NHPOA Meetings - March 2011
Manchester Chapter Meeting
When: Monday, March 14th at 6:30pm
Where:168 Amory Street Manchester, NH
Topic: Legislative Update, Vendor Workshop
Derry Chapter MeetingWhen:Monday, March 21st at 7:00pm
Where:Marion Gerrish Community Center
39 West Broadway(Route 102)Derry
Topic: Good Time to buy multi-families?
Speaker: Judy Nesset
Monday, March 14, 2011
Call To Action - Rent Escrow Bill
Landlords Helping Landlords
March 2011
Call to Action
Rent Escrow Bill
NHPOA
Dear Property Owner
We have the opportunity to get a favorable committee vote on rent escrow!!
The NH Senate Judiciary Committee
will meet on Thursday, March 17, 2011 at 1:30 pm to hear Senate Bill 44.
SB 44 allows for the payment of rent into court during an eviction proceeding. Failure to make this payment during the court action results in an eviction against the tenant.
The intent here is to reduce the number of frivolous actions by tenants who have no intentions of defending an eviction action, but do so to buy extra time. Tenants are required to pay rent to the court on a weekly basis if they intend to defend any eviction action.
SB 44 - AS INTRODUCED
2011 SESSION SENATE BILL 44
AN ACT relative to payment of rent pending a landlord-tenant action.
SPONSORS: Sen. Boutin, Dist 16; Sen. Sanborn, Dist 7; Sen. Carson, Dist 14; Rep. Jasper, Hills 27; Rep. Infantine, Hills 13; Rep. W. Hutchinson, Hills 9; Rep. Packard, Rock 3
COMMITTEE: Judiciary
ANALYSISThis bill requires the tenant to pay rent on a weekly basis pending an eviction proceeding.
Explanation: Matter added to current law appears in bold italics.
Matter removed from current law appears [in brackets and struckthrough.]
Matter which is either (a) all new or (b) repealed and reenacted appears in regular type.
11-0950
05/09
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Eleven
AN ACT relative to payment of rent pending a landlord-tenant action.
Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:
1 Landlord-Tenant Action; Payment of Rent. Amend RSA 540:13, II(a) to read as follows:
(a) If the tenant wishes to contest the eviction, [he] the tenant must file an appearance in the district court no later than the return day appearing on the writ and shall pay, on a weekly basis with the first payment due upon the filing of the appearance, all rent as it becomes due between the date of the appearance and the date that final judgment is issued. Otherwise, judgment shall be issued in favor of the landlord. The court shall retain 10 percent of such funds as an administration fee, and the balance of such funds shall be distributed to the prevailing party in the eviction action.
2 Effective Date. This act shall take effect January 1, 2012.
Various amendments to this bill have been discussed (including a change to percentage charged by the courts for collecting rent) since the original publication. Please be aware that the NHPOA has reviewed many of the suggested amendments, many of which are more favorable to landlords. An amendment may be introduced during the public hearing, so please be prepared to argue your point vigorously.
The NHPOA has been advised that we will need to fill the room during the public hearing, if we are to sway the committee in our favor. If you have never joined us in Concord before, please do so. If you will be joining us on Thursday, invite a fellow landlord to join you. The numbers are critical to our success.
We, as landlords, need to stop complaining about the laws which we find ludicrous and oppressive. We need to stand up and make our voices count. This is the time to do that. Letters and calls to your Senators do not make the same impact as your presence at the hearing. Your presence at the hearing makes it difficult for the committee to decide against us. If we don't have the numbers, the committee will believe that this issue is not that important to landlords.
Property owners in Massachusetts are also trying to pass a rent escrow law to avoid what is commonly referred to as the "free rent trick" Tenants stop paying rent. They call in the building inspector. They get code violations cited. And now they claim they are withholding rent for code violations and cannot be evicted. Some even prolong their free rent status by blocking repairs and deliberately creating more code violations. This unchecked rent withholding goes on as long as the tenants can keep it up -- many months, sometimes years. Rent escrowing would stop the free rent trick.
As landlords you are in the business of renting properties. This bill affects your business. It improves your bottom line. No-one is going to take care of your business if you don't.
Come to Concord and help us
take care of "business".
Quote of the day:
The ways things are going, pretty soon you will be able to list your tenants as "dependents" on your tax return.
ANALYSISThis bill requires the tenant to pay rent on a weekly basis pending an eviction proceeding.
Explanation: Matter added to current law appears in bold italics.
Matter removed from current law appears [in brackets and struckthrough.]
Matter which is either (a) all new or (b) repealed and reenacted appears in regular type.
11-0950
05/09
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Eleven
AN ACT relative to payment of rent pending a landlord-tenant action.
Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:
1 Landlord-Tenant Action; Payment of Rent. Amend RSA 540:13, II(a) to read as follows:
(a) If the tenant wishes to contest the eviction, [he] the tenant must file an appearance in the district court no later than the return day appearing on the writ and shall pay, on a weekly basis with the first payment due upon the filing of the appearance, all rent as it becomes due between the date of the appearance and the date that final judgment is issued. Otherwise, judgment shall be issued in favor of the landlord. The court shall retain 10 percent of such funds as an administration fee, and the balance of such funds shall be distributed to the prevailing party in the eviction action.
2 Effective Date. This act shall take effect January 1, 2012.
Various amendments to this bill have been discussed (including a change to percentage charged by the courts for collecting rent) since the original publication. Please be aware that the NHPOA has reviewed many of the suggested amendments, many of which are more favorable to landlords. An amendment may be introduced during the public hearing, so please be prepared to argue your point vigorously.
The NHPOA has been advised that we will need to fill the room during the public hearing, if we are to sway the committee in our favor. If you have never joined us in Concord before, please do so. If you will be joining us on Thursday, invite a fellow landlord to join you. The numbers are critical to our success.
We, as landlords, need to stop complaining about the laws which we find ludicrous and oppressive. We need to stand up and make our voices count. This is the time to do that. Letters and calls to your Senators do not make the same impact as your presence at the hearing. Your presence at the hearing makes it difficult for the committee to decide against us. If we don't have the numbers, the committee will believe that this issue is not that important to landlords.
Property owners in Massachusetts are also trying to pass a rent escrow law to avoid what is commonly referred to as the "free rent trick" Tenants stop paying rent. They call in the building inspector. They get code violations cited. And now they claim they are withholding rent for code violations and cannot be evicted. Some even prolong their free rent status by blocking repairs and deliberately creating more code violations. This unchecked rent withholding goes on as long as the tenants can keep it up -- many months, sometimes years. Rent escrowing would stop the free rent trick.
As landlords you are in the business of renting properties. This bill affects your business. It improves your bottom line. No-one is going to take care of your business if you don't.
Come to Concord and help us
take care of "business".
Quote of the day:
The ways things are going, pretty soon you will be able to list your tenants as "dependents" on your tax return.
Debbie Valente New Hampshire Property Owners Association
(603) 881-3682
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Catastrophic Losses and your Leases and Insurance Policies
What Does the Lease Say?
The language in a lease may specify the ownership interests of the landlord and tenant with respect to improvements and betterments and the like, which in turn could impact the question of which insurance policy or policies provide coverage for damage to or destruction of such property.
For example, a lease may provide that once affixed to the premises—whether by the landlord or by the tenant—all improvements and betterments become the sole property of the landlord, are not the property of the tenant, and cannot be removed or altered by the tenant without the express consent of the landlord. A lease may also state that furniture and equipment is the sole property of the tenant. Alternatively, a lease may provide for ownership by the landlord over certain fixtures, improvements and betterments, based on whether they were installed by the landlord or by the tenant, or based on the precise nature of the item.
In the event of a fire, explosion or other catastrophic loss, it can be extremely difficult to determine which items of property were: (1) part of the building's core and shell; (2) part of the improvements and betterments and the like owned by the landlord under the terms of the lease; or (3) part of the property owned by the tenant under the terms of the lease. In addition to the question of ownership over those items, the lease language may specify whether the landlord is contractually required to pay for the replacement of any damaged or destroyed property.
The lease may also address the question of which party is responsible for insuring the improvements and betterments. A lease may require the tenant to insure all improvements and betterments and personal property owned by the tenant. Or it may require only that the tenant insure furniture, equipment and other personal property. Or it may require the tenant to insure only those improvements and betterments or other personal property installed by the tenant. The lease may also specify which property the landlord agrees to insure.
In short, one must closely review any lease at issue to determine: (1) which party owns a given item of property within the leased premises; (2) whether the landlord is required to replace any damaged or destroyed property within the leased premises; and (3) which party was obligated to obtain insurance for a given item of property. Ideally, the lease language will address these issues consistently, so that the line drawn between property "owned" by the landlord or the tenant mirrors the line drawn between the property to be insured by one party or the other. The language is not always consistent or clear, however, which may add further complications in sorting through the parties' respective rights and obligations.
What Do the Policies Say?
A tenant lease is a contract, which governs the rights and obligations between landlord and tenant. In the event of a loss involving the property within the leased premises, another set of contracts will come into play: the landlord's property insurance policy; and the tenant's property insurance policy. The language of those policies with respect to coverage for property within the leased premises may be inconsistent from one policy to the other, and may also be inconsistent with the rights and obligations stated in the lease. Inconsistencies within and between the various contracts can create considerable uncertainty regarding which party is economically responsible for the damage or destruction of property within leased premises.
In a tenant's insurance policy, the scope of coverage for tenant improvements will typically be addressed by the general definition of "personal property" and any specific provisions that relate to coverage for tenant improvements and betterments, furniture, fixtures and equipment and the like. For example, a tenant's policy may explicitly state that personal property includes improvements and betterments installed in any premises owned, leased or occupied by the insured. Absent such an explicit provision, a general definition of personal property may refer to property owned by or in the possession of the insured.
If a tenant's lease states that all improvements and betterments are solely owned by the landlord, the tenant may be unable to demonstrate any ownership interest
in such property and the insurer may take the position that the property is therefore not covered. The tenant may argue that it was in possession of the property and had an insurable "use interest" in the property, and therefore the property was insured despite a lack of ownership. In some jurisdictions, case law may support that argument. For example, under New York law, an insurable interest in property typically includes "any lawful and substantial economic interest in the safety or preservation of property from loss, destruction, or pecuniary damage." Sigola Mfg., Inc. v. Dairyland Ins. Co., 124 A.D.2d 654, 654 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986). Where a tenant agreed in its lease to insure the premises, this argument is even stronger under New York law. Id.
In a policy issued to a landlord, the definition of "personal property" may explicitly include tenant improvements and betterments and the like within premises owned by the landlord and leased to others. Or a landlord's policy may explicitly state that the only improvements and betterments that are covered are those located within property occupied by the landlord. In that case, the insurer may argue that even if a lease between the landlord and the tenant states that the landlord owns the improvements and betterments, those items are not covered property since they are located in premises not occupied by the insured landlord.
Understanding how each policy defines personal property and whether such definitions conflict will be important in determining whether an insurer is responsible for the cost to replace or repair damaged property (or for the actual cash value of such property). This analysis can be further complicated when one or more policies at issue contains an "Other Insurance" provision that makes coverage contingent on the availability of other insurance, an issue discussed below.
What do the Policies Say About Each Other?
Many property insurance policies contain an "other insurance" provision. The language of such provisions varies, but typically they are designed to establish a requirement that in the event of a loss, any other applicable policy must respond first. In concept, a policy containing such a clause would only respond to the extent the "other insurance" was insufficient to cover the entire loss. Not surprisingly, a landlord's policy and tenant's policy may both contain such "other insurance" provisions. The case law in each jurisdiction will be significant in determining how to resolve competing "other insurance" clauses. For example, in Texas, when the "other insurance" provisions conflict, both the tenant's insurer and the landlord's insurer must share the costs. Travelers Lloyds Ins. Co. v. Pacific Employers Ins. Co., 602 F.3d 677 (5th Cir. 2010).
It is possible that both the landlord's policy and the tenant's policy explicitly provide coverage for some of the same property within the leased premises. In that circumstance, the insurers should explore whether it is appropriate to share in the cost of replacing or repairing the property at issue, either due to competing "other insurance" provisions or simply as a reasonable approach to resolving all claims.
Insurers should also be aware of the possibility of a multiple recovery for the same property, with one insurer paying the landlord the full replacement cost for the property and the other insurer paying an actual cash value claim to the tenant for the same property. Further complicating this scenario is the fact that landlords often provide cash up front at the start of a lease term for the tenant to use to fit out the premises. That up front sum is typically added to the monthly lease amount, spread out over the life of the lease. As a result, where property is damaged near the end of a lease term, the landlord may have already been repaid for the original cost to install the improvements, and then be paid again by the insurer for the cost to replace the improvements, with the tenant receiving a separate payment from its insurer for the same property.
Parties should be cognizant of any applicable case law related to these issues to determine whether such multiple or overlapping recoveries are allowed. For example, in New York there is case law supporting the argument that an insurer's contractual payment obligations to the insured cannot be offset by a recovery provided for by another policy. Foley v. Manufacturers & Builders' Fire Insurance Co. of New York, 46 N.E. 318 (N.Y. App. Div. 1897); Alexandra Restaurant, Inc. v. New Hampshire Ins. Co. of Manchester, 272 A.D. 346 (N.Y. App. Div. 1947).
Conclusion
In the event of a catastrophic loss involving property within leased premises, insurers, tenants and landlords should carefully review the applicable language in all leases and policies involved and consider the potential for conflicting terms. Particularly where disputes arise, the parties should consider any jurisdiction-specific case law that may clarify their rights and duties. Ultimately, an understanding of how the provisions of the policies and the lease fit together (or fail to fit together) will be essential in determining where each party's obligations begin and end.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
The language in a lease may specify the ownership interests of the landlord and tenant with respect to improvements and betterments and the like, which in turn could impact the question of which insurance policy or policies provide coverage for damage to or destruction of such property.
For example, a lease may provide that once affixed to the premises—whether by the landlord or by the tenant—all improvements and betterments become the sole property of the landlord, are not the property of the tenant, and cannot be removed or altered by the tenant without the express consent of the landlord. A lease may also state that furniture and equipment is the sole property of the tenant. Alternatively, a lease may provide for ownership by the landlord over certain fixtures, improvements and betterments, based on whether they were installed by the landlord or by the tenant, or based on the precise nature of the item.
In the event of a fire, explosion or other catastrophic loss, it can be extremely difficult to determine which items of property were: (1) part of the building's core and shell; (2) part of the improvements and betterments and the like owned by the landlord under the terms of the lease; or (3) part of the property owned by the tenant under the terms of the lease. In addition to the question of ownership over those items, the lease language may specify whether the landlord is contractually required to pay for the replacement of any damaged or destroyed property.
The lease may also address the question of which party is responsible for insuring the improvements and betterments. A lease may require the tenant to insure all improvements and betterments and personal property owned by the tenant. Or it may require only that the tenant insure furniture, equipment and other personal property. Or it may require the tenant to insure only those improvements and betterments or other personal property installed by the tenant. The lease may also specify which property the landlord agrees to insure.
In short, one must closely review any lease at issue to determine: (1) which party owns a given item of property within the leased premises; (2) whether the landlord is required to replace any damaged or destroyed property within the leased premises; and (3) which party was obligated to obtain insurance for a given item of property. Ideally, the lease language will address these issues consistently, so that the line drawn between property "owned" by the landlord or the tenant mirrors the line drawn between the property to be insured by one party or the other. The language is not always consistent or clear, however, which may add further complications in sorting through the parties' respective rights and obligations.
What Do the Policies Say?
A tenant lease is a contract, which governs the rights and obligations between landlord and tenant. In the event of a loss involving the property within the leased premises, another set of contracts will come into play: the landlord's property insurance policy; and the tenant's property insurance policy. The language of those policies with respect to coverage for property within the leased premises may be inconsistent from one policy to the other, and may also be inconsistent with the rights and obligations stated in the lease. Inconsistencies within and between the various contracts can create considerable uncertainty regarding which party is economically responsible for the damage or destruction of property within leased premises.
In a tenant's insurance policy, the scope of coverage for tenant improvements will typically be addressed by the general definition of "personal property" and any specific provisions that relate to coverage for tenant improvements and betterments, furniture, fixtures and equipment and the like. For example, a tenant's policy may explicitly state that personal property includes improvements and betterments installed in any premises owned, leased or occupied by the insured. Absent such an explicit provision, a general definition of personal property may refer to property owned by or in the possession of the insured.
If a tenant's lease states that all improvements and betterments are solely owned by the landlord, the tenant may be unable to demonstrate any ownership interest
in such property and the insurer may take the position that the property is therefore not covered. The tenant may argue that it was in possession of the property and had an insurable "use interest" in the property, and therefore the property was insured despite a lack of ownership. In some jurisdictions, case law may support that argument. For example, under New York law, an insurable interest in property typically includes "any lawful and substantial economic interest in the safety or preservation of property from loss, destruction, or pecuniary damage." Sigola Mfg., Inc. v. Dairyland Ins. Co., 124 A.D.2d 654, 654 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986). Where a tenant agreed in its lease to insure the premises, this argument is even stronger under New York law. Id.
In a policy issued to a landlord, the definition of "personal property" may explicitly include tenant improvements and betterments and the like within premises owned by the landlord and leased to others. Or a landlord's policy may explicitly state that the only improvements and betterments that are covered are those located within property occupied by the landlord. In that case, the insurer may argue that even if a lease between the landlord and the tenant states that the landlord owns the improvements and betterments, those items are not covered property since they are located in premises not occupied by the insured landlord.
Understanding how each policy defines personal property and whether such definitions conflict will be important in determining whether an insurer is responsible for the cost to replace or repair damaged property (or for the actual cash value of such property). This analysis can be further complicated when one or more policies at issue contains an "Other Insurance" provision that makes coverage contingent on the availability of other insurance, an issue discussed below.
What do the Policies Say About Each Other?
Many property insurance policies contain an "other insurance" provision. The language of such provisions varies, but typically they are designed to establish a requirement that in the event of a loss, any other applicable policy must respond first. In concept, a policy containing such a clause would only respond to the extent the "other insurance" was insufficient to cover the entire loss. Not surprisingly, a landlord's policy and tenant's policy may both contain such "other insurance" provisions. The case law in each jurisdiction will be significant in determining how to resolve competing "other insurance" clauses. For example, in Texas, when the "other insurance" provisions conflict, both the tenant's insurer and the landlord's insurer must share the costs. Travelers Lloyds Ins. Co. v. Pacific Employers Ins. Co., 602 F.3d 677 (5th Cir. 2010).
It is possible that both the landlord's policy and the tenant's policy explicitly provide coverage for some of the same property within the leased premises. In that circumstance, the insurers should explore whether it is appropriate to share in the cost of replacing or repairing the property at issue, either due to competing "other insurance" provisions or simply as a reasonable approach to resolving all claims.
Insurers should also be aware of the possibility of a multiple recovery for the same property, with one insurer paying the landlord the full replacement cost for the property and the other insurer paying an actual cash value claim to the tenant for the same property. Further complicating this scenario is the fact that landlords often provide cash up front at the start of a lease term for the tenant to use to fit out the premises. That up front sum is typically added to the monthly lease amount, spread out over the life of the lease. As a result, where property is damaged near the end of a lease term, the landlord may have already been repaid for the original cost to install the improvements, and then be paid again by the insurer for the cost to replace the improvements, with the tenant receiving a separate payment from its insurer for the same property.
Parties should be cognizant of any applicable case law related to these issues to determine whether such multiple or overlapping recoveries are allowed. For example, in New York there is case law supporting the argument that an insurer's contractual payment obligations to the insured cannot be offset by a recovery provided for by another policy. Foley v. Manufacturers & Builders' Fire Insurance Co. of New York, 46 N.E. 318 (N.Y. App. Div. 1897); Alexandra Restaurant, Inc. v. New Hampshire Ins. Co. of Manchester, 272 A.D. 346 (N.Y. App. Div. 1947).
Conclusion
In the event of a catastrophic loss involving property within leased premises, insurers, tenants and landlords should carefully review the applicable language in all leases and policies involved and consider the potential for conflicting terms. Particularly where disputes arise, the parties should consider any jurisdiction-specific case law that may clarify their rights and duties. Ultimately, an understanding of how the provisions of the policies and the lease fit together (or fail to fit together) will be essential in determining where each party's obligations begin and end.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
Article provided courtesy of mondaq.com
Saturday, February 19, 2011
Hearing rescheduled for Friday, Feb 25th
Dear Property Owner
The public hearing for SB 70-FN has been changed to:
FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 25
COMMERCE, Room 102, LOB In Concord at 9:30 a.m.
Please change your calenders. Talk to your neighbor landlords and ask them to join us on this date.
SENATE BILL 70
This bill shortens the time period during which a landlord is required to store a tenant's abandoned property - 28 days to 7 days. The bill also repeals the right to a private action under the consumer protection act for violation of certain landlord-tenant laws - $1,000 per day fines.
Remember, all the tenant activists and pro-tenant assistance groups will be there to oppose this bill. If you are not there, they will succeed in killing this bill. Make your voice count - be there!
The public hearing for SB 70-FN has been changed to:
FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 25
COMMERCE, Room 102, LOB In Concord at 9:30 a.m.
Please change your calenders. Talk to your neighbor landlords and ask them to join us on this date.
SENATE BILL 70
This bill shortens the time period during which a landlord is required to store a tenant's abandoned property - 28 days to 7 days. The bill also repeals the right to a private action under the consumer protection act for violation of certain landlord-tenant laws - $1,000 per day fines.
Remember, all the tenant activists and pro-tenant assistance groups will be there to oppose this bill. If you are not there, they will succeed in killing this bill. Make your voice count - be there!
Friday, February 18, 2011
Landlord Action Alert - Important Hearing Feb 24th
Dear Property Owner
The public hearing for SB 70-FN has been announced:
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 24
COMMERCE, Room 102, LOB at 9:30 a.m.
NHPOA is asking for your support in Concord to push the passage of SB 70. The time is now. Join us to make a change - don't leave it to others.
SENATE BILL 70
AN ACT relative to remedies in landlord-tenant actions.
SPONSORS: Sen. De Blois, Dist 18
COMMITTEE: Commerce - Sen. Prescott (C), Sen. White (VC), Sen. De Blois, Sen. Houde, Sen. Sanborn
ANALYSIS
This bill shortens the time period during which a landlord is required to store a tenant's abandoned property. The bill also repeals the right to a private action under the consumer protection act for violation of certain landlord-tenant laws.
Explanation: Matter added to current law appears in bold italics.
Matter removed from current law appears [in brackets and struckthrough.]
Matter which is either (a) all new or (b) repealed and reenacted appears in regular type.
11-1000
05/09
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Eleven
AN ACT relative to remedies in landlord-tenant actions.
Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:
1 Prohibited Practices and Security Deposits; Storage of Tenant's Personal Property. Amend RSA 540-A:3, VII to read as follows:
VII. Other than residential real estate under RSA 540-B, a landlord shall maintain and exercise reasonable care in the storage of the personal property of a tenant who has vacated the premises, either voluntarily or by eviction, for a period of [28] 7 days after the date upon which such tenant has vacated. During this period, the tenant shall be allowed to recover personal property without payment of rent or storage fees. After the [28-day] 7-day limit has expired, such personal property may be disposed of by the landlord without notice to the tenant.
2 Repeal. RSA 540-A:4, IX, relative to the landlord and tenant's right to a private action under RSA 358-A:10, is repealed.
3 Effective Date. This act shall take effect January 1, 2012.
Repeal RSA 540-A:4 IX - Landlords are being made to pay tenants a $1000.00/day in fines!!!!
Any landlord or tenant who violates RSA 540-A:2 or RSA 540-A:3 shall be subject to the civil remedies in RSA 358-A:10. Each day that a violation continues shall constitute a separate violation. If the court finds for the plaintiff, recovery shall be in the amount of actual damages or $1,000, whichever is greater. If the court finds that the act was a willful or knowing violation of this chapter, it shall award as much as 3 times, but not less than 2 times, such amount. In addition, a prevailing plaintiff shall be awarded the costs of the suit and reasonable attorney's fees, as determined by the court.
Please don't think this won't happen to you!
In December 2009, a NH tenant who had failed to pay rent, broken his lease and voluntarily vacated the apartment (after handing back his keys) was awarded over $40,000.00 in civil damages - Apparently he had been denied access to his apartment, as it had been subsequently rented to another person. In addition to the $40,000.00 award, the Landlord is now receiving threats from other tenants in the building that they will not be paying their rent. The tenants argue that if they were to sue, they could get $50,000.00, so the Landlord should consider non-payment of rent, a small price to pay.
In the past year NHPOA members have heard of four other similar cases.
Building departments, code enforcement officers, Legal Assistance and tenant attorneys are aware of this law. They are providing free advice to your tenants! How long do you think it is going to take for you to run into a savvy /sophisticated tenant who figures out how this abuse of the system works.
Change storage period to 7 days - Too often landlords have to wait for the full 28 days to pass before taking possession of their property once a tenant has vacated. Most landlords have been in this situation after months of non-payment of rental. On a best case scenario it can take three months to evict someone if they decide to "store" their belongings with the landlord for 28 days rent free.
We have to take a strong stand against these abuses. Please support us to ensure the passage of Senate Bill 70-FN.
It is obvious that this bill is critical in restoring the balance in landlord-tenant matters. We need your support. If you cannot attend the hearings - call or write to your Senator.
Now is the time to make the changes we desperately need. Come to Concord and make the Senate understand your problems as a landlord. Your presence makes a greater impact than a letter or a phone call.
Remember, all the tenant activists and pro-tenant assistance groups will be there to oppose this bill. If you are not there, they will succeed in killing this bill. Make your voice count - be there!
Click here for the current Senate Members: NH Senate Member List
About NHPOA
The New Hampshire Property Owners Association (NHPOA) is the largest rental property owner association in the state. The NHPOA is a non-profit group made up of rental property owners, managers and others with similar business affiliations. Our members are predominantly "mom and pop" landlords, who live in two or three-family homes, or run part-time or full-time rental businesses.
As rental property owners, we currently face the toughest economic climate we are likely to see in a generation. In addition, we are on the wrong side of some of the toughest pro-tenant legislation in the nation. The only way to ensure growth and stability in this climate is to create favorable legislation and educate our members.
Your financial, physical and vocal support helps us to:
* Press for reform of landlord-tenant laws in New Hampshire;
* Educate the public, the media and legislators about property owner issues;
* Educate property owners;
* Organize grassroots lobbying and campaigning;
Join or renew now at http://nhpoa.org
Debbie Valente
New Hampshire Property Owners Association
(603) 881-3682
The public hearing for SB 70-FN has been announced:
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 24
COMMERCE, Room 102, LOB at 9:30 a.m.
NHPOA is asking for your support in Concord to push the passage of SB 70. The time is now. Join us to make a change - don't leave it to others.
SENATE BILL 70
AN ACT relative to remedies in landlord-tenant actions.
SPONSORS: Sen. De Blois, Dist 18
COMMITTEE: Commerce - Sen. Prescott (C), Sen. White (VC), Sen. De Blois, Sen. Houde, Sen. Sanborn
ANALYSIS
This bill shortens the time period during which a landlord is required to store a tenant's abandoned property. The bill also repeals the right to a private action under the consumer protection act for violation of certain landlord-tenant laws.
Explanation: Matter added to current law appears in bold italics.
Matter removed from current law appears [in brackets and struckthrough.]
Matter which is either (a) all new or (b) repealed and reenacted appears in regular type.
11-1000
05/09
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Eleven
AN ACT relative to remedies in landlord-tenant actions.
Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:
1 Prohibited Practices and Security Deposits; Storage of Tenant's Personal Property. Amend RSA 540-A:3, VII to read as follows:
VII. Other than residential real estate under RSA 540-B, a landlord shall maintain and exercise reasonable care in the storage of the personal property of a tenant who has vacated the premises, either voluntarily or by eviction, for a period of [28] 7 days after the date upon which such tenant has vacated. During this period, the tenant shall be allowed to recover personal property without payment of rent or storage fees. After the [28-day] 7-day limit has expired, such personal property may be disposed of by the landlord without notice to the tenant.
2 Repeal. RSA 540-A:4, IX, relative to the landlord and tenant's right to a private action under RSA 358-A:10, is repealed.
3 Effective Date. This act shall take effect January 1, 2012.
Repeal RSA 540-A:4 IX - Landlords are being made to pay tenants a $1000.00/day in fines!!!!
Any landlord or tenant who violates RSA 540-A:2 or RSA 540-A:3 shall be subject to the civil remedies in RSA 358-A:10. Each day that a violation continues shall constitute a separate violation. If the court finds for the plaintiff, recovery shall be in the amount of actual damages or $1,000, whichever is greater. If the court finds that the act was a willful or knowing violation of this chapter, it shall award as much as 3 times, but not less than 2 times, such amount. In addition, a prevailing plaintiff shall be awarded the costs of the suit and reasonable attorney's fees, as determined by the court.
Please don't think this won't happen to you!
In December 2009, a NH tenant who had failed to pay rent, broken his lease and voluntarily vacated the apartment (after handing back his keys) was awarded over $40,000.00 in civil damages - Apparently he had been denied access to his apartment, as it had been subsequently rented to another person. In addition to the $40,000.00 award, the Landlord is now receiving threats from other tenants in the building that they will not be paying their rent. The tenants argue that if they were to sue, they could get $50,000.00, so the Landlord should consider non-payment of rent, a small price to pay.
In the past year NHPOA members have heard of four other similar cases.
Building departments, code enforcement officers, Legal Assistance and tenant attorneys are aware of this law. They are providing free advice to your tenants! How long do you think it is going to take for you to run into a savvy /sophisticated tenant who figures out how this abuse of the system works.
Change storage period to 7 days - Too often landlords have to wait for the full 28 days to pass before taking possession of their property once a tenant has vacated. Most landlords have been in this situation after months of non-payment of rental. On a best case scenario it can take three months to evict someone if they decide to "store" their belongings with the landlord for 28 days rent free.
We have to take a strong stand against these abuses. Please support us to ensure the passage of Senate Bill 70-FN.
It is obvious that this bill is critical in restoring the balance in landlord-tenant matters. We need your support. If you cannot attend the hearings - call or write to your Senator.
Now is the time to make the changes we desperately need. Come to Concord and make the Senate understand your problems as a landlord. Your presence makes a greater impact than a letter or a phone call.
Remember, all the tenant activists and pro-tenant assistance groups will be there to oppose this bill. If you are not there, they will succeed in killing this bill. Make your voice count - be there!
Click here for the current Senate Members: NH Senate Member List
About NHPOA
The New Hampshire Property Owners Association (NHPOA) is the largest rental property owner association in the state. The NHPOA is a non-profit group made up of rental property owners, managers and others with similar business affiliations. Our members are predominantly "mom and pop" landlords, who live in two or three-family homes, or run part-time or full-time rental businesses.
As rental property owners, we currently face the toughest economic climate we are likely to see in a generation. In addition, we are on the wrong side of some of the toughest pro-tenant legislation in the nation. The only way to ensure growth and stability in this climate is to create favorable legislation and educate our members.
Your financial, physical and vocal support helps us to:
* Press for reform of landlord-tenant laws in New Hampshire;
* Educate the public, the media and legislators about property owner issues;
* Educate property owners;
* Organize grassroots lobbying and campaigning;
Join or renew now at http://nhpoa.org
Debbie Valente
New Hampshire Property Owners Association
(603) 881-3682
Sunday, February 6, 2011
Landlord Action Alert
Landlord Action Alert from the NHPOA
Dear Property Owner
NHPOA is asking for your support in Concord to push the passage of the following bills which promote Landlord Rights!
SENATE BILL 44
AN ACT relative to payment of rent pending a landlord-tenant action.
SPONSORS: Sen. Boutin, Dist 16; Sen. Sanborn, Dist 7; Sen. Carson, Dist 14; Rep. Jasper, Hills 27; Rep. Infantine, Hills 13; Rep. W. Hutchinson, Hills 9; Rep. Packard, Rock 3
COMMITTEE: Judiciary
ANALYSIS
This bill requires the tenant to pay rent on a weekly basis pending an eviction proceeding.
Explanation: Matter added to current law appears in bold italics.
Matter removed from current law appears [in brackets and struckthrough.] Matter which is either (a) all new or (b) repealed and reenacted appears in regular type.
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Eleven
AN ACT relative to payment of rent pending a landlord-tenant action.
Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:
1 Landlord-Tenant Action; Payment of Rent. Amend RSA 540:13, II(a) to read as follows:
(a) If the tenant wishes to contest the eviction, [he] the tenant must file an appearance in the district court no later than the return day appearing on the writ and shall pay, on a weekly basis with the first payment due upon the filing of the appearance, all rent as it becomes due between the date of the appearance and the date that final judgment is issued. Otherwise, judgment shall be issued in favor of the landlord. The court shall retain 10 percent of such funds as an administration fee, and the balance of such funds shall be distributed to the prevailing party in the eviction action.
2 Effective Date. This act shall take effect January 1, 2012.
The public hearing for this bill has not yet been determined. We will notify you as soon as a date has been set. We are notifying you of these bills so that you have some notice that the hearing will take place within the next two weeks. Your presence is encouraged. The last landlord bill presented before the House Judiciary Committee was not well attended by landlords. The committee followed the view that the bill was not important to landlords, otherwise there would have many landlords physically present to voice their support. These bills are very important to all landlords throughout the state - please make every effort to attend the public hearings.
SENATE BILL 70
AN ACT relative to remedies in landlord-tenant actions.
SPONSORS: Sen. De Blois, Dist 18
COMMITTEE: Commerce
ANALYSIS
This bill shortens the time period during which a landlord is required to store a tenant's abandoned property. The bill also repeals the right to a private action under the consumer protection act for violation of certain landlord-tenant laws.
Explanation: Matter added to current law appears in bold italics.
Matter removed from current law appears [in brackets and struckthrough.]
Matter which is either (a) all new or (b) repealed and reenacted appears in regular type.
11-1000 05/09
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Eleven
AN ACT relative to remedies in landlord-tenant actions.
Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:
1 Prohibited Practices and Security Deposits; Storage of Tenant's Personal Property. Amend RSA 540-A:3, VII to read as follows:
VII. Other than residential real estate under RSA 540-B, a landlord shall maintain and exercise reasonable care in the storage of the personal property of a tenant who has vacated the premises, either voluntarily or by eviction, for a period of [28] 7 days after the date upon which such tenant has vacated. During this period, the tenant shall be allowed to recover personal property without payment of rent or storage fees. After the [28-day] 7-day limit has expired, such personal property may be disposed of by the landlord without notice to the tenant.
2 Repeal. RSA 540-A:4, IX, relative to the landlord and tenant's right to a private action under RSA 358-A:10, is repealed.
3 Effective Date. This act shall take effect January 1, 2012.
The public hearing for this bill has also not yet been determined. We will notify you as soon as a date has been set.
It is obvious that these bills are critical in restoring the balance in landlord-tenant matters. We need your support. If you cannot attend the hearings - call or write to your Senator.
Now is the time to make the changes we desperately need. Come to Concord and make the Senate understand your problems as a landlord. Your presence makes a greater impact than a letter or a phone call.
Click here for the current Senate Members: http://gencourt.state.nh.us/senate/members/
About NHPOA
The New Hampshire Property Owners Association (NHPOA) is the largest rental property owner association in the state. The NHPOA is a non-profit group made up of rental property owners, managers and others with similar business affiliations. Our members are predominantly "mom and pop" landlords, who live in two or three-family homes, or run part-time or full-time rental businesses.
As rental property owners, we currently face the toughest economic climate we are likely to see in a generation. In addition, we are on the wrong side of some of the toughest pro-tenant legislation in the nation. The only way to ensure growth and stability in this climate is to create favorable legislation and educate our members.
Your financial, physical and vocal support helps us to:
* Press for reform of landlord-tenant laws in New Hampshire;
* Educate the public, the media and legislators about property owner issues;
* Educate property owners;
* Organize grassroots lobbying and campaigning;
Join or renew now http://nhpoa.org
Debbie Valente
New Hampshire Property Owners Association
(603) 881-3682
Dear Property Owner
NHPOA is asking for your support in Concord to push the passage of the following bills which promote Landlord Rights!
SENATE BILL 44
AN ACT relative to payment of rent pending a landlord-tenant action.
SPONSORS: Sen. Boutin, Dist 16; Sen. Sanborn, Dist 7; Sen. Carson, Dist 14; Rep. Jasper, Hills 27; Rep. Infantine, Hills 13; Rep. W. Hutchinson, Hills 9; Rep. Packard, Rock 3
COMMITTEE: Judiciary
ANALYSIS
This bill requires the tenant to pay rent on a weekly basis pending an eviction proceeding.
Explanation: Matter added to current law appears in bold italics.
Matter removed from current law appears [in brackets and struckthrough.] Matter which is either (a) all new or (b) repealed and reenacted appears in regular type.
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Eleven
AN ACT relative to payment of rent pending a landlord-tenant action.
Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:
1 Landlord-Tenant Action; Payment of Rent. Amend RSA 540:13, II(a) to read as follows:
(a) If the tenant wishes to contest the eviction, [he] the tenant must file an appearance in the district court no later than the return day appearing on the writ and shall pay, on a weekly basis with the first payment due upon the filing of the appearance, all rent as it becomes due between the date of the appearance and the date that final judgment is issued. Otherwise, judgment shall be issued in favor of the landlord. The court shall retain 10 percent of such funds as an administration fee, and the balance of such funds shall be distributed to the prevailing party in the eviction action.
2 Effective Date. This act shall take effect January 1, 2012.
The public hearing for this bill has not yet been determined. We will notify you as soon as a date has been set. We are notifying you of these bills so that you have some notice that the hearing will take place within the next two weeks. Your presence is encouraged. The last landlord bill presented before the House Judiciary Committee was not well attended by landlords. The committee followed the view that the bill was not important to landlords, otherwise there would have many landlords physically present to voice their support. These bills are very important to all landlords throughout the state - please make every effort to attend the public hearings.
SENATE BILL 70
AN ACT relative to remedies in landlord-tenant actions.
SPONSORS: Sen. De Blois, Dist 18
COMMITTEE: Commerce
ANALYSIS
This bill shortens the time period during which a landlord is required to store a tenant's abandoned property. The bill also repeals the right to a private action under the consumer protection act for violation of certain landlord-tenant laws.
Explanation: Matter added to current law appears in bold italics.
Matter removed from current law appears [in brackets and struckthrough.]
Matter which is either (a) all new or (b) repealed and reenacted appears in regular type.
11-1000 05/09
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Eleven
AN ACT relative to remedies in landlord-tenant actions.
Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:
1 Prohibited Practices and Security Deposits; Storage of Tenant's Personal Property. Amend RSA 540-A:3, VII to read as follows:
VII. Other than residential real estate under RSA 540-B, a landlord shall maintain and exercise reasonable care in the storage of the personal property of a tenant who has vacated the premises, either voluntarily or by eviction, for a period of [28] 7 days after the date upon which such tenant has vacated. During this period, the tenant shall be allowed to recover personal property without payment of rent or storage fees. After the [28-day] 7-day limit has expired, such personal property may be disposed of by the landlord without notice to the tenant.
2 Repeal. RSA 540-A:4, IX, relative to the landlord and tenant's right to a private action under RSA 358-A:10, is repealed.
3 Effective Date. This act shall take effect January 1, 2012.
The public hearing for this bill has also not yet been determined. We will notify you as soon as a date has been set.
It is obvious that these bills are critical in restoring the balance in landlord-tenant matters. We need your support. If you cannot attend the hearings - call or write to your Senator.
Now is the time to make the changes we desperately need. Come to Concord and make the Senate understand your problems as a landlord. Your presence makes a greater impact than a letter or a phone call.
Click here for the current Senate Members: http://gencourt.state.nh.us/senate/members/
About NHPOA
The New Hampshire Property Owners Association (NHPOA) is the largest rental property owner association in the state. The NHPOA is a non-profit group made up of rental property owners, managers and others with similar business affiliations. Our members are predominantly "mom and pop" landlords, who live in two or three-family homes, or run part-time or full-time rental businesses.
As rental property owners, we currently face the toughest economic climate we are likely to see in a generation. In addition, we are on the wrong side of some of the toughest pro-tenant legislation in the nation. The only way to ensure growth and stability in this climate is to create favorable legislation and educate our members.
Your financial, physical and vocal support helps us to:
* Press for reform of landlord-tenant laws in New Hampshire;
* Educate the public, the media and legislators about property owner issues;
* Educate property owners;
* Organize grassroots lobbying and campaigning;
Join or renew now http://nhpoa.org
Debbie Valente
New Hampshire Property Owners Association
(603) 881-3682
NHPOA - Manchester Chapter Meeting
NHPOA
Manchester Chapter Meeting
When: Monday, February 14th at 6:30pm
Where: 168 Amory Street Manchester, NH
Speaker: Attorney Brian Shaughnessy
Topic: Landlord and Tenant discrimination laws
Manchester Chapter Meeting
When: Monday, February 14th at 6:30pm
Where: 168 Amory Street Manchester, NH
Speaker: Attorney Brian Shaughnessy
Topic: Landlord and Tenant discrimination laws
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)