Landlord took avantage of tenant

[Datman07]

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

My girlfriend had entered into a lease agreement with a landlord who lives cross country. The lease required her to pay for upkeep on the house since he lived so far away. Is this legal? or did he circumvent the law by doing this? Dosen't seem right since the house is 40 years old and things would start to break down.

Another quick question...She recently moved out of the house and upon inspection the landlord claimed that there were damages to the house that they are solely blaming on her. For example, water damage in the bathroom (Please note there is no type of ventalition in the bathroom and the walls get soaked with water vapor from the shower). He also claimed damage to the furnace (Please note that the landlord still kept posession of the basement where the furnace was located, this area was separate from the rest of the house). Does she have any kind of argument regarding her security deposit? or should she just walk away?

Thanks for taking the time to read!

 

[Gail in Georgia]

"Upkeep" on the house is a pretty broad statement.

Have the girlfriend post here, providing specific details on what the lease stated.

Same issue with specific water damage to the walls and the furnace damage.

Gail

 

[Datman07]

"Upkeep" on the house is a pretty broad statement.

Have the girlfriend post here, providing specific details on what the lease stated.

Same issue with specific water damage to the walls and the furnace damage.

Gail

I told her to ask for an itemized list of damages from the lanlord and will post if we get it in a timely manner. But as far as the "upkeep", she was supposedly responsible for any and all repairs while she was there according to the lease.

 

[Datman07]

I'm guessing that because it was a signed agreement between the two that it is technically valid, but just seems a bit on the shady side seeing as it is a house that was built in the 1960's and the house is going to have things breakdown over time. It has always been my understanding that the owner is responsible for types of things granted there is no blatant misuse. From the repairs that she has paid for, basicaly the landord got free repairs/upgrades at her expense with no reduction in rent.

Below is info I just recieved from her regarding repairs she has paid for (that she can remember off hand):

Um well there was issue with hose froze and water got baked up and came through to neighbor basement, so he charged me for that repair.said it was my fault for not winterizing the spigits. The frozen hose debacle cost around $200 for parts and labor

Will post more if she can remember...

Below is the actual agreement regarding repairs:

He said basically up to $300 I was responsible for then after that he would step in

 

[Banned_Princess]

Well, look at it this way SHE SIGNED THAT AGREEMENT, so what makes you think you can all ofd the sudden question it?


I didnt read anything that was against any of your states laws, but I have not looked.

Maybe you should, here is a link.


http://www.dhcd.virginia.gov/HomelessnesstoHomeownership/PDFs/Landlord_Tenant_Handbook.pdf


Please pay special attention as to whether or not your GF's place is even covered by the Act.

 

[atomizer]

It is not unusual for certain repairs to be taken up by the tenant. Obviously your gf did not have an issue with the agreement at lease signing. That is because she was willing to gamble that nothing would break down. Regardless the repair you question appeared to have occurred through negligence on her part and not due to the age of the house.

 

[Datman07]

Well, look at it this way SHE SIGNED THAT AGREEMENT, so what makes you think you can all ofd the sudden question it?


I didnt read anything that was against any of your states laws, but I have not looked.

Maybe you should, here is a link.


http://www.dhcd.virginia.gov/HomelessnesstoHomeownership/PDFs/Landlord_Tenant_Handbook.pdf



Please pay special attention as to whether or not your GF's place is even covered by the Act.

I'm just trying asking out of curiousity at this point, but already believe she enterred into a bad lease agreement. Thanks for the link! I actually found the following verbage:

B. The landlord shall perform the duties imposed by subsection A in accordance with law;
however, the landlord shall only be liable for the tenant's actual damages proximately caused by the landlord's failure to exercise ordinary care.

The way i'm reading that, if the landlord failed to tell her that by not performing certain preventative maintenance actions, the damage liability would fall squarely on the landlord. Am I reading that right? For instance, with the water situation. If he did not tell her to/how to winterize the spiquets(sp), as it may not be common knowledge), then the landlord would be liable for the damages that occured?

I'm also assuming the same would go for the furnace if she was not told to/how to change with filters regularly?

 

[Datman07]

I also found the following verbage in addition:

D. The landlord and tenant may agree in writing that the tenant perform the landlord's duties specified in subdivisions 3, 6 and 7 of subsection A and also specified repairs, maintenance tasks, alterations and remodeling, but only if the transaction is entered into in good faith and not for the purpose of evading the obligations of the landlord, and if the agreement does not diminish or affect the obligation of the landlord to other tenants in the
premises.

So if i'm reading that right, that means the landlord can not make the tenant pay for damages to the house just because they lived there and it happened "under their watch" so to speak? Can somebody verify that?

 

[atomizer]

No, use missed the whole point. Regardless, being that this is Virginia, it may not apply to your LL. In this case the tenant is reponsible for repairs over 300.00 again this is a common agreement clause.

 

[atomizer]

I'm just trying asking out of curiousity at this point, but already believe she enterred into a bad lease agreement. Thanks for the link! I actually found the following verbage:



The way i'm reading that, if the landlord failed to tell her that by not performing certain preventative maintenance actions, the damage liability would fall squarely on the landlord. Am I reading that right? For instance, with the water situation. If he did not tell her to/how to winterize the spiquets(sp), as it may not be common knowledge), then the landlord would be liable for the damages that occured?

I'm also assuming the same would go for the furnace if she was not told to/how to change with filters regularly?

As an adult, if there is something you don't know you pick up the phone and ask.

 

[Datman07]

As an adult, if there is something you don't know you pick up the phone and ask.

I understand, but not sure if that is a valid answer. I say this because the furnace was located in the basement which he still had posession of and not included as part of the rental property.

 

[Banned_Princess]

I understand, but not sure if that is a valid answer. I say this because the furnace was located in the basement which he still had posession of and not included as part of the rental property.

Are you sure your GF's place even falls under the VA LL TEN act?

Thats should be the first thing you need to find out.

Then after you have made sure the property falls under the act, then you can use what you have learned, and negotiate with the LL. He might just want to let her out of the lease, if she keeps trying to make sure everything is legal...



Maybe your GF should just leave ASAP when the lease is over, and make sure she READS and UNDERSTANDS everythng about the lease BEFORE signing it!!

 

[atomizer]

Are you sure your GF's place even falls under the VA LL TEN act?

!

Glad to see someone finally understands what Cvillecpm was trying to convey..

 

[Banned_Princess]

Glad to see someone finally understands what Cvillecpm was trying to convey..

Well, I did say that with the link in the first place, I just thought I would mention it again, it is very important.

 

[divona2000]

...He said basically up to $300 I was responsible for then after that he would step in...

...In this case the tenant is reponsible for repairs over 300.00 again this is a common agreement clause.

Tenant is (apparently) only responsible for the first $300 in repairs.