Quote Quoting johnsamashin
View Post
Thanks JK. The plumber repaired meaning they unclogged the toilet with a snake. According to the plumber he encountered resistance on the segment of the drain pipe that runs from the toilet bowl to the main drain pipe of the house. I.e. there was something big enough to clog the large diameter pipe and it was located in the section of pipe coming directly from the toilet and not from any other location in the house. The tenant denies that they placed anything in the toilet that could have clogged it. However they also had friends over that night. In my opinion it's pretty clear here that they clogged and are responsible for the clog. What isn't clear is who is responsible for the valve not working and leading to the overflow.
Sorry but nothing is clear based on what you’ve posted. As I stated before, who caused the clog is no more important than what actually caused the clog. To win in court you must prove your case. So far you cannot prove the tenants negligence or intentional acts caused the clog. Obviously the clog was caused due to the tenants use of the toilet. That does not mean they were negligent in their use if the toilet and as such, they would not be liable for the flood damages. The valve issue is a non-issue as it was not the proximate cause of the flood.

In addition, with nothing more than a snake being used, you can’t prove there isn’t a deficiency in the plumbing that was the underlying cause for the clog. For example; maybe a former tenant dropped a toothbrush down the toilet. Under typical use it never caused enough obstruction to cause a problem but that night where there were more users of the toilet and as such more toilet paper used. That could result in a more complete blockage and as such, caused the overflow.

Your simple argument that the tenants caused the blockage does not make them make them liable for the damages. The blockage must be due to negligence or malfeasance for them to be held liable.

If the plumber didn’t pull up any of the material causing the blockage, and it is a foreign material, I suspect you won’t win this case.