Heat over aircon

I've been in HK for about 10 years now, and been renting throughout. In each apartment the landlord repaired the airconditioner, fridge, stove or anything else that went wrong.

Now I am in a new place. I am this landlord's first ever tenant. Recently the aircon didn't work so I called in the repairman. Now I am left with the bill. Our tenancy agreement is bog standard. But aircons are on the list of "items" in the rooms e.g. wardrobes which need to be in good order when I leave.

Indeed we did notify him and this is his recommended aircon man. He says he has consulted a solicitor and now I have to give him back the apartment in the order he gave it to me (all appliances working). So he doesn't have to repair anything. This is a bit of a worry for me for a number of reasons - the appliances are old and are not going to last - does this mean when the finally peter out I need to replace them. Then there is mould growing on the cieling of my bedroom, which seem to come from the flat above, am I supposed to fix that? I'm locked into that first year of renting agreement otherwise I would be fleeing next month.

In that case, your landlord is just being an idiot. Yes, he's right you do have to give him back the apartment in the order that he gave it to you, but he also has to accept reasonable wear and tear of his appliances. Send him the receipt for the aircon repairs and deduct it from next month's rent. You're not really supposed to do this, but as he's being so unreasonable, this is what I would do if I were you. I think I would look for something else and get out of there as soon as your first year is up.

He says he's consulted a solicitor who said he was in the right. I could take the aircon off next month's rent, but then he's still got my deposit money. I wonder how much it costs to chat to a solicitor

How much money are we talking about here? It may be that you're going to incur more unnecessary costs.

a wee bit over 2,000. But my concerns are multiplied.

Is it possible to get the real estate agent who found the flat for you to contact the landlord on your behalf? I very much doubt your landlord went along to see a solicitor.

Hi inkonkoni,

I've found out the following from the internet:


The Landlrd & Tenant Ordinance does not contain provisions on repair liabilities. Any dispute on repair and maintenance liabilities, which cannot be settled between the landlord and tenant, may be resolved in court by reference to the expressed or implied terms of the tenancy and in accordance with common law principles.


When dealing with the issue of repair and maintenance, the landlord and the tenant must predominantly rely on the tenancy document to ascertain their respective duties. A commonly adopted approach is that the landlord is responsible for external and structural repairs and maintenance, and the tenant is responsible for internal and non-structural ones. However, such a simple dichotomy can be problematic because the words internal, external, structural and non-structural can have different interpretations under different circumstances. Therefore, a well-drafted tenancy document will try to anticipate and accommodate all potential areas of dispute that are specific to the particular property, and clarify the parties' duties in details. This also explains why a tenancy document that is drafted by solicitors may consume dozens of pages, whereas a standard form agreement may take only one or two pages.

It will also be quite normal that the terms of the tenancy document impose many obligations on the tenant. This apparent unfairness is actually quite reasonable because the tenant is the "person-in-charge" of the property during the term of the tenancy. As a tenancy has the effect of passing the interests in the property to the tenant, the duty to keep the property in good repair and maintenance passes to the tenant. It is for the same reason that the law implies that the tenant will keep the property in a tenant-like manner and will not commit waste.

It is also common to find in a tenancy document that the tenant's obligations for repair and maintenance are limited by the phrase "fair wear and tear excepted". This excuses the tenant from damage arising from the passing of time and the ordinary and reasonable use of the property. A well-drafted tenancy document should also contain a clause which specifies that the landlord's obligations for structural repairs and maintenance will arise only upon notice of the structural defects. This is reasonable because the landlords, not being in occupation of the properties, cannot be expected to remedy defects of which they are not aware.

On the whole, the answer to the question of who is responsible for repairs and maintenance is to be found in the terms agreed upon by the landlord and the tenant. If there is no written tenancy document or if the particular issue is not tackled by the tenancy document, then the dispute may have to be decided by the Court, which will take into account factors such as the common law duty of "tenant-like" manner, the factual circumstances of the particular dispute, the reasonableness of the parties' acts, etc.

Hi Shoe Girl, thanks for that. I did consult the estate agent, who phoned him and told him that he was being unreasonable. He accused her of interfering and taking sides and raised the spectre of the solisitor again. Then I turned here and also have contacted consumer council for their advice.

It's very unfair. Reason would tell you that if the landlord provided the apartment with appliances in it, and providing you are not wilfully damaging those appliances etc... then he should be responsible for the upkeep of them.


Of course, if you rent a flat that has no air-cons and you buy them yourself, then that's different.


It's a shame that it's a grey area and your landlord is taking advantage of that. What an idiot he is. He's being totally unreasonable. Good luck... and wish you better luck next time that you don't get lumped with such an unreasonable landlord.