Rent Laws: Violation & Justification Case Study

Exclusively available on IvyPanda Available only on IvyPanda

Introduction

The first law on the rent was formulated by David Ricardo around 1809. Since then, several other laws that explicitly define the principles on the various issues on the rent and the relationship between the landlord and tenant have surfaced. Ricardo’s law states that “…the rent of a land site is equal to the economic advantage obtained by using the site in its most productive use, relative to the advantage obtained by using marginal land for the same purpose, given the same inputs of labor and capital” (Dixon, 2002, p. 2). The two cases present together violation and justification of some rent laws. This essay intends to analyze and investigate the issues underlying each of the case scenarios.

We will write a custom essay on your topic a custom Case Study on Rent Laws: Violation & Justification
808 writers online

Angelo vs. Christie’s case

In this case, Christie honors her part of the bargain in the contract with Angelo and pays a $ 150 weekly dollar for the whole year. But an attempted raise in the amount of rent to $200 prompts Christine to consider relocating to another caravan park, which charges fairly cheap on rent. However, Angelo could not stand the pain of losing a tenant. Therefore, they reach a verbal agreement where Christie was supposed to pay a weekly amount of $175, which Angelo views as too little. When the neighbors raise complaints about Christie’s behavior, Angelo takes advantage of this and serves her with notice, claiming arrears in rent. These arrears were the differences between the supposedly$200 and $175 (Office of the General Counsel, 2008, p. 45).

The fact that Angelo and Christie only entered a legal agreement on the supposed amount to be paid makes this case complex. This is owed to the fact that Christie lacks the necessary documentation that she could present to the court to support her claim that she was rightly paying the $175. We are also not told whether the verbal agreement that the two entered into was recorded anywhere. To assess Angelo’s justification for the increase, we first need to understand what the law says about rent increment. A lease is supposed to secure the term of a tenancy for the period under which the lease was signed.

The terms of a lease cannot be changed unless the tenant consents to them. It is only after the expiry of a lease that a landlord is allowed to change the terms of the least but even so, the tenant must be given prior notice of not less than a month, a notice is only valid if it is written (Stewart et al., 2010, pp. 61-71).

A landlord is not allowed to raise a tenant’s rent in retaliation or a discriminatory manner (Office of the General Counsel, 2008, p. 123). Angelo has breached this rule. He was forced to demand claims from Christie in retaliation to Christie’s sheer rent payment. In her case, Christie could argue that she was acting within her legal rights to enjoy herself within her caravan. We are not told when the landlord warned of the exact noise levels that should not be exceeded within her neighborhood. If anything, it was Angelo’s mistake not to have installed sound absorbers in the caravans of the tenants. It is not a mistake to party within one’s area of residence.

Furthermore, Christie is reported to have been partying in her rented premises for several months. Although the neighbors complained to the landlord, we are not told if the complaints ever reached her. She might have developed the habit of partying consistently because nobody, least of all the landlord ever informed her that what she was doing was wrong. The landlord is therefore not entitled to claim arrears from her based on conduct, which she was not aware of that, was wrong (Dixon, 2002, p. 76).

Christie could further argue that an agreement is an agreement whether written or verbal. Having lived in the caravan for more than a year without seeing any malice from Angelo, she had no reason to doubt his verbal contract with her. Indeed she intended to seek to move into another house whose rent was fairly cheap but was prevented from doing so by Angelo. He, therefore, has no moral authority or any legal ground to impose charges on Christie for the simple reason of parting within the caravan (McAllister & Tarbert, 1999, p. 357).

1 hour!
The minimum time our certified writers need to deliver a 100% original paper

On the other hand, Angelo has all the legal grounds for evicting Christie. This is since Christie’s continued stay in the caravan infringes on the rights of other tenants to stay in a quiet environment. It would be just so that she vacates the premise so that the integrity of her aboard could be protected. The rent increase could also be attributed to the prevailing market demands.

Angelo is in the land-lording business with the main goal of making money. As a businessman, he was able to moderate the increase that had initially been advanced. This is because of the need to retain his long-term solvent tenant. It is important to note that, the $175 that Christie was paying weekly as the rent was only a privilege to her and a reward for her long-term stay at the caravan. The moment Christie resorted to causing disturbances to other neighbors it was automatically assumed that she had breached the contract. To this end, she has no option but to return the privileges that had been extended to her. After all, there was not any available proof to show that her payment of $175 was legal (Portman & Stewart, 2009, p. 81).

Conclusion

In this case, depending on the argument by both sides of the defense, Christie should or should not pay the arrears so demanded by Angelo. If the prosecution can prove that indeed Christie’s actions were deliberately meant to cause disturbances to the neighbors and that she was aware that the $175 weekly rent was a privilege, then she would have to pay. On the other hand, if Christie could prove to the defense that their verbal agreement with Angelo was legally binding and that she has all along honored her contract with the landlord, then she does not need to pay the so claimed arrears by Angelo.

Angelo vs. Ali’s case

In this case, Ali who formerly migrated from a war zone area feels that Christie’s actions of consistent partying have infringed on his rights to a peaceful and quiet environment. Apparently, he had sought clarification from Angelo, if peace and tranquility would be guaranteed within the neighborhood to which Angelo is obliged. He has then decided to move to a neighborhood that is quiet and has the tranquility and peace that he and his family need. This means that he is going to terminate the lease contract that he had signed with the landlord. Tentatively he would deny Angelo the remaining part of the money signed in the contract. Angelo on his side would not hear any of this. All he wants is for Ali to honor the contract and pay him by the end of the year (Stewart, 2009, p. 93).

The legal issues involved in this case include a breach of contract by the tenant and whether the tenant should pay for the remaining amount in the contract even though he is not going to stay in the caravan. Ali’s concern passes the relevancy test because his rights have indeed been violated. Having come from a war zone, he needs a peaceful and quiet environment to help him and his family recuperate from the ordeal. He sought to know if this was the best neighborhood, for which he was assured. Angelo, on his part, is in business. He has not contributed in any way to Ali’s decision of vacating the premises and therefore does not feel obliged to shoulder such a responsibility. It is prudent for the landlord and the tenant to respect their contract of agreement (Dixon, 2002, p. 89).

Tenants must observe certain codes of conduct and obey the terms and conditions in the lease contract. The landlord on the other hand has some duties imposed on him by the law which he has an obligation of safeguarding (Stewart, Warner, & Portman, 2009, p. 87). One of the duties includes ensuring that the premise is habitable to all the tenants therein. In this case scenario, Angelo allowed Christie to consistently disturb the peace and harmony of another tenant by playing loud music. This was not only a breach of the contract the landlord had signed with the tenant but also a violation of the law.

By letting a particular tenant do her parties at the expense of the peace and harmony of other tenants, Angelo ensured that the caravan park becomes inhabitable. In this essence, Ali has no alternative but to seek another quiet place where his peace and that of the family would be guaranteed because that is what he needs most (Portman & Stewart, 2009, p. 58).

Remember! This is just a sample
You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers

The law also requires landlords to include certain rules and procedures that prohibit certain conducts and behavior that are detrimental to the well-being of a rental apartment (Portman & Stewart, 2009, p. 93).

The lease should also state the kind of behaviors that are not accepted and the penalties that follow the violation of the rules. Angelo apparently did not observe this and allowed his tenants to behave in all manners that they so wished. Because of this, he should honor the termination of the lease contract between him and tenant Ali without expecting any pay for the remainder of the year. This is in line with taking responsibility for a duty neglected by him. The fact that Ali inquired if he would get the peace and tranquility that he needed before renting the place was enough reason to grant him his termination will. He should not take the responsibility of paying the remaining amount for the year.

Conclusion

This case seems to be in favor of Ali by all means. He did the right thing by inquiring first if the neighborhood would give him the peace and tranquility that he so much needed. Through a notice written as binding regulatory conduct to all tenants, he was shown the inscriptions that assured peaceful and harmonious living within the rented apartment.

References

Dixon, M. (2002). Principles of land law. Hull: Routledge.

McAllister, P., & Tarbert, H. (1999). Bargaining, utility and rents: Analysing the effect of potential lease termination on rent negotiation outcomes. Journal of Property Investment & Finance, 17(4), 353 – 364.

Office of the General Counsel. (2008). Principles of federal appropriations law. United States General Accounting Office. Web.

Portman, J., & Stewart, M. (2009). Everyt tenant’s legal guide. New York, NY: Nolo.

Stewart, M., Warner, A. R., Warner, R. E., & Portsman, J. (2010). Every landlord’s legal guide. New York, NY: Nolo.

We will write
a custom essay
specifically for you
Get your first paper with
15% OFF

Stewart, M., Warner, R., & Portman, J. (2009). Leases & Rental Agreements. New York, NY: Nolo.

Print
Need an custom research paper on Rent Laws: Violation & Justification written from scratch by a professional specifically for you?
808 writers online
Cite This paper
Select a referencing style:

Reference

IvyPanda. (2022, June 30). Rent Laws: Violation & Justification. https://ivypanda.com/essays/brief-case-study-on-law-of-rent/

Work Cited

"Rent Laws: Violation & Justification." IvyPanda, 30 June 2022, ivypanda.com/essays/brief-case-study-on-law-of-rent/.

References

IvyPanda. (2022) 'Rent Laws: Violation & Justification'. 30 June.

References

IvyPanda. 2022. "Rent Laws: Violation & Justification." June 30, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/brief-case-study-on-law-of-rent/.

1. IvyPanda. "Rent Laws: Violation & Justification." June 30, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/brief-case-study-on-law-of-rent/.


Bibliography


IvyPanda. "Rent Laws: Violation & Justification." June 30, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/brief-case-study-on-law-of-rent/.

Powered by CiteTotal, online bibliography tool
If you are the copyright owner of this paper and no longer wish to have your work published on IvyPanda. Request the removal
More related papers
Cite
Print
1 / 1