Don’t you have more important things to occupy your mind? Just let it go and continue living
Well,
- I don’t like seeing one large reputable company taking advantage of an insurer via me
- That’s how insurance costs keep growing for no good reason
Did the insurance company actually say this or is it your opinion? Insurance companies are familiar with the type and size of charges after a tenant moves out. Maybe the charges are within the range of what is expected, despite the questionable communications from the landlord.
For small amounts it is not worth the insurer to fight it. It is cheaper to just pay.
That feeling when you’re preparing for a fight and the other just says “not worth it”. Not the optimal outcome, but also not the worst one.
1 Like
Sage advice…the insurance company’s response is annoying, wrong (in the existential sense), and raising everyone’s costs, but you can’t fight every fight. Keep it for the important stuff.
Let me share with you the other side of the moon; I rented my small flat (not Switzerland, not able to afford even a garage here 
) to an expat professional, through a ‘corporate lease’ (i.e. directly with the corporation, not with him). 3 years later, the corporation severed the contract, through the ‘diplomatic clause’. When I received the ‘etat de lieu’ I was dismayed. The parkett had been totally destroyed. Water damaged in some areas, and ‘someone’ using it as a ‘tablao flamenco’ in others. I proceeded to sanding and waxing it, as that was beyond any normal ‘wear and tear’, and I retained the part of the deposit with evidence of invoice from the repair company(the deposit had been paid by the tenant, not the corporation). The next 6 months were hell for me – the tenant turned to the lawyers of the corporation, who threatened me to take me to court to recover the deposit, and make me pay ‘moral damages’ to the tenant and their share of costs to the corporation. It didn’t matter if in the ‘etat de lieu’, it was presented as damaged vs original state. Having worked myself in corporations, I know that for them is just their daily job. For the other side (a private individual), it is just headache, time consuming and finantial costs.
So, you see, this is not ‘landlord vs tenant’… this is more ‘corporation vs individual’…
5 Likes
One upside of outrageous demands is the certainty about winning since the very start. Yes, bit of fight but you will win.
I’m more worried of reasonable demands from the other side because it implies that there’s a chance that they may pull the trick off and win hahaha
Axa is clearly a lawyer…
This was France. ‘A bit of fight’ might be several years. And I know it first hand on another case (not related to the flat). Several = 7 years. I won. By then, the other party had moved out of the country (and out of the EU). His lawyer told my lawyer “go fetch him…” (in French, of course). It took me another 4 years (an a private detective), to locate some ‘forgotten’ assets that could be seized to pay for the court’s damages decision, and get my money back. So, tell me about headache, time, costs, heartburn and potentially an ulcer. Ah, and >35 kilos on court & lawyers paperwork. A full suitcase – and I am not exaggerating.
I have several lawyer friends. I tell them that if I reincarnate, I will study law. Where others see problems and strife, they see money and business!
1 Like
I’m not a lawyer. I’ve only structured the overall strategy for family members when they have issues. Precisely to avoid the headache and heartburn. Focus on the results and the steps to get there. Everything else is not relevant and optional.
Lawyers are there to sweat over the details and get the job one. But they won’t engage in long-term thinking, and it’s a plus that they don’t. This is fine, lawyers are useful, that’s already much better than lots of people 
1 Like
Just to give you a few examples,
- The landlord claim the building was constructed in Apr 2021
- I have this standard attachment to my contract stating “the previous tenant paid X from Feb 2021” (it’s for another purpose but an evidence still)
- I asked a person who moved in as the first tenant in May 2020 (it’s not an evidence but it shows it should be possible to find an evidence for it if someone wants to)
The landlord insisted on their position, the insurance concluded “OK, whatever, not a big difference for ammortisation”.
There’re other dubious moments, i.e.
- invoices they attached are from one vendor to another but not from a vendor to the landlord
- they refreshed the entire flooring because of a hole in one element (the insurance said they actually can do it if the parquet is connected throughout the apartment) - but is it really not possible to contest it (in person the landlord representative when writing it down explained they’d replace this piece and a few around it, and it was also the basis for the estimate) - and they are not refreshing it after each tenant, I was the 3rd, and there were already various defects, and they decided suddenly it was a good idea
- their total cost deviated ~85% from the estimate
- they have things I remember admitting verbally but not put into the protocol (one shelve) and things I remember we discussed it’s not my fault as it was in their protocol for the previous tenant (another shelve) but they put both shelves
- etc.
I.e. there’re points to fight or at least investigate but I guess they follow the logic you guys described, i.e. maybe it isn’t worth it for them.
I get your points I need to be practical but it’s hard for me to accept something like this, but I will, whatever.
probably the rents around have been risen quite a lot recently, landlords are timing the refreshment work for such moments when it makes the biggest impact on profitability as with a significant work done they can significantly adjust the rent to a new tenant
They did it during the tenant being present
Repainting all walls, redoing the floors… I can’t see how they could have done that with all the private stuff of a new tenant inside
The transport is 380 + 250 so I imagine they could protect everything inside and then remove it, one of transport positions mentions garbage removal. IDK.
At least in ZH, you can look up the year a building was built in the GIS.
Thanks for the tip. I’ve just looked it up in an equivalent system, and then used its EGID to find more data. Constructed in Mar 2020. But I guess the insurance wouldn’t care, they already paid anyways.
Yeah. Their AI probably told them it’s still ok.