Government requirements for RCD & smoke alarm testing, WA

I last owned property in WA in 2003. I'm fairly sure the laws governing rental properties would have changed since then.

In Queensland I'm liable for smoke detectors that stopped working because tenants had removed the batteries. Trying to fight the issue would have cost me 5x the cost of shutting up and paying up. To avoid further litigation and a possible fight with my insurers in the case of a fire... I'd jump at the offer from a third party to take over responsibility for maintaining the blasted things.

The owner's liability doesn't stop at installing smoke alarms... Despite what many might think/hope or believe. This is most likely why the firm offering frequent checks and maintenance of smoke alarms is prospering. How they offset the the issue of liability would (I guess) be the deal breaker.

HH

Reply to
Helmut
Loading thread data ...

Strictly, you are wrong. On your claim, you would be liable from the moment that the tenant removed the batteries. That is not so.

That's a different matter.

That in no way removes any obligations from you.

They don't. It's just a way for property owners to get someone to do the maintenance check. It doesn't do anything positive for the property owner if things go wrong.

Reply to
Epsilon

The law in Queensland relating to smoke alarms seems to be more sensible than that in WA, in that it doesn't assume that tennants are incapable of looking after a smoke alarm.

I can see nothing that would make the owner liable where a tenant has removed the batteries.

The tennant would have committed an offence by removing the batteries, though.

formatting link

The tendency for people to cop a fine rather than defending cases like this just encourages the authorities to initiate proceedings on spurious grounds.

Sylvia.

Reply to
Sylvia Else

Definitely not true. Report him.

Sylvia.

Reply to
Sylvia Else

Are you suggesting that those authorities are capable of reasoned thought?

Reply to
Epsilon

Oh, perhaps, up to the level of "We can issue fines, and there's no downside, so we do."

Sylvia.

Reply to
Sylvia Else

.html

.html

.
e
r

I have property in QLD, the owner is only liable to test the alarm at the start of a tenancy (and possibly a lease renewal) Other than that - the tenant is responsible for checking and changing the battery while they are in the unit.

We had mains powered alarms installed (the agent had it done) and these still require the battery check by law. The mains powered ones, I checked them and they do continuously "chirp" if the battery is removed and the mains is available.

Reply to
kreed

Not worth reporting him, it'd be my word against his & he likely suggest I'd misunderstood. Nice to know its not a requirement.

Reply to
Dennis

All correct and you realise by trying to reason with syliva she will drag you down to her level of stupidity ? If you won't answer her the rest of us don't see her s**te

--
X-No-Archive: Yes
Reply to
atec77

The issues raised with this subliminal insult reach far further than just denying someone the right to post in this public forum. They head towards vilification of another poster so you might enjoy what you seek to deny Sylvia.

By suggesting on one hand that a long standing regular here should be ignored so that you can enjoy the facility you seek to deny her is an attempt to force your ideas on others. An attitude hardly likely to win you any followers.

Live and let live. You might find more people will consider your posts as 'useful' if you did. Right now I'd be inclined to see you as a newsgroup vandal rather than a worthwhile contributor. Activity like yours is what has degraded newsgroups in general to a level as close to the gutter as it can get.

HH

Reply to
Helmut

oh ggf don't like it plonk me as I will you in a second

bullshite You might find more people will consider your posts

--
X-No-Archive: Yes
Reply to
atec77

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.