Faulty wiring - fire - and out in the cold

[chafeli]

My son and friends (students) have been renting a “granny house” behind a main residence in Santa Barbara, CA. (The main residence is also rented to students.) They arrived home in the middle of the night two nights ago to find there had been a fire that night in the main residence. The fire did not damage the smaller home but because the smaller home's utilities go through the main home they have been turned off. They supposedly need to move immediately. The fire appears to have been caused by faulty wiring (which was a known issue before the fire) and repairs to the main home will not be finished anytime soon. It seems that my son and his roommates could return home if the utilities were turned back on but that is dependent upon an inspection. The owner is not being forthcoming about any plans for inspections.

They spent last night in a hotel. These students have jobs but were not planning a move and do not have extra money available for deposit on a new rental much less enough to pay for hotel rooms while looking for a new place to live. The next day the property manager told them to let her know when they find a place and she will see about returning some of their deposit to them. Do they have any rights in this situation as far as the owner being responsible for paying for temporary housing for his tenants, and does he have an obligation to return their deposit as soon as possible? My son said that the owner is aware that the tenants of the main house are planning to sue him, and he is now resistant to helping any of the tenants. It seems that they are effectively being evicted without cause or due process - literally out in the cold. We would really appreciate any information or advice regarding this situation.

[OHlandlord]

"The fire appears to have been caused by faulty wiring (which was a known issue before the fire)..." Unless your son personally sent a certified letter to the LL to inform him of wiring problems, you do not know this for certian. It would not hold up in court. All that you could know is that faulty wiring caused a fire.

Has your son gotten a copy of the fire marshall's report yet? He should do so to see what the listed cause was on that report. (That is the only report a judge will want to see.) In the meantime, why couldn't a temporary electric line be run through a meter into the rear house while the front one is being repaired? If no damage was done to his residence, there is no reason this could not be done and he could then stay in his unit. Any competent electrician could do this in only one day and your son could be right back home. He should write a letter to the LL asking that this be done immediately. Send the letter certified mail, return receipt requested, and keep a copy. He might also mention that if it is not done, he will be effectively evicted from his unit. It would be in the LL's best interest to get the electric back up and running at that building before pipes burst or other damages is done. (I'd have done that within 2 days of the fire.)

What does your son's lease say about inhabitability of the unit? Many leases say it ends the lease. (If so, his lease has ended once he gets a letter from the health department or buidling inspector saying his unit is uninhabitable and he presents it to his LL. The deposit would be returned to him according to your state's laws, usually within 30 days.) And does your son have renter's insurance? This would cover any losses should he have any personal effects ruined by a fire or weather related issues (broken pipes, etc.). If the fire marshall's report lists the cause to be faulty wiring, the LL may not be at fault until proof of prior knowledge of a problem existed is presented. He must have had prior knowledge of the problem and failed to act on it (negligence) before he is liable.

Have your son read his lease and look for an inhabitility clause. Please post it's language here. And have him send the letter to the LL immediately.

[chafeli]

Thank you, OHlandlord, for your very prompt response.

Re: Faulty wiring. Understand judge would be interested solely in Fire Marshall's report. Mentioned because my son had conversations with the electrician who was effecting repairs to landlord's original work. Electrician said there were a number of problems and the owner was aware but not willing to pay for repairs necessary to correct them. However, fire could very well have been result of some other cause and my son will obtain the report. Main concern presently is being able to live in home ASAP.

Re: That. Relayed your suggestions to my son at work. Was helping him draft a letter to landlord; he could sign, fax to me and I could mail it since he couldn't get to Post Office in time. He spoke with one roommate about the information you provided and she called the landlord about hooking up power temporarily. He told her something about waiting for a week until his insurance company could inspect the damage - that the only way he could connect the power would "adulterate the evidence of the fire" ... The roommate did not inquire how or why that would be so or why it couldn't be done as you suggested. Frustrating for me to hear since they have related previous experiences with this fellow's lack of integrity, they did not understand the power of and reasoning behind stating their concerns in a letter rather than merely asking him conversationally, nor the need for speed (fire occurred early a.m. on 27th December) and having a record of communications. I had to leave for an appointment this afternoon but will convince my son to deliver the letter in peson to the property management folks tomorrow. I live 150 miles north of Santa Barbara so am trying to help from a distance.

My son said that two of the roommates spoke with the landlord initially and rented the home with a verbal agreement for a year's lease. There is nothing in writing. I'm not sure if this means there is a lease in effect legally, or if it would be considered month-to-month by a judge; but there definitely is no inhabitability clause. The lack of having the terms of the lease in writing has resulted in problems since its inception - particularly and ironically relating to payments of utilities.

There is no danger of pipes freezing as the weather in Santa Barbara is normally at least 40 degrees at night in winter and usually warmer - but there are some colder than normal storms lined up presently. After today's problem I was actually wondering about the legality of the young folks living there without power until it could be hooked up in a week or so. They are on winter break from school and might miss their computers, etc., but don't really need them for the time being. It might be inconvenient and a bit uncomfortable but they're young and the weather is positively balmy compared to the Midwest where those poor folks have been without power for over a week in the snow. If it's legal they might prefer that option rather than following the paperwork route or trying to find new housing. Then, of course, the problem would be convincing the landlord to hook them back up to utilities in a timely fashion - though it seems they might have more leverage with a recalcitrant landlord if they are actually living there rather than not. I haven't a clue - especially a legal one.

More questions:

1. I am confused about the role of the Property Mgt. company. They are obviously involved, but should the tenants be dealing with them or the landlord? I was thinking they might be more professional about the situation.

2. Is it a legal possibility for them to go back home and attempt to deal with the landlord from there?

3. Without a written lease containing a habitability clause, does the landlord need to give them one or two months notice for them to move out (for any reason)? If all it takes is having utilities hooked up to have the place habitable, then the landlord cannot say the place needs to be vacated? That is, without attempting to hook up the utilities or an order from Health Dept.?

4. Are the tenants within their rights to have these days, where the rent has been paid but they have had to live elsewhere, be credited to them - either deduct the rent for those days from the next months rent or receive cash back if they end up needing to move?

Again, thank you for your time - we really appreciate your efforts.

[OHlandlord]

Sorry I couldn't reply earlier. It seems there was a glitch in this site.
1) The property manager works for the owner. Perhaps the property manager could approach the owner about the temporary line. I understand they don't want to tamper with the scene of the fire, but a temporary line goes staight from the pole to a temporary pole to the building it is being connected to, then it enters the circuit breaker box from there. It doesn't have to even touch the other building, and would therefore not adulterate the evidence scene. They would only cut the wire at the edge of your son's building (the old wire that came from the other buolding) and would leave the burned building untouched. Perhaps the owner doesn't understand this. If he only called the insurance company and asked they could explain this to him. If he told them he had tenants that were unaffected by the fire, surely the insurance company would OK this measure to keep the other residents (especially since he probably has a loss of income clause in his insurance policy where they will pay him for the income he loses as a result of the fire.) It is a common thing to do and is possible unless the buildings are very close together.
2) If they have not been notified in writing to vacate by the LL, the fire marshall, or a health department official, they can return home. There would be no notice not to return to their apartment.
3) With no written lease, LL or tenant can give a 30 day written notice to vacate the premises. No reason needs to be given for this.
4) They should be credited for the days they had no power in the unit. They should be documenting the loss of power and contacting the LL about a credit for these days. Perhaps if they contacted the LL and told them they wanted to stay and continue to rent from him he would be more apt to get the power back on.
I don't understand why the LL wouldn't want to keep them as tenants. When there is a problem such as this, you would think he would want to keep some income coming in. The only thing I can think of is that he doesn't understand that it is possible to have their power restored while still protecting the burn scene. Maybe the PM can help you explain it to him. If the PM is experienced, he should understand this.