• You are viewing the forum as a Guest, please login (you can use your Facebook, Twitter, Google or Microsoft account to login) or register using this link: Log in or Sign Up

Aquarium Vs. Landlord

Hufsa said:
Im not sure this is the answer youre looking for @Worshiper but you can buy clips to put on the edge of rimless tanks that allow you to rest a cover on it. Your tank cannot have a vacuum sealed lid, if that is what the landlord is hoping for when he says a tight lid, there needs to be gaseous exchange. But a tank mostly covered by a lid with a few holes and minor openings will be perfectly ok. The humidity will deposit on the lid before the rest of the air makes its way out the holes, if that makes sense. We live in a very damp apartment, and I have to keep my tank covered for this reason. Leaving just one flap open will make the room noticeably humid, but a few small holes, no problem.
Click to expand...

Thanks Hufsa. I saw these online. I can only try. According to me no lid can be air tight for an aquarium with livestock so this may be the best option.
 
For a lid that looks tight, I would probably go with perspex, use a separate rectange piece(s) to go around your pipework if it's complicated. Then a panel over the top resting on the rim, with cut outs to overlap your rectangles. Then add a lip at the front (and optionally the two sides) only needs to be 1cm coming down. That will give you a pretty good fitting lid that doesn't look terrible and looks like it will do the job to a landlord. I wouldn't worried about accidentally sealing it too much, plenty of the kit tanks have well fitting lids or go back a few years glass cover panes with just small a notch for electrics with no issues. If you are really worried add an airline to circulate outside air in.
 
tam said:
For a lid that looks tight, I would probably go with perspex, use a separate rectange piece(s) to go around your pipework if it's complicated. Then a panel over the top resting on the rim, with cut outs to overlap your rectangles. Then add a lip at the front (and optionally the two sides) only needs to be 1cm coming down. That will give you a pretty good fitting lid that doesn't look terrible and looks like it will do the job to a landlord. I wouldn't worried about accidentally sealing it too much, plenty of the kit tanks have well fitting lids or go back a few years glass cover panes with just small a notch for electrics with no issues. If you are really worried add an airline to circulate outside air in.
Click to expand...
Thanks Tam. I have been looking at perspex sheets for lids. There's a shop on ebay that cuts, shapes and polishes them so be worth having a chat with them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tam
Hi
I will be reluctant to use Perspex or acrylic as a lid.
If not thick enough it can warp(spelling)/bend from the moisture and its own weight.It really dislikes moisture when used as lid.
I rather have glass covers.
Regards Konstantin
 
Worshiper said:
bit of mould due to an incorrectly fixed door(draft coming through the gaps).
Click to expand...

A question that comes to mind is, where is the mould? I guess it will be somewhere in/on a plastered wall.

I suspect this gap under the door unlikely will be the cause and probably neither is your open-top tank. It would be advisable to consult a construction professional and let them have a look. Or get a cheap moisture meter to detect the % of moisture in the wall(s)... On average the acceptable percentage of moisture in a wall should be between 5% and 12% anything higher is a concern and requires some investigation.

Anyway, a draft is actually a form of ventilation that usually prevents the development of mould. Thus mould is more likely caused by bad ventilation, if this would be from evaporating water in the house condensing on the wall then the wall should be rather dripping wet. A heated fish tank with 100 litres volume maybe evaporate 1 litre per day on averagely. That ain't that much compared with the volume of the room it is in and unlike to be enough to get the walls wet in a sufficient ventilated house.

But rising dampness in the walls from groundwater or a wall that has no cavity and has driving rain hitting it or another leak from above will soak and stay wet long term. And this is the most common recipe for mould development.

The landlord most likely knows this already, not willing to fix it and the easy way out if he gets the chance is to disguise it and use the tenant as a lightning rod. Not that i want to jump to conclusions, but at least ask a professional second opinion before you put the blame on yourself.
 
Last edited:
I am both a hobbyist and I own apartment buildings and single-family rentals; I have had extensive water damage to buildings in the past. I can see both sides of this discussion and I would have to know and trust the tenant well before allowing an aquarium. That said I think the landlord is being petty about the mold and should do mitigation, one aquarium is not going to cause mold.
 
zozo said:
A question that comes to mind is, where is the mould? I guess it will be somewhere in/on a plastered wall.

I suspect this gap under the door unlikely will be the cause and probably neither is your open-top tank. It would be advisable to consult a construction professional and let them have a look. Or get a cheap moisture meter to detect the % of moisture in the wall(s)... On average the acceptable percentage of moisture in a wall should be between 5% and 12% anything higher is a concern and requires some investigation.

Anyway, a draft is actually a form of ventilation that usually prevents the development of mould. Thus mould is more likely caused by bad ventilation, if this would be from evaporating water in the house condensing on the wall then the wall should be rather dripping wet. A heated fish tank with 100 litres volume maybe evaporate 1 litre per day on averagely. That ain't that much compared with the volume of the room it is in and unlike to be enough to get the walls wet in a sufficient ventilated house.

But rising dampness in the walls from groundwater or a wall that has no cavity and has driving rain hitting it or another leak from above will soak and stay wet long term. And this is the most common recipe for mould development.

The landlord most likely knows this already, not willing to fix it and the easy way out if he gets the chance is to disguise it and use the tenant as a lightning rod. Not that i want to jump to conclusions, but at least ask a professional second opinion before you put the blame on yourself.
Click to expand...
I agree Zozo. The landlord has finally said that they arent blaming the tank but looking for all options to be considered. I think this is fair tbh as its their property.
They will get a new door fixed with trickly vents which will defo help. I am happy if the lid solution keeps them happy and I can keep the tank. Considering theres dialogue happening between both of us we can surely come up with some sort of win win outcome. Just being optimistic as I have another 6 months on the contract and will move after that as I know this isnt the last I have heard about the tank Im sure ☹.
 
Worshiper said:
The landlord has finally said that they arent blaming the tank but looking for all options to be considered.
Click to expand...

A common slumlord characteristic is to have a look around to find arguments to downplay and redirect their own responsibilities... In our country, we call them literally translated House Milkers. I guess it's a worldwide issue since about every language has a slang term for the same practices.

Worshiper said:
I think this is fair tbh as its their property.
Click to expand...
Indeed the argument to minimize the risk of constructional water damage to the property is a valid argument. In case of an unfortunate accident, 100 litres of water can cause a lot of significant damage. I'm not sure if you can take insurance to cover the risks in the aquarium hobby. Most insurance companies are worst than slumlords and promise you the moon and then when the sh%t hits the fan they have rather a lot lower case characters in their clause saying something different. I guess that's also a worldwide issue, with insurance companies you are at risk only to be assured of running into a wall of contradictions when you need them.
 
A short story comes to mind that happened last year about 6 months ago a mile away down hill from my place. An older couple did spend their lifetime pension savings to buy a monumental old water mill and rebuild it into a B&B. Not long after they were done rebuilding the unfortunate happened.

Schermafbeelding 2022-02-01 114912.jpg
They thought they had assurance against water damage and made the claim... But the insurance company said, No, because one overlooked word was added in the clause, that stated damage created by "Vertical" water. And this damage obviously is from "Horizontal" water.
Sorry invalid claim, they got ZIP!?... Pension savings are gone and left with an estimated €150.000 damage. Now they have to go to court to dispute the insurance companies vertical water interpretation.

Only one word says they were only insured for water damage from a leaking roof while it rains. Sorry, all other options are not covered.
 
Last edited:
zozo said:
A short story comes to mind that happened last year about 6 months ago a mile away down hill from my place. An older couple did spend their lifetime pension savings to buy a monumental old water mill and rebuild it into a B&B. Not long after they were done rebuilding the unfortunate happened.

View attachment 181242
They thought they had assurance against water damage and made the claim... But the insurance company said, No, because one overlooked word was added in the clause, that stated only damage created by "Vertical" water. And this damage obviously is from "Horizontal" water.
Sorry invalid claim, they got ZIP!?... Pension savings are gone and left with an estimated €150.000 damage. Now they have to go to court to dispute the insurance companies vertical water interpretation.

Only one word says they were only insured for water damage from a leaking roof while it rains. Sorry, all other options are not covered.
Click to expand...
I briefly worked for a car insurance broker and this is so true. The brokers are salespeople that just want to get their commission by selling. But the companies never pay out in event of an accident!

On another note when I looked at the pic I just thought if it was my landlord he wouldve said that a leak in the aquarium may have caused that flooding 😂
 
zozo said:
A short story comes to mind that happened last year about 6 months ago a mile away down hill from my place. An older couple did spend their lifetime pension savings to buy a monumental old water mill and rebuild it into a B&B. Not long after they were done rebuilding the unfortunate happened.

View attachment 181242
They thought they had assurance against water damage and made the claim... But the insurance company said, No, because one overlooked word was added in the clause, that stated damage created by "Vertical" water. And this damage obviously is from "Horizontal" water.
Sorry invalid claim, they got ZIP!?... Pension savings are gone and left with an estimated €150.000 damage. Now they have to go to court to dispute the insurance companies vertical water interpretation.

Only one word says they were only insured for water damage from a leaking roof while it rains. Sorry, all other options are not covered.
Click to expand...
They should go public with a statement about the insurance companys ridicoulus way of rejecting a genuine claim and put it out there and the company would lose more than the money they should have payed out. Anything like Resolver or Martin Lewis website in your country @zozo
 
PARAGUAY said:
They should go public with a statement about the insurance companys ridicoulus way of rejecting a genuine claim and put it out there and the company would lose more than the money they should have payed out. Anything like Resolver or Martin Lewis website in your country @zozo
Click to expand...

As far as I know, it went public in regional sources I guess yet it ain't conclusive enough to go public nationally. There also is crowdfunding going on to give the victims the first start and a helping hand in redecorating the place. But the €15.000 collected at the time is just a drop on a hot plate.

At the time the lawyers are still busy with a tug of war. It's again a typical case of jurisprudence and hiding behind the interpretation of one simple word... But never the less it is disheartening especially for a hard-working older couple losing everything overnight and on top of that the insurance company is giving them a hard time to get rightfully compensated. Insurance companies are all sneaky backstabbing crooks and will try and do everything not to pay up if they see the slightest chance to avoid it. As said above you will most likely be assured to end up with headage when you need them.

I guess it will be a lengthy tug of war that ends up in a settlement to get only partially refunded. They will brut force them to agree with less or go to court which takes much longer (years). The insurance company has a much longer breath than an already devastated older couple.
 
Some years ago a chap told me of the property company were for years he paid his annual groundrent to had sent him a letter saying he had to have building/contents insurance with their recommended company. As he used a reputable company for years he wondered why? On checking internet we found they had become part invested / owners with their recommended of insurer. So they were forcing him use them without being transparent about their interest. Conversation with the gov.uk and then Gov Leasehold authority and advised they couldn't force him to do that so told the property company were to go and written apology followed . Sneaky treatment but how many houseowners got similar letters and changed thinking they had to? The old adage true here all they want is your money
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top