4 years of late fees, no notice

[Poemandres]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Pennsylvania

Hello, and thank you in advance for your help.

I've lived in the same apartment for 4 years. Called the office a few times when the heat wasn't working, had a problem with a water leak, and received letters notifying me of lease renewals and rent increases (yearly lease). That is the entirety of the communication between the landlord and myself.

Today I was informally notified by the superintendent and the office secretary that I have $1400 in late fees that have accrued over the years, and I will need to work out a payment. The lease does specify a 10% late fee if payments are made after the 5th of the month, and I am currently in the middle of my lease.

Here is my question: what obligations does the landlord have to notify me of late payments? I had no idea that my rent was being delivered late (mailed checks), and have never received a phone call, letter, or email about this. There were a couple of occasions where I legitimately forgot to mail the check, they called me, and I sent in another check with the due late fees separately. It seems incredibly wrong to never contact me for four years about this issue, and then attempt to collect it all at once right when he's renovating my floor. My lease isn't even up for another 9 months.

Is there any way I can fight this? Based on my research Pennsylvania law is not very good with protecting tenants, but the late fee is supposed to cover the cost of collecting rent, and he never had to put any effort into collecting it.

 

[Gail in Georgia]

Suggest to them that their acceptance of your rent for four years without a whimper of a complaint of late fees would show a court that they have accepted such rent while both waiving any fees and beginning any process of eviction for failure to pay the full rent AND late fees. In addition, you'll be more than happy to have the legal system decide the matter should it come to this.

Gail

P.S. From now on put the rent money in the mail early enough to avoid the late fee date.

 

[Poemandres]

Thank you for that, Gail. That is actually part of what makes this so upsetting: I switched banks a few months ago (to Ally), and they offer free bill pay services. I got them to mail my checks to avoid the hassle, and they have been arriving the first day of every month consistently. Why has this now become a problem, after the problem has gone away entirely?

Do you (or anyone else) happen to know if the acceptance of the checks for four years legally implies a waiver of late fees, or is this simply a matter of dealing in good faith that a judge would take into account?

Thank you again for any help.

 

[latigo]

Suggest to them that their acceptance of your rent for four years without a whimper of a complaint of late fees would show a court that they have accepted such rent while both waiving any fees (?) and beginning any process of eviction for failure to pay the full rent AND late fees. In addition, you'll be more than happy to have the legal system decide the matter should it come to this.

With all due respect, it occurs to me that if you were truly professionally qualified you might know that this scenario has nothing to do with forbearance to demand payment of the late fee as constituting a WAIVER or FORGIVING of the landlord's legal right to do so. It contradicts the very essence of the post - the landlord is demanding that the OP pay the late fees!

What it does present is a question of whether or not the long delay on the part of the landlord now denies it the right to assert its legal claim to the late fees because of the equitable doctrine of ESTOPPEL BY LACHES!

The difference which seems to have escaped you is that if the OP pleads the defense of waiver, he would be put to the impossible task of proving such intent on the part of the landlord. Whereas under the defense of estoppel by laches, the legal right to the claim is admitted with the ultimate question being - is the landlord now precluded from asserting it?

 

[Poemandres]

Thank you latigo. This is exactly the sort of thing I was looking for. It also seems to be what Gail was saying, and you just provided me the legal term.

However, I still have a few questions. It seems that the "undue burden" in most cases of estoppel by laches involves difficulty in defending yourself in court. I've seen examples where all of the witnesses have died, or all of the paperwork is now gone, etc. Do you know of any cases where the "burden" or "prejudice" in the late claim is financial in nature?

The second that I found, and maybe one more relevant, is equitable estoppel. This, I believe, is what Gail was going for. The one court case I found was an alimony case, where the husband tried to claim his marriage was invalid because it was in Mexico, so he didn't owe alimony. The court ruled that being married for years, having kids, etc implied that both parties believed the marriage was valid (Lambertini v. Lambertini, 655 So. 2d 142). The only question is this: does a lease renewal imply satisfaction with the contract? Are there any examples of this in law? I can't find anything myself.

So I guess I need one or two pieces of information. Can I claim a financial burden due to the late claimancy via estoppel by laches, and does a lease renewal imply no breach of contract?

Thank you all again. You have been most helpful.

 

[single317dad]

I believe the "undue burden" in defending yourself against any complaint form the landlord in court would be that of retrieving your own records of those payments (mailing dates, proof of mailing if any, proof of purchase of money orders if any, copies of cancelled checks, personal journal records of your activities at the time, etc). The undue financial burden (e.g. you don't have the money to pay the bill) isn't a defense you want to employ.

Stand by for someone more learned than I to give you a more accurate answer though.

 

[Poemandres]

Thank you for that input.

I'm sorry if I was confusing. I meant extra financial burden in the sense that if I was notified 4 years ago, I would have known the checks were coming in late. Waiting until now means that I had no opportunity to correct the problem.

 

[latigo]

Thank you for that input.

I'm sorry if I was confusing. I meant extra financial burden in the sense that if I was notified 4 years ago, I would have known the checks were coming in late. Waiting until now means that I had no opportunity to correct the problem (!).

Well you have just nailed it! Because you are now so disadvantaged by the delay goes to the very essence of the doctrine of estoppel by laches!

Here is a brief line of case law authority from your state of Pennsylvania, but it is a universal principal:

"Laches is an equitable doctrine which bars relief when the complaining party is guilty of want of due diligence in failing to promptly institute the action to the prejudice of another.” Estate of Aiello, 993 A.2d 283, 287-88 (Pa. 2010); In re Estate of Devine, 910 A.2d 699, 702 (Pa.Super. 2006); Kern v. Kern, 892 A.2d 1, 9 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2005

And from Virginia: The doctrine of estoppel by laches is the neglect or omission to assert a right for an unreasonable and unexplained length of time, under circumstances prejudicial to an adverse party.McNeir v. McNeir, 178 Va. 285, 291 (Va. 1941)

 

[Poemandres]

Those are very helpful, thank you very much. I've scheduled a meeting with the landlord, and I will see if it is possible to reach an amenable agreement. Armed with all of this, I'm hopeful that I should be able to reach some compromise that everyone involved can accept. Thank you all for your help!