Question

WTF are you actually asking here?

Start with a short course in punctuation, and then rewrite the above in comprehensible ENGLISH.

IANAL

Sounds like one for uk.legal to me

I wouldn't have thought he'd be able to do this for several reasons though:

• the damage that would be left behind
• the grant was provided at that specific property

It poses a couple more questions tbh, like was he honest in his grant application - did he present his "case" as though he owned the property himself ?

Has this "strip out" work already happened, or is the tenant threatening to do it ?

Depending on how long it's been installed, it may be the older non- condensing type, which afaik is now pretty much illegal to fit to a standard property unless there are specific reasons why one can't be used.

There will be no damage other than the rad pipes sticking up through the floor. Basically another system could be installed if need be.

Nope,he was honest and stated it was Private Landlord but using his disability to aquire it on honest terms.

Nope it hasn't evolved,but would like an anwser to whether its his or PL's?

Its a Combi Boiler fitted in the bathroom.

Tsk! Mr Wilson doesn't have a problem.

Why on earth would anybody want to do that?

Good question? but it might be another property he's moving to hasn't got CH?

The tenant wants out, and wants to take "his" central heating system with him...

Probaly,as won't be eligable again for gov grant again.

Mmmm.... but the cost of deinstalling carefully probably approaches the cost of new equipment.

The apostophes are the operative thing here.

Apart from the practicalities, the intent is to upgrade the property not the individual.

Plus the cost of re-installing the old kit which is (a) probably not allowed anyway as it will be effectively installing a new boiler which doesn't meet modern requirements; and (b) would need to be done totally above board by a CORGI to keep the landlord happy and fulfil requirements for letting in the future - so no chance of a cheap diy job in case that's what the OP was considering.

It would also be necessary to make good the whole property exactly as it was when it was rented, which would probably be a pretty tall order I suspect; the OP would be liable for any costs incurred by the landlord in so doing.

Obviously this is a totally daft idea. Let me guess - the landlord and tenant are not on speaking terms here, right?

David

Quite so there is a spectrum of what are movable assets and what are fixed. The heating system of a building is somewhere between and around the light switches and floor boards end.

Did the tenant directly contribute to the costs of the system? It was only the tenants in asmuch as it belonged to the building the tenant was in.

So are you saying that it was the "tenant" who applied for and got the CH under some scheme . Did he tell lies to do this and if so why on earth would someone install CH in a property he did not own .?

The way you have worded the above is a bit confuddling !!!

No. The grant is made to the property, not the individual - the individual can get another grant when you move house.

EAGA give grants out for various insulation measures and now CH - these are given out to *everyone* who qualifies by being on certain types of benefit - it doesn't matter who owns the house, be it privately owned, council or private landlord.

Wrong Phillip,the name goes on the register for grants of this ilk with details of that persons disability facts and they do ask for a previous address.

Is that not the scheme where you need to be at least aged 60. It was run in Scotland by EAGA but now BG run it . It's a Scottish Exective C/Heating Programme up here . CH has been included as well as insulation for a number of years.