<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: COURT OF APPEALS SAYS TENANT NOT LIABLE FOR FIRE DAMAGE</title>
	<atom:link href="http://petriestocking.com/blog/2009/05/28/court-of-appeals-says-tenant-not-liable-for-fire-damage/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://petriestocking.com/blog/2009/05/28/court-of-appeals-says-tenant-not-liable-for-fire-damage/</link>
	<description>Tristan&#039;s Landlord - Tenant Law Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 19:59:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Manhatten Beach Appliance Service</title>
		<link>http://petriestocking.com/blog/2009/05/28/court-of-appeals-says-tenant-not-liable-for-fire-damage/comment-page-1/#comment-1578</link>
		<dc:creator>Manhatten Beach Appliance Service</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Nov 2011 15:37:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://petriestocking.com/blog/?p=9#comment-1578</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Manhatten Beach Appliance Service...&lt;/strong&gt;

[...]COURT OF APPEALS SAYS TENANT NOT LIABLE FOR FIRE DAMAGE &#124; Tristan&#039;s Landlord - Tenant Law Blog[...]...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Manhatten Beach Appliance Service&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>[...]COURT OF APPEALS SAYS TENANT NOT LIABLE FOR FIRE DAMAGE | Tristan&#039;s Landlord &#8211; Tenant Law Blog[...]&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tristan</title>
		<link>http://petriestocking.com/blog/2009/05/28/court-of-appeals-says-tenant-not-liable-for-fire-damage/comment-page-1/#comment-38</link>
		<dc:creator>Tristan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Jul 2009 20:33:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://petriestocking.com/blog/?p=9#comment-38</guid>
		<description>Tom -- Thanks for commenting on this post.  I am sorry to hear that you are stuck in the middle of such a sticky situation.  I personally feel that your tenant is clearly responsible for the plumbing repairs since she caused  the damage.  I guess your tenant could argue that based on the holding in the case that I posted about she was not negligent since she allegedly passed out and and broke off the faucet and therefore since neither she nor you were negligent that the cost of repairs are your responsibility.

Never let your tenants make any repairs to your investment property.  Since it is your responsibility to provide a safe and habitable home to your tenants and since you own the property - you should always make the repairs.  If you let the tenant make the repairs and they hire a substandard contractor, friend, or relative, who does a poor job causing more damage then you are in a worse situation.  So you were correct in making the repairs yourself and then sending her the bill.

If your property is in Milwaukee County you may have some trouble with your eviction because the court commissioners are reading the 5 day Notice statute very literally these days.  They aresaying that you can only issue a 5 day notice for non-payment of &quot;rent.&quot;  Unless your rental agreement has some language in it to the effect that  the cost of repairs are to be treated as &quot;rent&quot; you may end up having your eviction dismissed since you issued a 5 day notice for something other than the non-payment of rent.  For more information on this issue please see my earlier post on 5 day notices and late fees from May 8, 2009.

You did not mention if this tenant is on a term lease or is month to month but that could certainly factor into your decision on which notice to serve on them and your ensuing eviction.  I would also consider sending them a notice regarding the pet damage to the carpet and floors.

You also may have a good argument to obtain double damages with regard to the pet damage becasue the facts you mention sound similar to those in the case of Three and One Company v. Geilfuss, 178 Wis.2d 400. 504 N.W.2d 393 (Ct. App 1993) in which the court allowed the landlord double damages due to the tenant committing &quot;waste&quot; by allowing their pets to use the landlord&#039;s property as a litter box.



Good luck.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tom &#8212; Thanks for commenting on this post.  I am sorry to hear that you are stuck in the middle of such a sticky situation.  I personally feel that your tenant is clearly responsible for the plumbing repairs since she caused  the damage.  I guess your tenant could argue that based on the holding in the case that I posted about she was not negligent since she allegedly passed out and and broke off the faucet and therefore since neither she nor you were negligent that the cost of repairs are your responsibility.</p>
<p>Never let your tenants make any repairs to your investment property.  Since it is your responsibility to provide a safe and habitable home to your tenants and since you own the property &#8211; you should always make the repairs.  If you let the tenant make the repairs and they hire a substandard contractor, friend, or relative, who does a poor job causing more damage then you are in a worse situation.  So you were correct in making the repairs yourself and then sending her the bill.</p>
<p>If your property is in Milwaukee County you may have some trouble with your eviction because the court commissioners are reading the 5 day Notice statute very literally these days.  They aresaying that you can only issue a 5 day notice for non-payment of &#8220;rent.&#8221;  Unless your rental agreement has some language in it to the effect that  the cost of repairs are to be treated as &#8220;rent&#8221; you may end up having your eviction dismissed since you issued a 5 day notice for something other than the non-payment of rent.  For more information on this issue please see my earlier post on 5 day notices and late fees from May 8, 2009.</p>
<p>You did not mention if this tenant is on a term lease or is month to month but that could certainly factor into your decision on which notice to serve on them and your ensuing eviction.  I would also consider sending them a notice regarding the pet damage to the carpet and floors.</p>
<p>You also may have a good argument to obtain double damages with regard to the pet damage becasue the facts you mention sound similar to those in the case of Three and One Company v. Geilfuss, 178 Wis.2d 400. 504 N.W.2d 393 (Ct. App 1993) in which the court allowed the landlord double damages due to the tenant committing &#8220;waste&#8221; by allowing their pets to use the landlord&#8217;s property as a litter box.</p>
<p>Good luck.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom Holster</title>
		<link>http://petriestocking.com/blog/2009/05/28/court-of-appeals-says-tenant-not-liable-for-fire-damage/comment-page-1/#comment-37</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom Holster</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Jul 2009 20:01:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://petriestocking.com/blog/?p=9#comment-37</guid>
		<description>This is a difficult case but I don&#039;t think it&#039;s fair that the landlord has to take complete financial responsibility.  There are other cases in which the tenant is not necessarily negligent but has more responsibility in the chain of events leading up to property damage than the landlord has.  We have encountered a similar situation in one of our rental properties but rather than a fire, it involves damage to property caused by a tenant&#039;s medical condition (namely epilepsy).  The tenant blacked out in the shower and broke off the tub faucet and we are now disputing who should be responsible for the cost of the repairs.  The tenant has lied to us many times and I am very skeptical about her true medical history, but I do not know how this will play out in court.

The tenant called me on a Saturday morning and explained that she had blacked out while showering and accidentally broke off the tub faucet.  She demanded that we have it fixed immediately.  She said that she had a doctor&#039;s appointment on Monday and needed to shower before then.  I said that I could call a plumber but that they would charge a premium for a weekend service call and furthermore since she caused the damage, she would have to pay the bill.  She screamed at me and said that it was the landlord&#039;s responsibility to maintain the plumbing systems and that she would not pay.  She hung up on me and after a few subsequent phone calls, she said that if she had to pay, then she would have her friend who is a plumber come and fix it.  That never happened and she eventually called the City Inspector.  We met the City Inspector at the property and agreed that it is the landlord’s responsibility to have it fixed but he did not know and didn’t want to comment on who was financially responsible.  We had our plumber fix it and billed her for it with her next month’s rent statement.  She paid her rent but not the plumbing bill (amounting to about $100) so we gave her a 5-day notice.  She did not pay within the 5 days so we are now starting an eviction action.

When we met with the City Inspector we saw that the tenants had torn all of the carpeting out of the living room where they were keeping two caged puppies and the puppies’ mom.  There was urine flowing on the living room floor from the puppies’ cage to the living room wall.  The damage will be significant and if we have to fight them in court on a $100 plumbing bill, I am guessing we will have a bigger fight when we sue them for damages.  She claims that they have been working with a Judicare attorney who will represent them in court.  If we lose the eviction hearing I guess we will have to wait until the end of the lease to pursue the additional property damage.

Have you heard of any similar cases?  If a tenant accidentally damages property due to a diagnosed medical condition are they not financially responsible for the damage?  Please let me know your thoughts.  Thanks!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is a difficult case but I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s fair that the landlord has to take complete financial responsibility.  There are other cases in which the tenant is not necessarily negligent but has more responsibility in the chain of events leading up to property damage than the landlord has.  We have encountered a similar situation in one of our rental properties but rather than a fire, it involves damage to property caused by a tenant&#8217;s medical condition (namely epilepsy).  The tenant blacked out in the shower and broke off the tub faucet and we are now disputing who should be responsible for the cost of the repairs.  The tenant has lied to us many times and I am very skeptical about her true medical history, but I do not know how this will play out in court.</p>
<p>The tenant called me on a Saturday morning and explained that she had blacked out while showering and accidentally broke off the tub faucet.  She demanded that we have it fixed immediately.  She said that she had a doctor&#8217;s appointment on Monday and needed to shower before then.  I said that I could call a plumber but that they would charge a premium for a weekend service call and furthermore since she caused the damage, she would have to pay the bill.  She screamed at me and said that it was the landlord&#8217;s responsibility to maintain the plumbing systems and that she would not pay.  She hung up on me and after a few subsequent phone calls, she said that if she had to pay, then she would have her friend who is a plumber come and fix it.  That never happened and she eventually called the City Inspector.  We met the City Inspector at the property and agreed that it is the landlord’s responsibility to have it fixed but he did not know and didn’t want to comment on who was financially responsible.  We had our plumber fix it and billed her for it with her next month’s rent statement.  She paid her rent but not the plumbing bill (amounting to about $100) so we gave her a 5-day notice.  She did not pay within the 5 days so we are now starting an eviction action.</p>
<p>When we met with the City Inspector we saw that the tenants had torn all of the carpeting out of the living room where they were keeping two caged puppies and the puppies’ mom.  There was urine flowing on the living room floor from the puppies’ cage to the living room wall.  The damage will be significant and if we have to fight them in court on a $100 plumbing bill, I am guessing we will have a bigger fight when we sue them for damages.  She claims that they have been working with a Judicare attorney who will represent them in court.  If we lose the eviction hearing I guess we will have to wait until the end of the lease to pursue the additional property damage.</p>
<p>Have you heard of any similar cases?  If a tenant accidentally damages property due to a diagnosed medical condition are they not financially responsible for the damage?  Please let me know your thoughts.  Thanks!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

