Landlord homeless after tenant’s fire

Landlord Bindesh Badiani is being refused insurance coverage after a tenant burnt his house down while taking legal highs

Landlord Bindesh Badiani is being refused insurance coverage after a tenant burnt his house down while taking legal highs

First published in News
Last updated
by

BINDESH Badiani whose house was torched when his tenant set fire to a mattress after taking a legal high, has said he has been left homeless and broke.

Bindesh, 46, was at home in Cambria Place on January 20, 2012 when a tenant of six months, David Nurdin, torched his bedroom as he thought people were coming through the floorboards to get him.

He had taken Eric 3, a plant food, which sent him into a panic, and to ward off his imaginary attackers he started the fire and rushed into the bedroom of his live-in landlord.

“I was asleep in my bed at the time,” said Bindesh. “I woke up and the fire alarm was going.

“I went straight for my clothes, to find out what was going on. At that point David started banging on my door saying there was a fire. He barged his way in and barricaded himself behind my door.

“I had to jump out of the bedroom window to escape the fire, because the smoke was so thick I could not breath.

“He was ingesting plant food, because he was on £20 a week he did not have money for anything else.”

The repair bill has forced Bindesh to sell off his assets, including another rental property, and he has been staying with family after his house was destroyed.

“I have had to sell my other property because of the fire, as well as my car and cashing in a lot of shares,” he said.

“All of the house was destroyed. Water damage spread throughout the place after the fire was put out, and the whole of the upstairs was damaged by fire. It had set light to the ceiling and there was structural damage.

“All the furniture was ruined by the smoke, because it was so thick you could not see or breathe.

“I have lost all my rental income from this property and I have become homeless.

“The other house I rent out is to a whole family in Haydon Wick, and I am having to sell up that one now to make ends meet.

“The house is still not up to scratch, and it will probably take another £5,000 or £6,000 before it is sorted.

“The house was bringing in around £900 a month, so I have lost that source of income.

“The council said it would not be allowed to be uninhabitable for more than a year. This is the second year now, and I am just about to get my TV back. I am struggling all round.

“I have had to stay with my family, and thank God for them.

“I am staying in the old house a few nights a week because I do not want it getting broken into.”

Bindesh said the event came as a shock after Nurdin, who was jailed for two years and three months for the offence in 2012, had been a flawless tenant.

“David was referred to me by one of his friends who was living there at the time,” he said.

“I applied to the council for the rent payments, and they cleared him to stay as a tenant.

“He moved in six months prior to the incident.

“He was a perfect tenant, and was one of the only ones who helped out around the house.”

Bindesh was unable to claim insurance costs for the damage wreaked on his property from Towergate Insurance, whose landlord policy states: “Significant and unusual exclusions or limitations include theft or malicious damage caused by you, members of your household, paying guests or tenants.”

The Adver attempted to contact Towergate but was unable to get a response before going to press.

Comments (21)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:29am Tue 11 Feb 14

socraties says...

Thankfully nobody was hurt in the fire.

£900 a week rental income from one property and rental income from a second property for several years...............
....................
......... he could stay in the Ritz!
Thankfully nobody was hurt in the fire. £900 a week rental income from one property and rental income from a second property for several years............... .................... ......... he could stay in the Ritz! socraties
  • Score: 6

8:59am Tue 11 Feb 14

EmmBee says...

Strikes me he was underinsured. I'm afraid I don't have a lot of sympathy.
Strikes me he was underinsured. I'm afraid I don't have a lot of sympathy. EmmBee
  • Score: 7

9:43am Tue 11 Feb 14

Takies says...

So you knew he was ingesting this "Drug" and yet you did nothing about it as a landlord???? It is your responsibility to perform the necessary checks on your tenants. How many times do we read that tenants go unchecked and the house becomes a drugs den , a brothel , a cannabis factory......
So you knew he was ingesting this "Drug" and yet you did nothing about it as a landlord???? It is your responsibility to perform the necessary checks on your tenants. How many times do we read that tenants go unchecked and the house becomes a drugs den , a brothel , a cannabis factory...... Takies
  • Score: 5

10:10am Tue 11 Feb 14

ChannelX says...

EmmBee wrote:
Strikes me he was underinsured. I'm afraid I don't have a lot of sympathy.
You do have to wonder about a landlord who takes out insurance that excludes 'malicious damage by tenants'. Surely that's one of the most likely factors in any damage of the property.
[quote][p][bold]EmmBee[/bold] wrote: Strikes me he was underinsured. I'm afraid I don't have a lot of sympathy.[/p][/quote]You do have to wonder about a landlord who takes out insurance that excludes 'malicious damage by tenants'. Surely that's one of the most likely factors in any damage of the property. ChannelX
  • Score: 15

10:41am Tue 11 Feb 14

benzss says...

Takies wrote:
So you knew he was ingesting this "Drug" and yet you did nothing about it as a landlord???? It is your responsibility to perform the necessary checks on your tenants. How many times do we read that tenants go unchecked and the house becomes a drugs den , a brothel , a cannabis factory......
Well

That escalated quickly
[quote][p][bold]Takies[/bold] wrote: So you knew he was ingesting this "Drug" and yet you did nothing about it as a landlord???? It is your responsibility to perform the necessary checks on your tenants. How many times do we read that tenants go unchecked and the house becomes a drugs den , a brothel , a cannabis factory......[/p][/quote]Well That escalated quickly benzss
  • Score: 4

11:15am Tue 11 Feb 14

Badgersgetabadname says...

Completely agree under insured on what must be a likely scenario for a landlord. The other property which has a family in is not up to scratch and need 5-6k of work done couldnt be any health and safety issues as you couldnt house a family in an unfit house (please correct me if I have read that incorrectly).
It also reads as this is additional income as well as a job?
Several years of making this amount and the house is in disrepair?
How was the tenant on £2.85 a day?
Completely agree under insured on what must be a likely scenario for a landlord. The other property which has a family in is not up to scratch and need 5-6k of work done couldnt be any health and safety issues as you couldnt house a family in an unfit house (please correct me if I have read that incorrectly). It also reads as this is additional income as well as a job? Several years of making this amount and the house is in disrepair? How was the tenant on £2.85 a day? Badgersgetabadname
  • Score: 5

11:41am Tue 11 Feb 14

Sir Fawn Maker says...

I read it as saying the Cambria Place one needs 5-6k spending on it rather than the Haydon one
I read it as saying the Cambria Place one needs 5-6k spending on it rather than the Haydon one Sir Fawn Maker
  • Score: 2

11:42am Tue 11 Feb 14

Sir Fawn Maker says...

but it's very poorly written
but it's very poorly written Sir Fawn Maker
  • Score: 4

1:08pm Tue 11 Feb 14

swindonurock says...

socraties wrote:
Thankfully nobody was hurt in the fire.

£900 a week rental income from one property and rental income from a second property for several years...............

....................

......... he could stay in the Ritz!
Though, of course, the article doesn't say anything about £900 a week rental income does it. It says £900 a month.

And, in any case, FYI, income is not profit.

He also had no way of knowing the insurance company would screw him over (other than the fact that screwing people over is what they do best); the damage was not malicious - it was caused by somebody with a mental health issue and because of the mental health issue. The insurance company are ducking their responsibilities.

I have a certain amount of sympathy for the landlord, though this type of scenario is, unfortunately, one of the risks of being in that business.
[quote][p][bold]socraties[/bold] wrote: Thankfully nobody was hurt in the fire. £900 a week rental income from one property and rental income from a second property for several years............... .................... ......... he could stay in the Ritz![/p][/quote]Though, of course, the article doesn't say anything about £900 a week rental income does it. It says £900 a month. And, in any case, FYI, income is not profit. He also had no way of knowing the insurance company would screw him over (other than the fact that screwing people over is what they do best); the damage was not malicious - it was caused by somebody with a mental health issue and because of the mental health issue. The insurance company are ducking their responsibilities. I have a certain amount of sympathy for the landlord, though this type of scenario is, unfortunately, one of the risks of being in that business. swindonurock
  • Score: 2

1:34pm Tue 11 Feb 14

socraties says...

swindonurock wrote:
socraties wrote: Thankfully nobody was hurt in the fire. £900 a week rental income from one property and rental income from a second property for several years............... .................... ......... he could stay in the Ritz!
Though, of course, the article doesn't say anything about £900 a week rental income does it. It says £900 a month. And, in any case, FYI, income is not profit. He also had no way of knowing the insurance company would screw him over (other than the fact that screwing people over is what they do best); the damage was not malicious - it was caused by somebody with a mental health issue and because of the mental health issue. The insurance company are ducking their responsibilities. I have a certain amount of sympathy for the landlord, though this type of scenario is, unfortunately, one of the risks of being in that business.
Ok, £900 a month, plus rental income from a second property, plus a job, plus how many yeras has he been rentinhg?

Income is not profit agree...............
... still more income than the average person, so not sure what point you are making,

Explain to me why he chose to do nothing about a tenant he knew was ingesting plant food?

Make it the Hilton not the Ritz
[quote][p][bold]swindonurock[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]socraties[/bold] wrote: Thankfully nobody was hurt in the fire. £900 a week rental income from one property and rental income from a second property for several years............... .................... ......... he could stay in the Ritz![/p][/quote]Though, of course, the article doesn't say anything about £900 a week rental income does it. It says £900 a month. And, in any case, FYI, income is not profit. He also had no way of knowing the insurance company would screw him over (other than the fact that screwing people over is what they do best); the damage was not malicious - it was caused by somebody with a mental health issue and because of the mental health issue. The insurance company are ducking their responsibilities. I have a certain amount of sympathy for the landlord, though this type of scenario is, unfortunately, one of the risks of being in that business.[/p][/quote]Ok, £900 a month, plus rental income from a second property, plus a job, plus how many yeras has he been rentinhg? Income is not profit agree............... ... still more income than the average person, so not sure what point you are making, Explain to me why he chose to do nothing about a tenant he knew was ingesting plant food? Make it the Hilton not the Ritz socraties
  • Score: -1

1:47pm Tue 11 Feb 14

house on the hill says...

ChannelX wrote:
EmmBee wrote:
Strikes me he was underinsured. I'm afraid I don't have a lot of sympathy.
You do have to wonder about a landlord who takes out insurance that excludes 'malicious damage by tenants'. Surely that's one of the most likely factors in any damage of the property.
Usually because it is the most expensive part of the premium so its a false economy. As above I have no sympathy for those who are under insured, If you are not prepared to pay the premiums you don't get the cover.
[quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EmmBee[/bold] wrote: Strikes me he was underinsured. I'm afraid I don't have a lot of sympathy.[/p][/quote]You do have to wonder about a landlord who takes out insurance that excludes 'malicious damage by tenants'. Surely that's one of the most likely factors in any damage of the property.[/p][/quote]Usually because it is the most expensive part of the premium so its a false economy. As above I have no sympathy for those who are under insured, If you are not prepared to pay the premiums you don't get the cover. house on the hill
  • Score: 2

2:35pm Tue 11 Feb 14

Swindon_AOK says...

socraties wrote:
Thankfully nobody was hurt in the fire.

£900 a week rental income from one property and rental income from a second property for several years...............

....................

......... he could stay in the Ritz!
£900 a month....taking into account mortgage costs and maintenance etc, these days that is not a huge sum for a family house.

Terrible writing by the adver though - totally confusing as to which house is which!
[quote][p][bold]socraties[/bold] wrote: Thankfully nobody was hurt in the fire. £900 a week rental income from one property and rental income from a second property for several years............... .................... ......... he could stay in the Ritz![/p][/quote]£900 a month....taking into account mortgage costs and maintenance etc, these days that is not a huge sum for a family house. Terrible writing by the adver though - totally confusing as to which house is which! Swindon_AOK
  • Score: 0

2:39pm Tue 11 Feb 14

Swindon_AOK says...

This is a seriously weird statement though:

“He was ingesting plant food, because he was on £20 a week he did not have money for anything else.”

Does that mean, he was ingesting plant food on a regular basis as a food substitute as he was so broke (that's how it was written but it doesn't make any sense in the context of the article), or does it imply that he was taking this stuff to get high as he could not afford 'proper' drugs (more likely in the context, but in itself raising serious questions about the statement of him being a 'model tenant'.
This is a seriously weird statement though: “He was ingesting plant food, because he was on £20 a week he did not have money for anything else.” Does that mean, he was ingesting plant food on a regular basis as a food substitute as he was so broke (that's how it was written but it doesn't make any sense in the context of the article), or does it imply that he was taking this stuff to get high as he could not afford 'proper' drugs (more likely in the context, but in itself raising serious questions about the statement of him being a 'model tenant'. Swindon_AOK
  • Score: 0

3:15pm Tue 11 Feb 14

twasadawf says...

Said he was a perfect tenant up until he set the house on fire, with all that plant food in him he should put him in a grow bag, sounds more like jack an the beanstalk
Said he was a perfect tenant up until he set the house on fire, with all that plant food in him he should put him in a grow bag, sounds more like jack an the beanstalk twasadawf
  • Score: 2

5:45pm Tue 11 Feb 14

ChannelX says...

socraties wrote:
swindonurock wrote:
socraties wrote: Thankfully nobody was hurt in the fire. £900 a week rental income from one property and rental income from a second property for several years............... .................... ......... he could stay in the Ritz!
Though, of course, the article doesn't say anything about £900 a week rental income does it. It says £900 a month. And, in any case, FYI, income is not profit. He also had no way of knowing the insurance company would screw him over (other than the fact that screwing people over is what they do best); the damage was not malicious - it was caused by somebody with a mental health issue and because of the mental health issue. The insurance company are ducking their responsibilities. I have a certain amount of sympathy for the landlord, though this type of scenario is, unfortunately, one of the risks of being in that business.
Ok, £900 a month, plus rental income from a second property, plus a job, plus how many yeras has he been rentinhg?

Income is not profit agree...............

... still more income than the average person, so not sure what point you are making,

Explain to me why he chose to do nothing about a tenant he knew was ingesting plant food?

Make it the Hilton not the Ritz
If he's already got a job and another rental property, he's probably paying 40% tax on his rental income, which slashes it in half once you take NI into consideration.

If he's got mortgages on the properties he's probably clearing virtually nothing.
[quote][p][bold]socraties[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]swindonurock[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]socraties[/bold] wrote: Thankfully nobody was hurt in the fire. £900 a week rental income from one property and rental income from a second property for several years............... .................... ......... he could stay in the Ritz![/p][/quote]Though, of course, the article doesn't say anything about £900 a week rental income does it. It says £900 a month. And, in any case, FYI, income is not profit. He also had no way of knowing the insurance company would screw him over (other than the fact that screwing people over is what they do best); the damage was not malicious - it was caused by somebody with a mental health issue and because of the mental health issue. The insurance company are ducking their responsibilities. I have a certain amount of sympathy for the landlord, though this type of scenario is, unfortunately, one of the risks of being in that business.[/p][/quote]Ok, £900 a month, plus rental income from a second property, plus a job, plus how many yeras has he been rentinhg? Income is not profit agree............... ... still more income than the average person, so not sure what point you are making, Explain to me why he chose to do nothing about a tenant he knew was ingesting plant food? Make it the Hilton not the Ritz[/p][/quote]If he's already got a job and another rental property, he's probably paying 40% tax on his rental income, which slashes it in half once you take NI into consideration. If he's got mortgages on the properties he's probably clearing virtually nothing. ChannelX
  • Score: 4

5:46pm Tue 11 Feb 14

ChannelX says...

Please don't tell me the landlord actually thought his tenant was eating 'plant food' (as in, actual plant food) because he had so little money?
Please don't tell me the landlord actually thought his tenant was eating 'plant food' (as in, actual plant food) because he had so little money? ChannelX
  • Score: 2

5:47pm Tue 11 Feb 14

Badgersgetabadname says...

Sir Fawn Maker wrote:
but it's very poorly written
i was trying to avoid saying that maybe the office was busy today
[quote][p][bold]Sir Fawn Maker[/bold] wrote: but it's very poorly written[/p][/quote]i was trying to avoid saying that maybe the office was busy today Badgersgetabadname
  • Score: 0

7:25pm Tue 11 Feb 14

Badgersgetabadname says...

ChannelX wrote:
Please don't tell me the landlord actually thought his tenant was eating 'plant food' (as in, actual plant food) because he had so little money?
I am confused by most of the article its a bit all over the place
[quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: Please don't tell me the landlord actually thought his tenant was eating 'plant food' (as in, actual plant food) because he had so little money?[/p][/quote]I am confused by most of the article its a bit all over the place Badgersgetabadname
  • Score: 0

2:38pm Wed 12 Feb 14

Mukkin says...

In legal terms a Live in Landlord has lodgers not tenants, you'd have thought a newspaper would be aware of this :-D
In legal terms a Live in Landlord has lodgers not tenants, you'd have thought a newspaper would be aware of this :-D Mukkin
  • Score: 2

5:55pm Wed 12 Feb 14

Badgersgetabadname says...

Mukkin wrote:
In legal terms a Live in Landlord has lodgers not tenants, you'd have thought a newspaper would be aware of this :-D
Maybe it was a busy day and didnt have time to check details. The weather has been bad and those road works....disaster. I am sure one of these highly valid reasons will indicated the holes in the above article.
[quote][p][bold]Mukkin[/bold] wrote: In legal terms a Live in Landlord has lodgers not tenants, you'd have thought a newspaper would be aware of this :-D[/p][/quote]Maybe it was a busy day and didnt have time to check details. The weather has been bad and those road works....disaster. I am sure one of these highly valid reasons will indicated the holes in the above article. Badgersgetabadname
  • Score: -1

6:19pm Wed 12 Feb 14

Mukkin says...

Badgersgetabadname says

Maybe it was a busy day and didnt have time to check details. The weather has been bad and those road works....disaster. I am sure one of these highly valid reasons will indicated the holes in the above article.

Absolutely, after all it's only a newspaper, let's not worry about fact and detail :-D
Badgersgetabadname says Maybe it was a busy day and didnt have time to check details. The weather has been bad and those road works....disaster. I am sure one of these highly valid reasons will indicated the holes in the above article. Absolutely, after all it's only a newspaper, let's not worry about fact and detail :-D Mukkin
  • Score: 2

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree