I and some friends have been renting a townhouse in CA. The refrigerator has a built in ice maker which has broken. I contacted the management agency and they sent out a repairman to inspect it. After the holidays and several unanswered emails, the management company says the owner has declined to have it fixed since it is a "luxury".
I checked our lease agreement for relevant text and found this line:
"The following items of personal property are included in the Premises without warranty and Landlord may maintain, repair or replace with appliances or parts that may not be new or of similar make and model to the existing item: Stove, Refrigerator, Microwave, Dishwasher, Washer & Dryer, Ladder (stored in garage storage)"
The fridge is clearly named but I'm unsure of two things. 1. Does "may" obligate the owner to fix appliance issues? 2. Is the ice maker breaking sufficient to activate this clause if the fridge is otherwise functional?
Obviously the ice maker breaking is fairly trivial and I can always buy a tray for the freezer and I will never take this to court, but I figure this is actually a slightly interesting academic question and relevant to any future appliance issues of more significance.
I plan on sending an irritated email in any case, but any ammunition you can provide would be appreciated.
Submitted February 01, 2017 at 08:33AM by VerrKol http://ift.tt/2jToYQj legaladvice
No comments:
Post a Comment