Water damage: from the tenant's report to a closed defect

The owners' association at Lindenstraße 12 in Leipzig has fourteen units. Flat 7 belongs to Mr Brandt, who lets it out, and Ms Yilmaz lives there. One Thursday evening she notices a dark patch on the bathroom ceiling. By Friday morning it has grown.

Without a shared system it goes roughly like this. Ms Yilmaz calls Mr Brandt, who is away on business. On Sunday he emails the management, who read it on Monday. The management calls Ms Yilmaz to get the photos she sent Mr Brandt by WhatsApp days ago. The plumber needs the tenant's phone number, and the owner of the flat above only learns about the damage from the plumber. When the insurer asks three months later when the damage was reported, someone searches four inboxes. The sections below follow the same case in Condomana.

Friday at 7:30: the report

Ms Yilmaz has her own login to the tenant portal; Mr Brandt invited her when he recorded the tenancy. Under Issues she describes the patch and attaches three photos. Up to five would be possible.

The issue goes to Mr Brandt first, because most of a tenant's issues concern the rented flat, such as the dripping tap or the sticking balcony door, and so they concern the landlord rather than the association. As long as an issue sits between tenant and landlord, the management does not see it, and the photos from inside her flat stay with him for now too.

Friday at 8:10: the landlord decides

Mr Brandt is notified and opens the issue in his portal under Tenant issues. In the same thread he tells Ms Yilmaz that he is dealing with it. If the organisation has AI switched on, he can have the reply drafted and then edit it.

A patch on a ceiling comes from above, though, either from the flat upstairs or from the riser pipe, and the riser is usually common property. That takes the damage beyond him and his tenant. Mr Brandt clicks Escalate to the management and writes an endorsement: "Patch growing since yesterday, probably a pipe above, please check urgently."

An issue can only be escalated with an endorsement. When it is, the very same issue moves on to the management; no duplicate is created and nobody retypes the report. The management sees the tenant's original report, her photos and Mr Brandt's reason. Ms Yilmaz is notified that her issue has been passed on, and carries on writing in her one thread.

Friday at 8:25: the management takes over

Thomas Reuter, the manager, receives the escalation as a notification, and the matter appears in the defect list.

If AI is switched on, Condomana has already prepared an assessment: category Plumbing / water, urgency High, and a pointer to a possible duplicate, because the owner of flat 10 reported a damp wall in the hallway on Wednesday. There is also a draft of a first reply. All of it appears as suggestions that Mr Reuter accepts or dismisses, and until he accepts something, the defect stays as it is.

The duplicate pointer helps him most. No keyword search finds two reports from two flats written in two different ways, and now he knows the cause very probably sits above both flats.

Contractor and sub-tasks

Mr Reuter assigns the plumbing firm from his contractor directory. Owners see only the company and trade on the defect; phone numbers and contact names stay within the team.

He sends the job straight from the defect, under Contractor jobs and quotes with Send job. The firm receives his text, the address, the unit and the photos Mr Reuter ticks, and nothing else. For the drying he wants two prices, so he uses Request quotes to send the same description to two firms, with a reply-by date. Each firm gets a personal link by email and needs no account. The plumber accepts and proposes an appointment, which Mr Reuter confirms; later the plumber posts an update with a photo of the opened pipe. The drying firms send an amount and a validity date. Mr Reuter awards the job to the cheaper one, and the other is told politely. Whatever comes back sits on the defect as an internal note. Owners see the progress in the status, but they do not see the haggling.

Water damage takes several separate steps, so Mr Reuter breaks it into sub-tasks. Each has its own status and, where needed, its own contractor:

• Locate and repair the leak (plumber)
• Dry out the structure (drying company)
• Restore the ceiling in flat 7 (painter)
• Report the claim to the building insurer (own team)

While a sub-task is still open, the main defect cannot be archived. That way the painter is not accidentally left over once the pipe is sealed.

He puts the insurance claim number and the price agreement into an internal note, which is never shown to owners. Anything the parties should know goes into the thread as an ordinary comment.

On site

In the afternoon Mr Reuter is in the building with the plumber. There is no signal in the basement, and Capture on site works anyway: he opened the page beforehand, photographs the wet section of pipe, and the photos upload as soon as he has signal again. The device itself strips the location data from the images.

Photos and files stay attached to the defect. A year from now it will still show what was broken and what was done.

Telling the building

Even after escalation, Ms Yilmaz's issue remains an issue of her flat, and the other owners do not see it. The building still needs to know, because on Monday the water will be off for two hours.

So Mr Reuter writes an announcement and marks it urgent, which sends every owner with portal access an email straight away. Ticking also visible to residents puts it in the tenants' portal as well. With AI switched on, he can have the text drafted and translated into each recipient's portal language.

A timeline that only moves forward

A defect's status moves in one direction only: Open, In progress, Handled. It does not jump back, and nobody rewrites afterwards when work started and when it finished. Whoever follows the defect hears about every status change.

Behind this is a question of liability. In Germany the association owes a duty of care (Verkehrssicherungspflicht) for the common property, which in practice the manager discharges. When someone later asks when you knew about the damage and when you acted, what counts is a record that cannot be changed.

The invoice

Three weeks later the plumber's invoice arrives. Mr Reuter books it and links the booking on the defect under Costs. The defect now shows what it cost, and the accounts show what the money was spent on. In the annual settlement the expense is apportioned like any other, by its cost type's distribution key.

He marks the defect handled. Ms Yilmaz sees the status in her portal, Mr Brandt in his. Fourteen days later the defect list proposes archiving it.

What Condomana does not do here

Condomana does not file the insurance claim for you and does not hire a contractor on its own initiative; you send the job. Triage proposes, and the decision stays with you. Whether a pipe is common or individual property is something your declaration of division tells you, not the software.

The essentials

• The tenant reports once, with photos, and keeps a single thread to the end.
• The landlord filters: what concerns the flat stays with him, and what concerns the association he escalates with a reason.
• The management gets the whole context, with report, photos, endorsement and possible duplicates, where it used to get a phone call.
• The timeline holds: when you knew and when you acted can be shown later.