Explore the legal rights and responsibilities of the tenant and the landlord
The landlord tenant law mainly focuses on the rules that govern the commercial, rental, and residential real estate. The law stipulates that the tenant should not illegally be discriminated against by the landlord (Hill & Brown, 2011). Moreover, the tenant should have a quiet enjoyment of the property, which they have leased or rented from the landlord (Morris & Morris, 1999). In case they decide to vacate the house, they should have their security deposit refunded and if the landlord decides to withhold the money, they should provide a written explanation of why the amount was withheld. More than that, the landlord should provide the tenant with a habitable home and all repairs that the landlord assumes at the time of the lease should be made in a timely way. Moreover, the tenant has the right to certain disclosures about the premises safety, its background check, as well as use of credit reports. Consequently, the failure of the landlord to provide the above gives the tenant the right to terminate the lease and vacate the premise, withhold the full or partial rent or even sue the landlord (Morris & Morris, 1999).
On the other hand, the tenant has the responsibility of maintaining the premise they leased in reasonable repair. They also owe the landlord the duty of paying the rent on time and as agreed at the time of the contract. Moreover, the tenant should not interfere with the rights of other tenants to enjoy the safe environment.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The law also requires the landlord to observe some rights and obligations according to the landlord tenant law. The landlord rights include the receipt of the full time payment of the rent as agreed in the lease (Hill & Brown, 2011). Moreover, they have a right to charge late fees for any overdue rent if it is specified in the lease. They also are entitled to the tenant's maintenance of the premises unless the lease states the contrary. They are also allowed to evict the tenant for any lawful reasons that are specified in the lease law. On the other and the landlord's responsibilities, include keeping the units of the tenants safe and the common areas fit for habitation and safe. The landlord also has the responsibility of delivering the necessary possessions, mainly keys, to the tenant as agreed in the lease. They should also allow the tenant to enjoy the property quietly. The landlord should also give the tenant proper notice before the landlord enters the premise and this ranges from two hours to two days. They are also entitled with the duty of returning the security deposit to the tenant or delivering a written order of the charges.
Decide whether or not the landlord and / or the tenant had a legal duty to mitigate damages.
Before Roger entered the contract, he made an enquiry from the landlord if the roof leaked and the landlord assured him that the roof was intact and had no leaks. Based on that, the tenant signed the contract relying on the word of the landlord. However, when the rains came, Roger confirmed that Larry's words were untrue as the house now leaked. When he noticed the leak, Roger told Larry about it and also placed a can under the roof to ensure that no damage was caused. Consequently, Larry promised to fix it. However, it may be true that the roof never leaked but it started as a result of the rain that was described as heavy. The landlord at this point has the legal duty of repairing the roof to make the premises habitable to the tenant (Hill & Brown, 2011). At this point, Larry could have repaired the roof as ignoring it only escalated the issue and caused more damage, when it rained gain, Rogers's furniture was damaged, as he was absent. Still, he took the initiative of calling the landlord and asking him to confirm when he would be repairing the roof. The landlord was evasive and rude and his answer insinuated that he was not committed to conduct the necessary repairs. Still no action was taken and one week before the rent was paid, it rained yet again and more property was damaged in the house. As such, it is the duty of the landlord to conduct the necessary repairs as he was informed of the leakages but he chose to ignore the tenant. However, if Rogers repaired the roof, he would have been entitled to a refund as per the law. He could have repaired the house and with held partial or full rent or even sued Larry.
The tenant had the legal duty to mitigate the damages caused by the leaking roof as he could have done the repairs and then sued Larry for compensation if he failed to compensate. The above could have reduced the instances of damage on his property and the issue could not have escalated to him breaking the sockets using the baseball bat (Hill & Brown, 2011). Moreover, Roger had the legal duty to mitigate the damage he caused on the wall, as that could not be blamed on Larry. The law holds the tenant responsible to maintain the property in good order and all the damage that the law allows is the one that accrues from wear and tear (McQueen, 2013). . Otherwise, breaking the wall and removing the socket is taken as illegal and Roger is liable to mitigate the damage caused by his anger. Moreover, the landlord has the legal duty to mitigate the damages as the law provides that the landlord must make the leased property habitable. In this case, the leaking roof made the leased property a snare to Roger and it made his life uncomfortable to the point of stressing him up.
Determine whether Larry has legal grounds to evict Roger. Explain why or why not.
Larry has no legal grounds to evict Roger from the house as Rogers had a right to request him consistently to repair the damages that existed in the house. Moreover, Rogers's requests are allowed in the landlord tenant relationship as the leakages made the house inhabitable. Moreover, the leaking roof also spoilt Rogers's belongings that he had inherited from his family members and initially, it had damaged some of his furniture and the clothing furniture.
The attempt to evict Rodger from the premises will portray Larry as a retaliator as highlighted by the state sanitary code. Moreover, the local board of health pushes the sanitary standards that tenants should live in and the conditions in Rodgers house were inhabitable as per the clause (Hill & Brown, 2011). Larry lacks recourse to evict the tenant owing to the tenant's written explanation, which is called answer that antagonizes eviction of the tenant. After all, it is clear from the case that the tenant Roger had reported the case to Larry severally and in most cases, he only got rude or ignorant responses.
Larry has the legal right to leave the house without giving a notice given the much damage he has experienced while living the house. Moreover, the law provides that he should not be fined when leaving, given the damage he has experienced. The property law provides that a landlord have no ground to evict a tenant because of damages caused in the house. Instead, the landlord is asked to give a three months notice in a written format asking the tenant to vacate the premises.
Describe whether Roger has a legal obligation to pay for the damage he caused and determine whether Larry would be liable for any direct damage.
Roger has the legal duty to pay the damage that he caused on the wall, as they are not the usual tear and wear that occurs in houses after one resides in them for a while. Instead, the default was a direct result of Roger throwing the baseball bat against the wall, damaging the wall and knocking out the socket. As much as he acted out of anger, he had no right to do that and there is no provision for the misconduct under the law. Consequently, saying that the act was a result of anger from Larry's response is no excuse for not repairing the wall. Although the damage span from the anger spurred by Larry's continuous dismal to repair the leakage, the two instances are treated as two separate entities by the court. The court assumes that the failure of the landlord to repair the roof should have been reported to the relevant authorities and not used as an excuse for damaging the property. Consequently, the damages caused on the wall give Larry a leeway to sue Roger (Hill & Brown, 2011). Moreover, during the tenure of occupancy, the presumption is made that the two filed a checklist that ascertained the condition of the apartment's exterior and interior conditions. As such, Rodgers is bound to pay for the damages as deductions from the security deposit or even as a direct payment. Conversely, Larry is liable for the direct damages that existed in the house. The fact in the case is that Roger reminded Larry of the damages on the wall on several instances and he refused to oblige. To make it worse Larry was arrogant and rude to the tenant instead of being friendly and making the due repairs. Moreover, it is clear that Roger had done the best he could to mitigate the damage by putting a can where it leaked and moving the items from where it rained.
Still, it is notable that Larry has no legal obligation to pay for the damage of Roger's property as Roger had the legal obligation to sue Larry on the unrepaired leaking roof or to vacate the house without motive to protect his property.
References
Hill, D. S., & Brown, C. N. (2011). Landlord and tenant law in a nutshell .
McQueen, J. (2013). An Emerald guide to landlord and tenant law .
Morris, J. R., & Morris, J. R. (1999). Principles of landlord & tenant law . London: Cavendish.
Weiland, M., & Wilsey, S. (2008). State by state: A panoramic portrait of America . New York, NY: Ecco.
