Common electric part of tenant's meter ~ tenant knew and is specified in the lease.

[PixelRogue]

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

Hello everyone,

Thank you for your legal insight on the matter... hope this is not too lengthy....

Background
Tenant liked the apartment. I explain that the common/house electric for the building is tied to the electric meter of that apartment. The tenant of that unit is responsible for the common electric. The building was old and was the way the electric was set up long before I even purchased the building. The tenant was aware that the common electric was on that account, and there was a significant discount provided in the rent to cover that electric usage. Terms of the common electric were written into the signed lease.

Year later, tenant decided to renew the lease and negotiated a discount (based on costs it would take to re-rent the apartment). All is fine.

Few months later, tenant then asked to leave. Tenant understood, and signed a related document, the exit procedures & responsibilities and I started to work to get the apartment re-rented. Also explained it will be challenging to re-rent the apartment in the colder months. Over time tenant got more frustrated, actively worked against efforts to have the apartment re-rented, and looks for any excuse to call the lease invalid.

Tenant found me working at another apartment and proceeded to yell at the top of the tenant's lungs so other tenants would here... and has gone as far as calling in the utility company in to inspect the building for 'foreign wiring' on that account - even though this was not only verbally explained but also captured in the lease. Naturally the utility company saw that public electric was part to that account, called it foreign wiring... will learn more this week when speaking to the utility company.

Now, as mentioned, the tenant continues to go out the way to make life difficult, not honor signed agreements and does everything in their power to prevent the apartment from being re-rented. I keep a crazy busy schedule, have much more important things to do when the tenant is behaving in such a manner and preventing me from helping the tenant out of the lease. Would prefer to just pull the apartment from the market; truly a ridiculous situation.

Unknown
The tenant continues to look for loopholes, clauses, situations that will invalidate the lease or lease terms. The lease states "$XX.00 discount for the house electric." The house electric includes public lighting and a coin operated washer/dryer which was explained when the tenant moved in...and ironically there was never an issue with any of this until after the tenant decided they would like to break the lease. The tenant now claims he was not aware the washer/dryer were included on the electric account. The washer/dryer get little use and are provided as a convenience. Hardly any revenue is generated, and I even offered the few coins to the tenant just as a 'Hey, there is no money being made here and here... you take it ... just so there is less drama and problems.'

Current State
Tenant provided an ultimatum of either a) paying significant funds to the tenant and let the tenant leave the lease early - or - b) Tenant will remains in the apartment for as long as possible without paying rent. "You will have to drag me out of that place if you don't repay your debt."

Tenant states January rent is in escrow but has not provided any details about the escrow - I can not validate. I do not want unhappy tenants, honest just want people who like the environment and want to stay. At the same time, leases are leases and I will do what I can to help tenants out of a lease but this is ridiculous. I've been cordial, professional... even as the tenant yells at the top of their lungs cursing...but am about at the end of patience.

Questions
When the lease was signed, there was just me, the tenant and a co-signer. The lease states the discount for the house electric. House electric was verbally explained yet the items of the house electric were not specifically written in the lease. The tenant (and likely co-signer) will state they were not aware of the coin-operated washer/dryer. Nothing changed in the set-up since the tenant moved in two years back... washer/dryer were not added. Nothing was ever hidden from the tenant.

Situation will likely go to court as the tenant maintains unrealistic expectations. What impact will the coin operated washer/dryer have on the situation?

Any insight would be appreciated. Thank you once again...

 

[justalayman]

How is the total electric cost divided among the total tenants and common areas?
or is it simply that they pay the total electric costs on top of their rent and the others (tenants or common areas) are not charged?

 

[justalayman]

the law regarding the issue:

(765 ILCS 735/1.2) (from Ch. 80, par. 62.2)
Sec. 1.2. Certain tenant-paid utility payment arrangements prohibited; Notice of change in payment arrangement.
(a) No landlord shall rent or cause to be rented any unit in which the tenant is responsible by agreement, implication, or otherwise for direct payment for utility service to the utility company and in which the utility company billing for that service includes any service to common areas of the building or other units or areas used or occupied by persons other than the individual tenant and those occupying the unit with the tenant on the utility account, unless, before offering an initial lease or a renewal lease, accepting a security deposit, or otherwise entering into an agreement with the prospective tenant to let the premises:
(1) The landlord provides the prospective tenant with

a written statement setting forth the specific areas of the building and any appurtenances that are served by the meter that will be in the tenant's name and the nature of the utility uses of those areas, including any that have not been reflected in past utility company billings but that may arise (such as the rental of a neighboring unit that has been vacant, the installation of washers and driers in the basement, or the use of the garage for mechanics);
(2) The landlord provides the prospective tenant with

copies of the utility bills for the unit for the previous 12 months, unless waived by the tenant in writing;
(3) The landlord neither suggests nor requires the

tenant to collect any money for utility bills from neighboring tenants whose utility usage will be reflected in the prospective tenant's utility company billings; and
(4) The landlord sets forth in writing the amount of

the proposed rent reduction, if any, that is offered to compensate for the tenant's payments for utility usage outside of the tenant's unit.
(b) No landlord shall request or cause to be effected a change (i) from landlord-paid master metered utilities to tenant-paid individually metered utilities or (ii) from landlord-paid to tenant-paid utilities, regardless of the metering arrangement, during the term of a lease. The landlord shall provide a minimum of 30 days notice to each affected tenant before effecting such a change in service; for tenants under a lease, the notice shall be provided to the tenants no less than 30 days before the expiration of the lease term. This subsection does not prohibit the landlord and tenant from agreeing to amend the lease to effect such a change; the amendment must be in writing and subscribed by both parties.
(c) Any term or condition in a rental agreement between the landlord and the tenant that is inconsistent with this Section is void and unenforceable.
(d) Nothing in this Section affects the relationship between a utility company and its customers.
(Source: P.A. 87-178.)

(765 ILCS 735/1.3) (from Ch. 80, par. 62.3)
Sec. 1.3. Tenant remedies and burdens of proof.
(a) A residential tenant shall be entitled to recover damages from the landlord for the utility bills rendered in the tenant's name as a result of the landlord's violation of this Act and which the landlord has not paid to the utility company. The tenant shall have the burden of establishing that the tenant was billed for utility service as a result of the landlord's violation of this Act. Upon proof by the tenant that the tenant was billed an amount for service not attributable to the unit or premises occupied by the tenant, the landlord shall be liable to the tenant for 100% of those utility bills. However, this sum shall be reduced by whatever percentage of use that the court finds that the landlord has established to have been attributable to the unit or premises the tenant occupied during the period that the violation continued. The tenant may recover these damages by an action at law or by a counterclaim in any action brought by the landlord against the tenant. The court may treble the damage award when the court finds that the landlord's violation of this Act was knowing or intentional. The tenant may also recover costs and fees, including attorneys fees, if the amount awarded by the court for utility service is in excess of $3,000. The remedies contained in this Act do not limit or supersede any remedies the tenant may have under a lease, contract, or the laws, including the common law, of this State.
(b) This Section shall be prospective in application; the remedies shall not attach to any violation that occurred before July 1, 1992.
(c) Nothing in this Section affects the relationship between a utility company and its customers.
(Source: P.A. 87-178; 87-895.)

 

[PixelRogue]

Is is cost divided?

How is the total electric cost divided among the total tenants and common areas?
or is it simply that they pay the total electric costs on top of their rent and the others (tenants or common areas) are not charged?

All tenant utilities are separated. That said, the public house electricity is the responsibility of the tenant and part of what is metered for that unit. Tenant was aware, discounts provided, situation written into the lease.

 

[PixelRogue]

the law regarding the issue:

Thank you for the information. Here is what I'm seeing:

� Tenant was aware prior to entering agreement.
� Common electric was verbally explained and written into the lease "$$ Discount for House Electric". Service points were not individually specified in writing.
� Nothing was added to the tenants electrical network. Everything is the same now as it has been since the tenant moved in.
� Requests for copies of the bills from the utility company have been denied as I was not the account holder. Will renew efforts.
� Rent reduction is written into the original lease. A second reduction provided starting year two.

No efforts were made to deceive tenant nor hide common electric. Discounts applied have been generous.

 

[FarmerJ]

if your lease specifies the discounted amount (xx.00 per month) then Id say to send the tenant certified mail that you would be happy to pay repay them the last two years of the electric use as long as they sign a agreement that states that they forfeit ALL the discounted months they have had with you and agree to pay that sum. Up to you , but if that lease spelled out the discounted amount , If tenant says NO then i guess Id tell this tenant lets take it to court where I will ask the court for full credit of the discounts every month on your rent if I agree to pay ALL the months of electricity you were billed for. AND if tenant hasnt paid rent file for eviction any way but go into the eviction hearing with enough money to settle it on the spot , encourage that there is no reason to drag it out . Tenant may decide that the discount per month on rent was enough and drop it. HINT get either a house meter and panel for house installed OR submeter if you dont want to spend that much then include the elect in the next lease but spell out set fees x amount per month window ac , x amount for additional freezer , and forbid the use of electric space heaters You say you dont have alot of time to deal with this, well I know from having rental units in the past that the courts wont care what your schedule is like , nor does any one in inspections .

 

[xylene]

It seems like breaking the tenants you know -whats over wanting to get out of the lease was a costly mistake of time and money that will probably wind up with you rewiring and going to court.




This over not collecting rent for maybe a month.

 

[PixelRogue]

Curious:

According to the law stated below (765 ILCS 735/1.2) (from Ch. 80, par. 62.2) and (765 ILCS 735/1.3) (from Ch. 80, par. 62.3), having a tenant responsible for common electric is legal, provided the landlord follows the outlined certain procedures.

According to the utility company, a tenant is not responsible for common electric (with or without those procedures), sighting Section 1529.1(b) of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Code, 66 Pa. C.S. 1529.1).
• http://dornish.net/a-change-in-the-interpretatation-of-1529-1-of-the-public-utility-code-beneficial-to-landlords

•http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol28/28-44/1794.html

 

[Ohiogal]

Curious:

According to the law stated below (765 ILCS 735/1.2) (from Ch. 80, par. 62.2) and (765 ILCS 735/1.3) (from Ch. 80, par. 62.3), having a tenant responsible for common electric is legal, provided the landlord follows the outlined certain procedures.

According to the utility company, a tenant is not responsible for common electric (with or without those procedures), sighting Section 1529.1(b) of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Code, 66 Pa. C.S. 1529.1).

It could be legal but you didn't do everything required to make it so: 1) you didn't spell out the areas electric covered in writing; 2) you didn't provide 12 months of utility bills PRIOR to the signing of the lease and the tenant did not waive such.

Hence you are in breach of the law and therefore making your tenant pay common electric is not legal. Those bills needed provided BEFORE tenant signed the lease.

 

[PixelRogue]

Understood your point.... I was not aware and will take actions to correct.

The question about the legality is that the utility company is stating that is not legal - meaning - that for the next tenant having 12 months of bills, specifying in writing (etc) would not matter, it would not be acceptable. The two laws contradict and which would take precedence in court? The law stating it is legal provided the conditions were met, or that is it is not legal in any way?

 

[justalayman]

ok, not sure how I did it but I cited Illinois law here. Ignore the law I posted.


I have to go look for some PA law. I'll be back.


My apologies.

 

[PixelRogue]

Thank you for clarifying. I have not located additional information on the matter.

 

[PixelRogue]

It seems like breaking the tenants you know -whats over wanting to get out of the lease was a costly mistake of time and money that will probably wind up with you rewiring and going to court.




This over not collecting rent for maybe a month.

Not following? The moment the tenant asked to leave the lease I put it on the market to re-rent. Very standard for the industry ~ not busting anyone's stones. On the other hand, the tenant has gone out of their way to break mine. Also would get in the way of most efforts to re-rent the unit including showings and no dates to plan and constantly changing their mind. Much longer than one month btw.

After reviewing the electric bills, turns out the tenant was getting free electric plus extra money each month. Disgruntled tenant looking for any loopholes to disqualify the lease rather than work together to re-rent.

Even after all of this aggressive behavior I'm still not busting stones and working professionally to resolve.

 

[FarmerJ]

No matter what you may not be able to get a happy solution for all, Id say one way to do this is to split it all up, If the tenant is not paying then by all means take them to court for non pay. In court if the tenants complaint about the electric comes up your free to say your are addressing it ( one way for sure that wont be as expensive is to just take over another tenants elect acct with you paying it then move the circuits that are outside of the complainers unit to the meter you pay, then by the time your in court with this tenant your able to literally tell the court this tenants meter supplies nothing else but the unit they live in then if tenant supplies you with copies of the bills you can come to a settlement with tenant which is separate matter and does not excuse them from not paying rent. Your not knowing the details of the law will never excuse you , but the court may grant you some leeway since you did give monthly discount to reduce the rent ( no way to know) Maybe you will get lucky n this tenant will make the judge mad over something dumb like coming into court with out ALL the rent money. ( you sure do not have to accept less than what the tenant owes but maybe if the tenant showed up with out rent the judge will refuse to hear any side issue and just order them out.