Tenants gave Notice to Vacate (NC)

[Sabinerose]

Not sure your wording in your lease would hold up in court. "The tenant is responsible for all damages, whatever the cause, unless it is due to an act of the landlord." So, if a tree falls on the house, your tenants are responsible? According to your wording, something like that wouldn't be an "act of the LL", so it must be the fault of the tenant? Ask yourself if a judge would uphold that blanket wording...sometimes too vague is not a good thing.

You've said that you lived there before for many years and didn't have a problem, but truthfully, that doesn't really mean much. It's like saying "the brakes on my car have worked fine for the last 8 years...I don't understand why they are failing now". Things wear out...it's that simple (I'm referring to the pressure reducing valve bolt). I do not believe you will be able to prove that your tenants tampered with it. The fact that it worked fine for the years you lived in the home and that it worked fine for the year that they lived there isn't really a defense. You are talking about almost a decade of wear now.

The water damage upstairs would be based on the exact wording of the repair companies reports. Did they give a definitive reason for the water damage? Sounds like you might have at least one that said it was caused by an overflowing sink in the area of highest damage (I'm paraphrasing here). That type of wording would help you if it came to going to court.

The only suggestion I would have to prevent anything like this from happening in the future...when you are having your repairs done, can you add sink replacement to it? They still make double walled sinks with the little hole in the front that prevents overflows...might be worth the extra few dollars to prevent this kind of hassle in the future.

[LOL_Whut]

Originally Posted by Sabinerose

Not sure your wording in your lease would hold up in court. "The tenant is responsible for all damages, whatever the cause, unless it is due to an act of the landlord." So, if a tree falls on the house, your tenants are responsible? According to your wording, something like that wouldn't be an "act of the LL", so it must be the fault of the tenant? Ask yourself if a judge would uphold that blanket wording...sometimes too vague is not a good thing.

You've said that you lived there before for many years and didn't have a problem, but truthfully, that doesn't really mean much. It's like saying "the brakes on my car have worked fine for the last 8 years...I don't understand why they are failing now". Things wear out...it's that simple (I'm referring to the pressure reducing valve bolt). I do not believe you will be able to prove that your tenants tampered with it. The fact that it worked fine for the years you lived in the home and that it worked fine for the year that they lived there isn't really a defense. You are talking about almost a decade of wear now.

The water damage upstairs would be based on the exact wording of the repair companies reports. Did they give a definitive reason for the water damage? Sounds like you might have at least one that said it was caused by an overflowing sink in the area of highest damage (I'm paraphrasing here). That type of wording would help you if it came to going to court.

The only suggestion I would have to prevent anything like this from happening in the future...when you are having your repairs done, can you add sink replacement to it? They still make double walled sinks with the little hole in the front that prevents overflows...might be worth the extra few dollars to prevent this kind of hassle in the future.

Absolutely.

I had 3 hot water valves suddenly fail over the course of a year. They were about 20 years old. Water pressure is effectively corrosive, and valves will fail when they hit the end of their lifespan.

[NoMoreSnowForMe]

It doesn't sound like you would be charging them for damages out of their deposit in "bad faith," so I don't see why you couldn't go ahead and charge what you think is fair against the deposit. Be sure you have all your receipts, insurance info, etc. In California, if the judge thinks you acted in bad faith, you can be liable for twice the deposit, but it's rare they determine this anyway.

In my opinion, it sounds like the tenant overflowed the sink. I did this in an apartment by accident once, and the firemen came and used this big suction pump thing to remove the water. Fortunately, it was cleaned up in time and no damage was charged against my deposit.

They will probably sue you for their deposit back, but in my opinion, when you show the judge what the damage actually cost the insurance company, and you only charged the deductible, you're not going to look like some evil slum lord.

Get a statement from the inspectors who said the damage was likely an overflowed sink. Make your case that you think they messed with the garage water valve.

What the heck. I tell tenants to sue over deposits all the time. In this case, I think you should. You just want to look like a fair, reasonable person in court.

As far as their notice time frame. In California, it's 30 calendar days. It's my understanding that that is normally the law in other states, too, but in other states, landlords are allowed to put in leases the first of the month notice requirement. So check your lease and your state laws.

As far as them being able to break the lease, it depends on your state, and if you are required to "mitigate damages." In California you are, so you can only charge them for lost rent while you look for a new tenant, and any advertising costs. Here's a link that lists all state laws regarding mitigating damages:

http://dirt.umkc.edu/files/mitigationsurvey.htm

If this is too "legal" for you, google your state and "landlord mitigate damages" and you should be able to see if you can charge rent to end of lease or not. Some states actually allow this, even if you rent to someone else in the meantime.