[RPPTL LandTen] Who is responsible for replacement of air conditioning unit when the lease is silent except for tenant's duty to maintain?

Wed Oct 9 08:04:48 PDT 2013

Harry, I assume that you are referring to the residential lease setting.  I think Chip's inquiry relates to a non-residential lease and I think the analysis is different in that arena.

Sent from my iPad

On Oct 9, 2013, at 11:02 AM, "Heist, Weisse & Wolk" <harry at evict.com<mailto:harry at evict.com>> wrote:

I don’t have anything to base this on but I feel it is the landlord's responsibility unless it is made the tenant's in the lease.

I tell my clients that if they want to make something the tenant's responsibility or disclaim responsibility for repairs or replacements, they need to make this clear in the lease.

Some items which become real problems and are often not addressed in the lease:
1. The pool heater (just had this situation, cost the owner $2000)
2. A window A/C (very commonly found in the Florida room)
3. A/C
4. The extra fridge/freezer in the garage (see it all the time)
5. The gas grill plumbed to the big LP tank
6. The Jacuzzi tub (huge money to repair due to tiling issues)
7. Irrigation system (just had this situation with one of my houses, cost me $800)

My feeling is based on how judges seem to rule. If it is on the property and was not specifically excluded, it needs to work even if it is not a landlord responsibility in the law. More of a contract/implied merchantability thing.

I have absolutely no law to back it up. It just seems to be the attitude judges take so I am going to go with that.

Harry

LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website:  www.evict.com<http://www.evict.com/>
Email: harry at evict.com<mailto:harry at evict.com>
THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY.  ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.

From: landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org> [mailto:landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Neil B. Shoter
Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2013 10:46 AM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Who is responsible for replacement of air conditioning unit when the lease is silent except for tenant's duty to maintain?

Chip, I think it’s opposite. Of course, it depends on your lease language (and if any statutes apply, i.e., residential), but I believe the traditional common law is that unless made a landlord obligation, the Tenant is responsible for repair/maintenance of its premises. This goes back to original common law where the landlord leased the premises and had no obligations at all.  There are probably cases on this, I will check if I have any.

Neil

<image001.jpg>

Neil B. Shoter
Partner / LEED Accredited Professional
________________________________
Shutts & Bowen LLP
CityPlace Tower, 525 Okeechobee Blvd, Suite 1100 | West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Direct: (561) 650-8535 | Fax: (561) 822-5525
E-Mail<mailto:NShoter at shutts.com> | Biography<http://www.shutts.com/attorneys-Neil-Shoter.html> | V-Card<http://www.shutts.com/vcard-181.vcf> | Website<http://www.shutts.com>

From: landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org> [mailto:landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Roland Waller
Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2013 10:32 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Who is responsible for replacement of air conditioning unit when the lease is silent except for tenant's duty to maintain?

Is the landlord responsible to replace air conditioning units if the lease is silent as to the responsibility?  Are there any cases on this?

I represent the tenant and have taken the position the lease spells out the responsibilities of the tenant.  If the lease does not require the tenant to do sometime then the landlord is responsible.

Thanks for any help

Roland "Chip" Waller
Waller & Mitchell
5332 Main Street
New Port Richey, FL 34652
Office: (727) 847-2288
Fax: (727) 848-4183
Email: roland.waller at rdwaller.com<mailto:roland.waller at rdwaller.com>
E-service: pleadings at rdwaller.com<mailto:pleadings at rdwaller.com>

The mission of Waller & Mitchell is to take a genuine interest in our clients, understand their objectives and meet or exceed their expectations in a timely manner.  We strive to provide superior legal services and maintain the highest standards of professional integrity.

From: landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org> [mailto:landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of James Zink
Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2013 10:08 AM
To: RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee
Subject: Re: [RPPTL LandTen] Strange but not uncommon scenario

I would say yes to both, unless there are other damages to the property. Can still come back and sue him/her later on if there are additional damages, but considering the language of the statute, it seems pretty strict as far as what you can keep.

James Zink, Esq.
Florida Rural Legal Services, Inc.
3111 South Dixie Highway, Suite 140
West Palm Beach, FL 33405
Phone: (561) 820-8902 x. 6025
Fax: (561) 820-8892

The information contained in this e-mail, including any attachment(s), is intended solely for use by the named addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, or a person designated as responsible for delivering such messages to the intended recipient, you are not authorized to disclose, copy, distribute or retain this message, in whole or in part, without written authorization from the sender.  If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately

From: landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org> [mailto:landten-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Heist, Weisse & Wolk
Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2013 1:48 PM
To: 'RPPTL Landlord Tenant Committee'
Subject: [RPPTL LandTen] Strange but not uncommon scenario

Rent is $500 a month. Tenant pays security deposit of $500 and a last month's rent of $500 OR, tenant pays an $800 security deposit and no last month's rent.

Tenant pays rent September 1 and breaks lease and vacates  September 15, 3 months into a 1 year lease.

Tenant has given written notice to break lease and gave his forwarding address.

30 day clock starts ticking on the Notice of Intention to Impose Claim.

Landlord has 30 days to send Notice of Intention to Impose Claim out.

On October 1, October rent is owed.  October 10, Landlord sends out Notice of Intention to Impose Claim.

Obviously, they can claim October rent of $500.

What happens to the last month's rent landlord is holding or any excess if the security deposit is $800?

Since acceleration is not a remedy and the remedies are set forth in the FS 83.595 and cannot be outside of this per the Equity/Yates Case of 2003, does the landlord have to return the last month's rent he is holding? Does he have to return the $300 if he had an $800 security deposit?

Harry

LAW OFFICES OF
HEIST, WEISSE & WOLK P.A.
PH: 1 800 253 8428
FAX: 1 800 367 9038
"Serving the Property Management Professional"
Website:  www.evict.com<http://www.evict.com/>
Email: harry at evict.com<mailto:harry at evict.com>
THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND INTENDED FOR THE PERSONS NAMED ABOVE ONLY.  ALL OTHER USE, COPYING, OR DISTRIBUTION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.

_____________________________________________________________
IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: Pursuant to recently enacted U.S. Treasury Department Regulations, we are now required to advise you that, unless otherwise expressly indicated,any federal tax advice expressed above was neither written nor intended by the sender or this firm to be used and cannot be used by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed under U.S. tax law. If any person uses or refers to any such tax advice in promoting, marketing or recommending a partnership or other entity, investment plan or arrangement to any taxpayer, then the advice should be considered to have been written to support the promotion or marketing by a person other than the sender or this firm of that transaction or matter, and such taxpayer should seek advice based on the taxpayer's particular circumstances from an independent tax advisor.

The information in this email transmission is privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, nor the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination or copying of this transmission (including any attachments) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender by email reply.
Thank you.
_______________________________________________
landten mailing list
landten at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:landten at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/landten
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/landten/attachments/20131009/cf507309/attachment-0001.html>