|
Recently, my girlfriend was terminated from a part time position while working for a major retail company in Pennsylvania. She would work once every three months when home from college per their company policy. She was let go without notification and found out by calling to inquire about working the next break. Did they legally have to let her know that she was terminated?
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2012 01:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 20:20 |
|
|
Dogen posted:Not a MN lawyer. Thank you for taking the time to look things up. Right now, there is neither. The full situation is that the state may deem the mother to be an unfit parent and the child may end up in foster care. The (unestablished) father is considering seeking custody to keep the child out of a foster home.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2012 05:39
|
|
|
I'm not seeking legal advice in any way at all. My question is purely for fun. I was surprised with an earlier discussion about the effectiveness of using a paper bag to conceal an alcoholic beverage. On a similar note, there was a case a while back in Phoenix, AZ where a guy was evading speed cameras by wearing a gorilla mask and making it impossible to prove the identity of the driver. Are there any great examples of legal defenses that should be too stupid to work, but still work nonetheless?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2012 06:07
|
|
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:I'm not seeking legal advice in any way at all. My question is purely for fun. A man in San Francisco was found not guilty of magic mushroom possession by admitting he had bought them six months prior but had forgotten he had done so, so he did not "knowingly" possess them. R. Kelly was videotaped urinating on a minor. His lawyer argued that despite that the guy on the tape looked and sounded exactly like R. Kelly it wasn't him but some other guy who had been edited with CGI to look like him. He was found not guilty.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2012 06:32
|
|
|
I'm not totally sure this is the right thread for this, but it's the closest thing I could find. If any of you guys can help me out I would be eternally grateful. I'm in kind of a weird situation: I was arrested at the school I currently attend, but it was before I went here. They banned me, I went to court, and the charges were dismissed. I was eventually un-banned after applying for admission and being accepted. So now, 4 years later, I'm applying to graduate schools and they're asking me about being subject to disciplinary action at any post-secondary institution. Some of them have wording I can get around (e.g. "that you were attending at the time") but I'm not sure how to handle them asking about any discipline. I'm doing my state's free self-background check and I'm going to check my student record on Monday. If both are clean, is it worth lying about it? Is there any way they could possibly find out if it's not on my criminal record or my student conduct record? I'm from a public school and I'm applying to top programs, so I already have a non-traditional application. I worry that if they see I checked the "yes" box, they'll toss the app without even reading the attached form explaining the charge. As far as I know it's just for underage drinking, which I assume no one cares about but what if they don't bother reading the attachment? Pretty conflicted here. Any advice is greatly appreciated.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2012 09:47
|
|
or I will be banned.
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:I'm not seeking legal advice in any way at all. My question is purely for fun. I dont know if this quite qualifies as stupid but your paper bag comment reminded me of it so here it goes anyway. Back when I was in high school, one of my classmates was caught walking out of a liquor store, drinking something from a bag, and getting into his car. Smug cop was at his window before he even got the car started. Cop wasn't too happy when my classmate pulled a coke bottle from the bag and went looking for anything else he could get him on, which turned out to be the dice hanging from his rear view mirror. California law says something to the effect of you can't have anything obstructing the driver's view through the windshield. Now, while it was obvious as hell that this was the case with these dice, on the advice of our government teacher my classmate took it to court and asked the cop just one question: "Did you sit in my seat at my height to verify the dice were in a position to actually block my view?" He was off the hook as soon as the cop said no.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2012 09:49
|
|
|
Karb posted:I'm not totally sure this is the right thread for this, but it's the closest thing I could find. If any of you guys can help me out I would be eternally grateful. Disciplinary action usually means academic disciplinary action- they don't want cheaters. That said, a lot of grad schools want to know if you've been arrested, and the general consensus is that if they ask, you should err on the side of disclosure.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2012 22:38
|
|
|
marsisol posted:Recently, my girlfriend was terminated from a part time position while working for a major retail company in Pennsylvania. She would work once every three months when home from college per their company policy. She was let go without notification and found out by calling to inquire about working the next break. Did they legally have to let her know that she was terminated? No, and they did notify her when she called to inquire.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 17:58
|
|
|
If I were to sell a used vehicle in Minnesota (private party sale) that has non-functional emergency brake and rusty rear end brake lines that are on the verge of failing, would a disclaimer like this be good enough to release me from any liability in the event that the buyer drives the vehicle and mows down a busload of children due to a brake failure: The buyer (NAME) understands that this vehicle (YEAR/MAKE/MODEL/VIN) does not have a working emergency brake and the brake lines are in terrible condition and may fail at any time resulting in the complete loss of all braking ability. The seller strongly recommends that the vehicle not be driven until the emergency brake is fixed and the brake lines are inspected/replaced by a qualified technician. (BUYERS SIGNATURE/DATE).
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 18:28
|
|
|
Karb posted:I'm not totally sure this is the right thread for this, but it's the closest thing I could find. If any of you guys can help me out I would be eternally grateful. Just disclose it; it won't keep you out of grad school, but if you lie about and they (or a prospective employer, etc.) later find out about it, it will be a big deal.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 21:38
|
|
|
Gobbeldygook posted:R. Kelly was videotaped urinating on a minor. His lawyer argued that despite that the guy on the tape looked and sounded exactly like R. Kelly it wasn't him but some other guy who had been edited with CGI to look like him. He was found not guilty. I was present for that trial and while he was found not guilty, there's no way he was found not guilty because of some stupid argument that it wasn't him. We played the video on a projector screen numerous times during trial, and it starts with a clear shot of kelly looking right into the camera as he prepares the perfect angle and gets down to business. The problem with the trial was that there was no victim to testify, and there was trouble proving who the victim was and how old she was at the time the video was taken.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 21:58
|
|
|
SkunkDuster posted:If I were to sell a used vehicle in Minnesota (private party sale) that has non-functional emergency brake and rusty rear end brake lines that are on the verge of failing, would a disclaimer like this be good enough to release me from any liability in the event that the buyer drives the vehicle and mows down a busload of children due to a brake failure: You might be better off getting an indemnity agreement from them (this assumes that the person who is buying your lovely, no brake car will have money to indemnify you). Or, just fixing the brakes before you sell it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 22:14
|
|
|
It was my understanding that buying something "as is, with no warranties or guarantees implied or stated" meant you could be buying a literal death trap. Doesn't a buyer have the responsibility to inspect it?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 22:41
|
|
|
NancyPants posted:It was my understanding that buying something "as is, with no warranties or guarantees implied or stated" meant you could be buying a literal death trap. Doesn't a buyer have the responsibility to inspect it? e: oh, and sometimes a seller makes an implied warranty in their contract. Whether this happens as a matter of course or through the seller's conduct, and the effect (if any) of an "as is" clause is also a matter of state law. Green Crayons fucked around with this message at 23:15 on Aug 19, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 23:10
|
|
|
SkunkDuster posted:If I were to sell a used vehicle in Minnesota (private party sale) that has non-functional emergency brake and rusty rear end brake lines that are on the verge of failing, would a disclaimer like this be good enough to release me from any liability in the event that the buyer drives the vehicle and mows down a busload of children due to a brake failure: Green Crayons posted:Maybe. Depends upon the state. Also, depending upon the parties involved, there may be a duty to affirmatively inform about certain things, e.g., an inherently defective condition -- so that a waiver of liability clause ("as is") is inoperative as to those defects. But that, too, varies by state. Minnesota seems to allow "as is" disclaimers, but that may apply only to used car dealers and some cars with over 75K miles, other conditions, are exempt from their used car law. The best course of action here would probably be to fix the brakes before sale. The second best course of action might be to pay to have a mechanic inspect the car and put together a report on what's wrong with the car, and attach it to any sale contract to your private buyer. I'd still kinda be worried about some of the worst case scenarios, cuz it sounds like the car isn't safe to drive at all, so unless your buyer is coming by with a flatbed, you may be putting him in a position where he has to drive the car to take delivery, after telling him it's not in a safe condition to drive. I think some states might make you liable for any defect in a car you've owned then sold, but I'm not as fresh on products liability stuff as I could be. I'd also worry about the buyer getting into an accident shortly after purchase, but before he has taken it in to get it repaired- might make you liable to third parties who are injured as a result of a brake failure (hence my previous suggestion about an indemnity agreement. You'd also probably want to make sure he's insured) Or maybe you could just sell the car to a used car dealer, or donate it to charity and take a tax write-off, and save yourself some potential headaches. This is kinda stream of consciousness, I'm not a Minnesota lawyer, I'm not your lawyer, I'm not a lawyer, I'm still kinda hungover, take it with a grain of salt.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 23:34
|
|
|
NancyPants posted:It was my understanding that buying something "as is, with no warranties or guarantees implied or stated" meant you could be buying a literal death trap. Doesn't a buyer have the responsibility to inspect it? If you don't properly disclose things you know about you could still be in trouble for fraud or worse (if a safety concern) That language protects you from defects you were unaware of.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 23:59
|
|
|
I have a question regarding a large portion of my security deposit that was withheld. I'm pretty sure I know the answer based on the research I've done but I want any additional advice that maybe someone in a similar spot in the past can provide. I lived in an apartment in New York City for two years and paid a security deposit equal to one month's rent at the beginning. During the time I was there, I installed shelves which required drilling into the walls and brought up a dishwasher (one of those portable ones that wheels around). When I left the apartment, I cleaned thoroughly, but left up the shelves and the dishwasher. I'm a clean freak and I've never had a cent deducted from a security deposit for cleaning before in all the times I've rented. Both the shelves and the dishwasher were in perfect condition and had no visible defects. I didn't take any pictures because I am an idiot. After my landlord informed me that a large portion of my security deposit would be withheld because of "damages," I requested an itemized statement through the mail. Today that arrived. It is handwritten on a piece of paper and says: $500 - holes in walls, cleaning Included is a check for the amount minus the $500. The lease does not mention a cleaning fee, or a fee for holes in walls. I know not to cash the check, but what is the next step here? Sending a letter? Making a phone call? In this communication, should I just try and talk the number down by denying any damages and then requesting something like $100 off? Should I deny all damages and threaten to bring suit? Even if I did sue, I don't have pictures so could I win?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2012 13:40
|
|
|
Feces Starship posted:I have a question regarding a large portion of my security deposit that was withheld. I'm pretty sure I know the answer based on the research I've done but I want any additional advice that maybe someone in a similar spot in the past can provide. You haven't said why you think the amount is inappropriate. Repairing the damage you did with your holes in the walls costs something. They could have easily meant cleaning up the mess from doing the repairs to the wal, or removing the dishwasher. If they didn't want the dishwasher in there (as a landlord, I wouldn't want to leave a dishwasher in an apartment...too much potential for damage), "cleaning" could mean removing the dishwasher. Basically, to me, the amount you're talking about doesn't seem too crazy. The real wtf is the inadequate deposit disbursement information they sent you. I'd just call or write them asking for more detail.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2012 17:16
|
|
|
Yeah the only thing that is aberrant is that I've rented tons of places before and never lost anything from my security deposit, let alone five hundo. So I guess an ultra-pedantic way of putting it is that "the amount charged seems to be substantially higher than what other landlords have charged for equivalent damages in that market."
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2012 17:26
|
|
|
SkunkDuster posted:If I were to sell a used vehicle in Minnesota (private party sale) that has non-functional emergency brake and rusty rear end brake lines that are on the verge of failing, would a disclaimer like this be good enough to release me from any liability in the event that the buyer drives the vehicle and mows down a busload of children due to a brake failure: That sounds good, but I would replace "The seller strongly recommends that the vehicle not be driven..." with "The vehicle is not in drivable condition due to..." and add a clause saying that the buyer is required to provide alternative means of transporting the vehicle at time of sale.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2012 17:59
|
|
|
Re: selling a car with defects I would include: 1. An affirmative disclosure of the known defects. 2. A release by the buyer of liability for unknown defects. 3. Indemnification by the buyer against claims brought by 3rd parties harmed by the buyer while driving the car. #1 and #2 protect the seller against the buyer, but these are contract terms that won't shield the seller from tort claims brought by people who are 3rd parties to the contract. #3 is the provision that protects the seller against claims from 3rd parties.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2012 18:36
|
|
|
Just a little question about a landlord situation. So, my family just moved to Pittsburgh from Rhode Island and we rented a property sight unseen. Yes, we knew this was a risk, but we couldn't afford to take a trip out to the see the property first. That said, we still would have taken the property had we walked through it first, because of its size and remodeling. Now, we have been here for about a month and a half and have continued to have a litany of small issues with all of the remodeling, knobs coming off, things leaking, etc. EVEN a day after the maintenance man would come out and fix them. But, all that small stuff aside, we have had a serious issue which has made the place unlivable. We started getting a bunch of flies and noticing rodents, so the landlord had pest control come out. Apparently there is a huge opening in the foundation and groundhogs and other rodents have been able to come in and out of the crawlspace under the kitchen and have taken up residence in the property. One of these rodents has died under the kitchen and the flies are coming from there. Basically, we decided that we don't want to stay here because the place is not in the condition advertised or fitting to the price tag. So, we are moving in the middle of next month. Now, my concern is, what if the landlord tries to be a dick and sue us for rent or something if he can't re-rent the place or something like that? Again, this is in Pittsburgh, PA. Where do you think we stand should this thing go to court after we relocate? We did sign a lease, but as we see it, we are only moving because we feel that the place is not in the condition advertised and requires repairs which will be a serious detriment to standard of living and habitability; we are not simply CHOOSING to break the lease, willy-nilly or for reasons outside the landlord's control. We are both beginning school in a couple of weeks and have two children and can't stay here dealing with countless repairmen and animal control and all the issues associated with these problems. not: to cover our end of things we have reported these issues to the department of building inspection and will be sending the landlord this stuff in writing this week (any pointers on what to include or not include in such a letter?). nern fucked around with this message at 20:02 on Aug 20, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2012 19:55
|
|
|
Nern, you don't usually get to break a lease for a reason like that. Most of the time all that is due to you is an abatement of the rent for the portion of the property that you cannot use while it is under repair. Your landlord may agree to let you break the lease, but he is probably not required to. Your location may have awesome renters rights, but even places with great tenants rights require you to allow the landlord and chance to repair it. You may be allowed to withhold rent, or be required to pay it into a registry of the court, but unless you get the place condemned as a health hazard you won't be able to walk away with no penalty. Unless you get the landlord to agree in writing. You two can agree on any course of action, just be sure to document it. I doubt you'll be that lucky, though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2012 21:49
|
|
|
entris posted:Re: selling a car with defects #3 isn't really an effective shield if the guy buying the car has no assets, right?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2012 22:23
|
|
|
I was hit by a car last week while running errands on my bike and have arranged a meeting with a reputable lawyer this week in the interest of going to small claims court. I need advice - I'm considering calling the driver and trying to handle things out of court and I don't want to hash out the details in public (suffice to say I wasn't intentionally mowed down, and I'm not dead or hideously disfigured), is someone willing to exchange a few emails about this? kalizely at gmail Thanks so much.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2012 01:06
|
|
|
Incredulous Red posted:#3 isn't really an effective shield if the guy buying the car has no assets, right? Surely a tort claim would require evidence of negligence, which would be negated by the affirmative notice of defects and warning to the purchaser of the possibility of latent defects?
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2012 01:10
|
|
|
Incredulous Red posted:#3 isn't really an effective shield if the guy buying the car has no assets, right? Indemnification agreements come in all shapes and sizes, and can/do include a lot more than "you pay me back for defending a lawsuit."
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2012 01:47
|
|
|
1337 haxxor pirate posted:I was hit by a car last week while running errands on my bike and have arranged a meeting with a reputable lawyer this week in the interest of going to small claims court. I need advice - I'm considering calling the driver and trying to handle things out of court and I don't want to hash out the details in public (suffice to say I wasn't intentionally mowed down, and I'm not dead or hideously disfigured), is someone willing to exchange a few emails about this? kalizely at gmail Did he not have insurance or was it not enough? If so you probably won't be able to get much out of them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2012 02:51
|
|
|
I'm in England, looking to break a lease. Will try to summarise the situation. -Agree to stay on with landlord (I'm a student), renting a different property. He forgets that the property we choose is on a Sep-Sep let, i.e. is unavailable until several months after our current lease expires -Moves us into a halfway house at reduced rent in the interim. We do not sign a contract for this. -Have (idiotically) signed a contract for the house we are to move into at the end of September, but I believe (even more idiotically, I didn't get a copy) the move in date on the contract was still pre-September. Hopefully this invalidates it, because the house isn't actually ready for us to occupy until the end of September. That's three months off. A housemate seems to have gotten out of the agreement just by having a disagreement RE rent rates with the landlord, so I'm hoping it won't be too hard. I also happen to know that he has employed some people cash in hand, though hopefully it won't get so bad that using that information is necessary because I'd rather not blackmail anyone (and doubt that much would come of it even if I were to report it). I'm presuming my best course of action is to negotiate termination of the lease with the landlord, and try to obtain a written agreement that I won't get sued for anything? Any advice would be very much appreciated. Thanks! Car Stranger fucked around with this message at 13:07 on Aug 21, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2012 13:01
|
|
|
Car Stranger posted:I'm in England, looking to break a lease. Will try to summarise the situation. Step 1: get a copy of the contract you signed. Step 2: talk to Student Union for free legal advice.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2012 13:10
|
|
|
Have contacted landlord and asked for a copy, which is apparently in the mail. And for some reason I hadn't even thought of contacting the SU - also done that. Thanks  Would still be (potentially) very reassuring if anyone had any idea whether the move in date thing could allow me to get out of the contract, though I would be very surprised if he pursued legal action anyway because we're only talking about ~£3,600 (and he has a lot of properties).
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2012 14:00
|
|
|
Missouri Employment Law: I was contacted out of the blue by a copmany looking for someone in my field. They ended up offering me a pretty decent job... or so I thought. After getting here I'm finding many of the promises made were outright lies, some small, some large. I was offered a salary and a 10% yearly bonus. I am receiving the salary but on the first day of work we had an nice argument about the bonus. You see according to them the 10% bonus in the offer letter is not gauranteeed. They shoved a paper in my face stating I had to meet lofty(probably not attainable) project goals for 5% and the other 5% is based on company performance and drop to as low as 2.5%. They threatened me with 0 bonus whatsoever if I didn't sign the drat paper so I did. I realize now that probably removes this as a contended point so I've no-one to blame but myself. Just thought I'd put it in here anyways if theres ANYTHING that can be done. Apparently the office is moving an hour away. Was never informed upon hire. But don't worry they decided not to and told everyone this. Well not anymore, now they are moving but they're keeping it a secret that I'm not supposed to know about. They plan on telling everyone the day before they need to start driving another hour down the road. Probably not illegal, but sure as hell incredibly annoying. Several small written promises for apparel items. Never gonna get them. The job description is definitly not what I'm doing whatsoever. My career is actively stepping backwards and devolving at this point. They hired me for certain skills and its written into the job description what they are but instead they decided to postpone that about 3 weeks after starting here and have turned me into an overpaid accountant(completely not my area of expterise). This is the most infuriating part for me. PTO: I was told they have a normal PTO system when thats anything but the case. PTO has to be used for national holidays effectively limiting the amount of PTO received to about 7 usable days a year when I was lead to believe it amounted to 3 weeks(not having to use them on holidays). Hostile envorinemnt(never saw that coming did ya). Another guy was hired in at the same time I was and was lied to just the same. He brought his issues up to our manager and was promised a meeting to try and make things right. Instead he was written up for insubordination for complaining about being lied to. Thats all I can think of for the moment but I'm sure theres more. I really doubt I have any options here other than stick it out until a new job opens up but its a rather highly skilled small job market. I'm sure there will be more soon enough but it involves being here probably another 6-8 months before finding something new and my career is going backwards at a rapid pace, not to mention skills I'd like to keep that I won't have been able to use for a year by the time I'm gone.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2012 14:10
|
|
|
Hi, I just got mail from the Toll Roads in California. It says I missed two payments(5,50 each)back and forth to LA, and now I have to pay 126 dollars. I don't live in the US nor got US citizenship, what options do I have?
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2012 14:20
|
|
|
Car Stranger posted:Have contacted landlord and asked for a copy, which is apparently in the mail. And for some reason I hadn't even thought of contacting the SU - also done that. Thanks I don't know. See what the SU says when you have the agreement. I am not sure why you want to break the lease: presumably the property was fine when you first looked at it. If you have somewhere of equivalent standard until then, but at a cheaper rent, I'd be tempted to stick with that and enjoy the rent savings.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2012 14:21
|
|
|
Bad jobs aren't unlawful. Sadly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2012 14:22
|
|
|
spog posted:I don't know. See what the SU says when you have the agreement. Me waving away what seemed like minor issues until they built up and I realised how bad the overall situation was, basically. Our landlord is awful with repairs (which culminated in parts of one person's ceiling starting to crack/fall and the back patio being substantially covered, literally, with poo poo last year - this was in the last few months of our tenancy, did not get repaired. That really would have been a legal case), housemates are nice guys but living with them and studying hard seems untenable, they're messy as gently caress (kitchen infested with insects, one of them has managed to piss themselves twice while sleeping on a sofa). So summarily I've been a huge, cowardly idiot and dug myself into a hole/vastly skewed my perception of how normal, functional people live. A clean kitchen and lack of piled trash bags in the garden is not meant to be a novelty. Don't think I mentioned, but one housemate already managed to get out of it just by having a disagreement with her over rent payment - IIRC, she simply told him not to bother moving into the other house in Sept. Her manner and his leaving (he was the only clean person in the house aside from me) contributed too. Of course, so far as I know he has zero evidence aside from that verbal agreement of being out of lease.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2012 15:15
|
|
|
bigpolar posted:Nern, you don't usually get to break a lease for a reason like that. Most of the time all that is due to you is an abatement of the rent for the portion of the property that you cannot use while it is under repair. Your landlord may agree to let you break the lease, but he is probably not required to. yeah, we did call and file complaints with the housing inspector/building code places and filed a report of health code violation. the thing is, all this stuff started up after being in the property for only a couple of weeks and the problem have just kept coming over the last month. we just reached the point where even though it is terribly inconvenient to move again, we just don't really have any choice. we are busy people with a tight schedule and two children, we can't live someplace where they are going to be in and out constantly doing repairs and where there are disease risks with rodents and flies. if the landlord did decide to take us to court; i just don't see how any judge could rule against us. i mean, what are we supposed to do, just stay in a filthy place that was not as advertised and is in complete disrepair dealing with an absentee landlord (he lives in Florida and has ONE maintenance man for 30 properties)? Besides, its not like we have any money he could get from us, we don't have any income (we live off of student loans) so there's no wages he could get garnished, etc. i am just personally really upset that he would be dick about it, because we are being nice letting him know we are leaving and offering to pay the half month's rent before moving out when we could probably try to sue him for misrepresentation of the property or something like that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2012 16:03
|
|
|
A judge could very easily rule against you. The contract is binding unless you can demonstrate that the landlord broke the lease. "We're really busy, have 2 kids, don't have time for this" doesn't add up to anything. The landlord falling through in a few places doesn't break the lease. Honestly, your reason for wanting to me is on your side of the ledger: "we can't live someplace where they are going to be in and out constantly doing repairs and where there are disease risks with rodents and flies". Based on what you've said so far, if the landlord sued you they would win.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2012 16:11
|
|
|
nern posted:yeah, we did call and file complaints with the housing inspector/building code places and filed a report of health code violation. the thing is, all this stuff started up after being in the property for only a couple of weeks and the problem have just kept coming over the last month. we just reached the point where even though it is terribly inconvenient to move again, we just don't really have any choice. we are busy people with a tight schedule and two children, we can't live someplace where they are going to be in and out constantly doing repairs and where there are disease risks with rodents and flies. if the landlord did decide to take us to court; i just don't see how any judge could rule against us. i mean, what are we supposed to do, just stay in a filthy place that was not as advertised and is in complete disrepair dealing with an absentee landlord (he lives in Florida and has ONE maintenance man for 30 properties)? Besides, its not like we have any money he could get from us, we don't have any income (we live off of student loans) so there's no wages he could get garnished, etc. i am just personally really upset that he would be dick about it, because we are being nice letting him know we are leaving and offering to pay the half month's rent before moving out when we could probably try to sue him for misrepresentation of the property or something like that. I live in CA where we have pretty good tenant protection laws. I was in a very similar situation to yours but in addition our power kept going out because the landlord had illegally rewired part of their house and had no idea what they were doing. We finally moved out when part of our roof caved in in the middle of winter and we waited a week and they never sent anyone out to even look at it. A lawyer told us we should move out but that we could very well be responsible for the remainder of the lease. We did end up going to court over it and we had to prove they had rented the property out again right after we left. How they manged that I have no idea. I understand that you are frustrated but keep in mind that if they do take you to court and get a judgment against you they don't have to try and collect right away, I assume you will be planning on getting a job sometime in the future. It's also a ding on your credit rating.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2012 16:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 20:20 |
|
|
nern posted:yeah, we did call and file complaints with the housing inspector/building code places and filed a report of health code violation. the thing is, all this stuff started up after being in the property for only a couple of weeks and the problem have just kept coming over the last month. we just reached the point where even though it is terribly inconvenient to move again, we just don't really have any choice. we are busy people with a tight schedule and two children, we can't live someplace where they are going to be in and out constantly doing repairs and where there are disease risks with rodents and flies. if the landlord did decide to take us to court; i just don't see how any judge could rule against us. i mean, what are we supposed to do, just stay in a filthy place that was not as advertised and is in complete disrepair dealing with an absentee landlord (he lives in Florida and has ONE maintenance man for 30 properties)? Besides, its not like we have any money he could get from us, we don't have any income (we live off of student loans) so there's no wages he could get garnished, etc. i am just personally really upset that he would be dick about it, because we are being nice letting him know we are leaving and offering to pay the half month's rent before moving out when we could probably try to sue him for misrepresentation of the property or something like that. Not your attorney, don't know PA law (specifically). The following is not legal advice and I am not your attorney, it is rather the result of some quick research that you are free to use or not use as a starting point. I strongly suggest you consult a local attorney to verify any of the below information because I am not representing it is current. PA appears not to have a statute on the books that defines "habitability." Most states do, and the issue is that what renters tend to think of "habitability" is not what the law does. The law is usually geared around working plumbing, electricity, doors, etc... not matters of convenience like clean rugs, uncracked windows, blinds, etc. Instead habitability in PA is defined in Pugh v. Holmes, (http://www.ourturn.net/pdf/Pugh_v__Holmes.pdf) which uses an implied warranty of habitability. This implied warranty is affirmative defense, meaning it is something you will have to prove if you get sued and have to go to Court. It basically requires that the landlord make the residence fit for habitation, which is defined in the above case (more or less, there may be subsequent case law). My advice is document everything. Take pictures of droppings, rat holes, scratch marks, the entry point, foot prints, dead carcasses, flies, etc. Send letters to your landlord, saying 1) you reported the problem, 2) the landlord has had enough time to fix it, 3) the steps he has taken have not fixed the problem. Document how you have small children and the rodents present a obvious danger to their physical well being from attack, as well as disease from droppings, decaying carcasses, flies etc. My biggest concern is whether or not your situation rises to the level of rendering your place uninhabitable for not being "safe and sanitary" (or other basis.) I did not look into that issue and am not representing that the situation you described would be sufficient in court to prove an unsafe and unsanitary living condition. I will repeat this is not legal advice and I am not your attorney. Please consult a local attorney in your area. If you are students and your school has a law school you may also want to pop over and see if a professor will give you some guidance.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2012 17:05
|
|