, however, that exactly the same type of tile was no longer available and the responsible party could only have a very similar pattern installed. The differences in shading were noticeable. Nevertheless, it was allowed to remain as it was, ruled Munich Regional Court I (file number 1 T 14345/04), since a complete re-tiling of the bathroom would have cost over 6,000 instead of the 2,600 euros used here. However, the affected party was awarded 1,400 euros in damages because a diminution in value had occurred.
Tile installation by tenant – higher rent?
Owner and tenant had agreed that the tenant could have the bathroom walls tiled at their own expense. That was done. Approximately ten years later, another re-tiling of the bathroom was necessary due to renovation work. Afterwards, the owner demanded higher rent because of this increase in residential value. The Berlin-Lichtenberg District Court (file number 5 C 507/03) did not agree. The measure enhancing the residential value had already been carried out originally by the tenant; the new work within the framework of a main pipeline renovation was at the landlord’s expense.
Micro-sanding marks in the tiles
Even the highest court had to deal with the issue of tiles. It concerned a sales contract for polished floor tiles worth almost 1,400 euros. When most of the goods had already been laid, the client noticed shading on the surface. They were micro-sanding marks. He demanded reinstallation, which would have cost a total of 5,800 euros. The European Court of Justice (file number C 65/09) pointed to the principle of proportionality and stated that reimbursement of costs could be limited to the value of the contractually delivered goods.
Asbestos release through broken tile
If asbestos escapes through a broken floor tile, there is a risk of health damage. The utility value of a rental apartment is noticeably reduced in this way. For this reason, the Berlin Regional Court (file number 65 S 419/10) ruled a ten percent rent reduction until the damage was remedied. In the specific case, this was 77 euros per month.
Care products not suitable
Whoever sells tiles and arranges their installation does not only assume responsibility for correct laying. They must also give their customer at least fundamental information about dangers from improper cleaning. In a trial before the Frankfurt Higher Regional Court (file number 15 U 163/12), it became apparent that the grout material used did not tolerate the use of acidic cleaning agents. For this reason, rows of tiles fell to the floor. It would have been a secondary obligation of the craftsman, the court said, to point out the special situation.
Tiled backsplash in the kitchen
A tiled backsplash in a kitchen is now part of the normal, appropriate equipment of an apartment. The landlord must accept this as contractually agreed if his tenant makes such installations. The Fürstenwalde District Court (file number 15 C 248/01) points out that such a tiled backsplash is also important to keep harmful splash water from the sink away from the wall surface.
Source: Infodienst Recht und Steuern der LBS
Legal index – Law and judgments
Rhineland regards
14 anchor holes in the kitchen
14 anchor holes in a kitchen are still quite within the usual range – at least if no countertop was present and the tenant had to install it themselves. The fastening of a countertop is, according to the opinion of the Rheinbach District Court (file number 3 C 199/04), part of the ordinary use of the rental property. The owner must accept that due to the particular spatial situation some of the anchor holes are located right in the middle of the tiles.
Drill holes preferably in the joints
In principle, however, a tenant should make an effort to place drill holes only in the joints. Because there they cause far less damage. The Berlin-Köpenick District Court (file number 4 C 64/12) pointed out to a tenant that he certainly would have been able to mount his wall mirrors and cabinets using drill holes in the joints. However, tiles were cracked. The party responsible for the damage had to bear the costs.
Screed instead of tiles?
If the landlord has tiles removed from the balcony during a renovation and instead chooses the cheaper screed as flooring, the tenant has no right to restoration of the original condition. The Berlin Regional Court (file number 62 S 133/00) pointed out that the residential purpose is not impaired by this replacement. It is quite different, for example, if parquet flooring or stucco ceilings disappear inside the property. These increase the residential value.
Replacement of some tiles
An apartment owner basically had a claim to replace some bathroom tiles after a damage incident. The problem was, however, that exactly the same type of tile was no longer available and the responsible party could only have a very similar pattern installed. The differences in shading were noticeable. Nevertheless, it was allowed to remain as it was, ruled Munich Regional Court I (file number 1 T 14345/04), since a complete re-tiling of the bathroom would have cost over 6,000 instead of the 2,600 euros used here. However, the affected party was awarded 1,400 euros in damages because a diminution in value had occurred.
Tile installation by tenant – higher rent?
Owner and tenant had agreed that the tenant could have the bathroom walls tiled at their own expense. That was done. Approximately ten years later, another re-tiling of the bathroom was necessary due to renovation work. Afterwards, the owner demanded higher rent because of this increase in residential value. The Berlin-Lichtenberg District Court (file number 5 C 507/03) did not agree. The measure enhancing the residential value had already been carried out originally by the tenant; the new work within the framework of a main pipeline renovation was at the landlord’s expense.
Micro-sanding marks in the tiles
Even the highest court had to deal with the issue of tiles. It concerned a sales contract for polished floor tiles worth almost 1,400 euros. When most of the goods had already been laid, the client noticed shading on the surface. They were micro-sanding marks. He demanded reinstallation, which would have cost a total of 5,800 euros. The European Court of Justice (file number C 65/09) pointed to the principle of proportionality and stated that reimbursement of costs could be limited to the value of the contractually delivered goods.
Asbestos release through broken tile
If asbestos escapes through a broken floor tile, there is a risk of health damage. The utility value of a rental apartment is noticeably reduced in this way. For this reason, the Berlin Regional Court (file number 65 S 419/10) ruled a ten percent rent reduction until the damage was remedied. In the specific case, this was 77 euros per month.
Care products not suitable
Whoever sells tiles and arranges their installation does not only assume responsibility for correct laying. They must also give their customer at least fundamental information about dangers from improper cleaning. In a trial before the Frankfurt Higher Regional Court (file number 15 U 163/12), it became apparent that the grout material used did not tolerate the use of acidic cleaning agents. For this reason, rows of tiles fell to the floor. It would have been a secondary obligation of the craftsman, the court said, to point out the special situation.
Tiled backsplash in the kitchen
A tiled backsplash in a kitchen is now part of the normal, appropriate equipment of an apartment. The landlord must accept this as contractually agreed if his tenant makes such installations. The Fürstenwalde District Court (file number 15 C 248/01) points out that such a tiled backsplash is also important to keep harmful splash water from the sink away from the wall surface.
Source: Infodienst Recht und Steuern der LBS
Legal index – Law and judgments
Rhineland regards