I’ve recently become aware that some Massachusetts landlords are requiring that tenants procure their own policy of renter’s insurance as a condition of leasing. In fact, MSN Real Estate did a nice write up about the practice here. But I am also hearing about a dark side to this practice where some landlords have a kickback arrangement with the insurance provider where the landlord receives compensation for any policy taken out by a tenant.
Renter’s insurance is almost always a good idea, but under Massachusetts law, can a landlord require that a tenant get a policy (if the tenant doesn’t want one) and must it disclose a referral relationship with the insurance provider?
Landlords Should Be Careful About Renter’s Insurance Requirement
In light of recent court decisions, landlords should re-examine the legality of a mandatory renter’s insurance policy requirement. In the recent Hermida v. Archstone class action ruling, which considered amenity fees under the Massachusetts security deposit statute, the court held that landlords can only charge first and last month’s rent, a security deposit, and a lost key fee at the beginning of a tenancy, and no other types of fees. Any other type of fee or financial obligation required to be paid by the tenant at the beginning of the lease could be deemed illegal under the Mass. Security Deposit law, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 186, sec. 15B. Accordingly, landlord must be very careful about what and how much they charge tenants at the inception of leases, over and above the standard rent deposits and new key fee. At the very least, renter’s insurance should be optional, and any affiliate or kickback arrangement should be fully disclosed to the tenant. This still may not prevent a landlord from getting sued over a mandatory renter’s insurance requirement.
Renter’s Insurance Still Smart Choice
That said, I always recommend that tenants get their own renter’s insurance policy. It’s fairly inexpensive and provides protection to your personal belongings. Massachusetts law does provide for a minimum of $750 per unit for tenant relocation assistance due to fire displacement. However, that is not nearly enough for the average renter.
Has your landlord required that you purchase renter’s insurance? Have they disclosed any referral relationship? I’d like to hear from you. The practice may well be illegal.
Another Expansion Of Massachusetts Landlord Liability
In yet another case demonstrating Massachusetts’ inhospitable legal environment towards residential landlords, Northeast Housing Court Judge David Kerman has ruled that an owner of a mixed used residential – commercial building is “strictly liable” for a drunk tenant’s fall through a defective porch guardrail. The 17-page ruling is Sheehan v. Weaver, and is embedded below. The imposition of strict liability, sometimes called absolute or no-fault liability, makes landlords 100% liable for the injuries of tenants where there is a building code violation, regardless of whether the tenant was equally at fault for the accident. This is a troubling ruling and another reason supporting the notion that Massachusetts is landlord unfriendly!
Faulty Porch Guardrail
The landlord, David Weaver, owned a building with three residential apartments located above a commercial establishment. None of the apartments were owner-occupied. One of Weaver’s residential tenants, William Sheehan, fell through a porch guardrail, several stories onto the asphalt pavement below, suffering serious injuries. There was evidence that Sheehan was intoxicated, however, the connection of the guardrail to its post gave way because it was defective and in violation of the Building Code.
After a four-day trial in the Housing Court, a jury found for the tenant on the negligence claim, awarding approximately $145,000 after a 40% reduction for the plaintiff’s own negligence. The jury also found the landlord strictly liable, assessing $242,000 in damages.
Building Code Violation At Issue
The Massachusetts State Building Code provides for strict (100%) liability for any personal injuries caused by any building code violation at any “place of assembly, theatre, special hall, public hall, factory, workshop, manufacturing establishment or building.” The landlord argued that the primarily residential structure was not sufficiently commercial to be considered a “building” within the meaning of the Building Code’s strict liability provision. But Judge David D. Kerman disagreed:
“[T]he structure in this case may well be at the outer margin of the class of structures that fall within the ambit of the term ‘building’ in the strict liability law,” wrote Kerman. “However, it is my opinion that the mixed residential-commercial four-unit non-owner-occupied structure in this case is ‘commercial’ and ‘public’ enough to fit within the term ‘building’ in section 51.”
The imposition of strict liability resulted in the landlord being hit with the full amount of the $242,000 judgment with no reduction for the tenant’s comparative negligence due to his intoxication. Ouch.
Commentary: Bad Decision
As I stated to Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, this is a troubling ruling. The Building Code provision, passed in the late 1800’s, was clearly intended to cover structures with a distinctively commercial nature, i.e., “public hall, factory, workshop, manufacturing establishing or building.” The law was not intended to cover a predominantly residential apartment building with commercial/retail on the ground floor, in my opinion.
This ruling will now expand liability for residential developers who have built quite a number of mixed-use residential projects in the last few years. This decision can be read as providing strict liability for anyone injured due to any type of building code violation, however minor. Property managers and commercial insurers should be aware of this ruling, and ensure that there are no building code issues which could cause harm to tenants.
Given the concerning expansion of liability in this case, look for this ruling to get appealed. Judge Kerman is a well-respected judge, and this decision is a close call, but I think he went a bit too far outside the legislative intent behind the law.
Commercial Landlord Must Wait Out 12 Year Lease Term To Recover For Tenant’s Early Termination
In a decision which underscores the importance of careful commercial lease drafting, the Massachusetts Appeals Court has ruled that under a standard form default indemnity provision in a commercial lease, a commercial landlord must wait out the end of a 12 year lease term to recover unpaid rent from a tenant who abandoned the premises in Year 2 of the lease. The practice pointer here is to always have a current acceleration/liquidated damages clause in your commercial lease. See below for some form language.
The case is 275 Washington Street Corp.. vs. Hudson River Int’l, LLC (Mass. Appeals Court March 9, 2012), and is embedded below.
Dental Practice Goes South Quickly
The landlord and tenant entered into a 12-year lease beginning April 13, 2006, and ending April 16, 2018. The premises, located at 221-227 Washington Street in downtown Boston, were intended for use as a dental practice. Within a year of the lease commencement, the dental practice went under and closed. In May 2008, the dentist told the landlord that he would not be making any further lease payments.
Fortunately, the landlord found a new tenant. A new 10 year lease was signed, covering the remainder of the dentist’s term, but at a lower rent. The landlord sued the tenant for the rent differential.
Standard Indemnification Clause
The lease contained a standard default indemnification clause found in many older standard lease forms such as this:
The LESSEE shall indemnify the LESSOR against all loss of rent and other payments which the LESSOR may incur by reason of such termination during the residue of the term. If the LESSEE shall default, after reasonable notice thereof, in the observance or performance of any conditions or covenant on LESSEE’s part to be observed or performed under or by virtue of any of the provisions in any article of this lease, the LESSOR, without being under any obligation to do so and without thereby waiving such default, may remedy such default for the account and at the expense of the LESSEE.
Indemnity Provision Lacking
The problem is that under Massachusetts law, recovery under an indemnity clause of a lease cannot be had until the specified term of the lease has ended. The reasoning underlying this legal tenet is that such liability is ultimately “contingent upon events thereafter occurring, because the full amount which the lessee eventually must pay for the remainder of the term cannot be wholly ascertained until the period ends.” Although somewhat reluctant, the Court was bound to follow the law in this instance:
We are cognizant of the concerns raised by this long-established rule barring recovery until the end of the original lease, given the possible intervention of factors, presently unknown, that make the determination of damages uncertain at the present. We also recognize the possibility that this rule, which forces this landlord to wait until 2018 to determine post-termination damages, may in effect make it impossible for the landlord to recover its true damages from this corporate tenant or guarantor, because of the protections afforded by legal processes, such as dissolution or bankruptcy. However, given the present state of the law and the specific terms of the contract to which parties of equal bargaining power agreed, we are constrained, nonetheless, to deny recovery to the landlord under the indemnification clause of this lease.
Time To Change The Old Law?
The Appeals Court, especially the concurring opinion of Justice Kantrowitz, suggested that the time may be ripe for the Supreme Judicial Court to re-examine and modernize the law in this area. So look for this case to possibly go up on appeal.
Solution: Acceleration/Liquidated Damages Clause
The lease in this case did not contain the more current acceleration/liquidated damage clause which provides that upon a rent default, all unpaid rent is automatically due through the end of the lease term as liquidated damages. I recommend language such as this to prevent what happened to the landlord in this case:
If LESSEE shall default in the payment of the security deposit, rent, taxes, substantial invoice from LESSOR or LESSOR’s agent for goods and/or services or other sum herein specified, and such default shall continue for ten (10) days after written notice hereof, and, because both parties agree that nonpayment of said sums when due is a substantial breach of the lease, and, because the payment of rent in monthly installments is for the sole benefit and convenience of LESSEE, then in addition to the foregoing remedies the entire balance of rent which is due hereunder shall become immediately due and payable as liquidated damages. The Parties acknowledge and agree that (i) the liquidated damages hereunder is the best estimate of such damages which would accrue to Lessor in the event of Lessee’s default hereunder; (ii) said deposit represents damages and not a penalty against Lessee.
Federal Judge Rules $475 Apartment Amenity Use Fee Violates Massachusetts Security Deposit Law
Some large apartment owners, such as Archstone Properties, have been charging tenants a separate “amenity use fee” for use of the community pool, workout room, media center and other amenities, or a separate “move-in” fee or pet fee. The fees can be rather hefty; several hundred dollars in many cases. Well, a federal judge recently struck down these fees as illegal under the Massachusetts Security Deposit Law. What’s more, the judge has allowed a class action to proceed against Archstone Reading apartment complex which may be on the hook for thousands if not millions in refunds to tenants. Other apartment complexes may have legal exposure if they used similar amenity use fees.
Massachusetts Amenity Fee Class Action
The case is Hermida v. Archstone Properties (D. Mass. Nov. 29, 2011). The case arose out of a $475 amenity use fee charged by Archstone Properties in their Reading, Massachusetts apartment complex. The judge ruled that under Massachusetts law, landlords can only charge tenants for: (1) first month’s rent, (2) last month’s rent, (3) a security deposit, and (4) a key installation fee. The additional amenity use fee is illegal, Judge Young ruled, if it is required, not optional, and charged up front, i.e, a condition to renting. Judge Young also approved the case for class action status.
The class action attorney handling the case, Matthew Fogelman, Esq., is also investigating whether other apartment complexes and landlords have charged similar amenity use fees, move in fees and/or pet fees, for potential class actions against those apartment complexes. If you were ever charged a separate amenity use fee, move-in fee, or pet fee as part of your rental lease, please email me at [email protected] and I will put you in contact with the case attorney. You could be entitled to a refund of several hundred dollars and possibly additional compensation.
Alert: Property managers are asking tenants to sign releases to get a refund of their amenity use fees. DO NOT SIGN ANY RELEASE OR WAIVER FORM UNTIL YOU HAVE CONSULTED WITH AN ATTORNEY. YOU COULD BE WAIVING YOUR RIGHT TO COLLECT THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF COMPENSATION.
Buying a condominium unit can be more involved than buying a single family home. This is because you have to worry about both the unit itself and the condominium project as a whole.
10 Questions You Must Ask Before Purchasing A Condominium Unit
To borrow from a famous phrase, not all condominiums are created equally. Some condominiums are very well run; some are quite poorly run and underfunded. Buyers interested in purchasing a condominium unit must do their homework: not only about the condition of the individual unit they are interested in purchasing, but on the financial health and governance of the condominium as a whole. Remember, you are buying into the entire project as much as you are the unit, and your decision will impact your daily living and your ability to re-sell.
Here are the 10 questions buyers should ask when deciding to purchase a condominium unit:
What is the monthly condominium fee and what does it pay for? The monthly condominium fee can range quite dramatically from condominium to condominium. The fee is a by-product of the number of units, the annual expenses to maintain the common area, whether the condo is professionally managed or self-managed, the age and condition of the project, and other variables such as litigation. For budgeting and financing you need to know the monthly fee and exactly what you are getting for it.
What are the condominium rules & regulations? Condominium rules can prohibit pets, your ability to rent out the unit, and perform renovations. Make sure you carefully review the rules and regulations before buying. Needless to say, the buyer’s attorney should review and approval all condominium documents, including the master deed, declaration of trust/by-laws, covenants, unit deed and floor plans to ensure compliance with state condominium laws as well as Fannie Mae and FHA guidelines, as necessary.
How much money is in the capital reserve account and how much is funded annually? The capital reserve fund is like an insurance policy for the inevitable capital repairs every building requires. As a general rule, the fund should contain at least 10% of the annual revenue budget, and in the case of older projects, even more. If the capital reserve account is poorly funded, there is a higher risk of a special assessment. Get a copy of the last 2 years budget, the current reserve account funding level and any capital reserve study.
Are there any contemplated or pending special assessments? Special assessments are one time fees for capital improvements payable by every unit owner. Some special assessments can run in the thousands, others like the Boston Harbor Towers $75 Million renovation project, in the millions. You need to be aware if you are buying a special assessment along with your unit. It’s a good idea to ask for the last 2 years of condominium meeting minutes to check what’s been going on with the condomininium.
Is there a professional management company or is the association self-managed? Usually, a professional management company, while an added cost, can add great value to a condominium with well run governance and management of common areas. But for smaller condominiums, self-management works just fine.
Is the condominium involved in any pending legal actions? Legal disputes between owners, with developers or with the association can signal trouble and a poorly run organization. Legal action equals attorneys’ fees which are payable out of the condominium budget and could result in a special assessment. In some states, you can run a search of the condominium association in the court database to check if they’ve been involved in recent lawsuits.
How many units are owner occupied? A large percentage of renters can create unwanted noise and neighbor issues. It can also raise re-sale and financing issues with the new Fannie Mae and FHA condominium regulations which limit owner-occupancy rates. If your buyer is using conventional financing, check if it is a Fannie Mae approved condo. If FHA financing, check if it’s an FHA approved condo. (Thanks mortgage specialist Lou Corcoran for the links)
What is the condominium fee delinquency rate? Again, a signal of financial trouble, and Fannie Mae and FHA want to see the rate at 15% or less.
Do unit owners have exclusive easements or right to use certain common areas such as porches, decks, storage spaces and parking spaces? Condominiums differ as to how they structure the “ownership” of certain amenities such as roof decks, porches, storage spaces and parking spaces. Sometimes, they are truly “deeded” with the unit, so the unit owner has sole responsibility for maintenance and repairs. Sometimes, they are common areas in which the unit owner has the exclusive right to use, but the maintenance and repair is left with the association. Review the Master Deed and Unit Deed on this one.
What Does The Master Insurance Policy Cover? The condominium should have up to $1M or more in coverage under their master condominium policy. For buyer’s own protection, they should always buy an individual HO-6 policy covering the interior and contents of the unit, because the master policy and condo by-laws may not cover all damage to their personal possessions and interior damage in case of a roof leak, water pipe burst or other problem arising from a common area element. Ask for a copy of the master insurance policy and don’t forget to check the fine print of the by-laws. Sometimes, there’s language that would hurt a unit owner in case of a common area casualty. Condominiums over 20 units should also have fidelity insurance to protect against embezzlement.
I posted this list on the Realtor ActiveRain website and it was the featured post, generating a slew of great comments from real estate brokers around the country.
Of course, a good real estate attorney will help buyers and their realtors with this “due diligence.” As part of our standard condominium representation, we will review the following condominium documents and issues:
Master Deed and amendments
Declaration of Trust/By-Laws, Rules & Regulations
HOA Covenants/Restrictions
Unit Deed and Floor Plans
Condominium Budget and Capital Reserve Fund
Fannie Mae/FHA Compliance Provisions
Condominium Annual and Special Meeting Minutes
Pending or Contemplated Special Assessments or Litigation
We will also build in provisions into your purchase and sale agreement to protect you in case there are unanticipated or undisclosed issues with the condominium which affect your willingness to move forward with the transaction. Happy condo hunting!
With the impending influx of renters and students invading the Greater Boston area soon, let’s review some often asked questions concerning Massachusetts landlord tenant law to assist landlords in navigating the rental process.
Screening Prospective Tenants: What You Can and Cannot Ask?
Landlords can legally ask about a tenant’s income, current employment, prior landlord references, credit history, and criminal history. Your rental application should include a full release of all credit history and CORI (Criminal Offender Registry Information). Use CORI information with a great deal of caution, however, and offer the tenant an opportunity to explain any issues. Landlords should also check the Sex Offender Registry as they can be held liable for renting to a known offender. Use the rental application and other forms from the Greater Boston Real Estate Board.
Under Massachusetts discrimination laws, a landlord cannot refuse to rent to a tenant on the basis of the tenant’s race, color, national origin, ancestry, gender, sexual orientation, age, marital status, religion, military/veteran status, disability, receipt of public assistance, and children. It’s best to stay away from asking about these topics.
Students, especially undergraduates, often create problems for landlords. Meet with students personally before signing the lease and firmly explain a “no tolerance” policy against excessive noise, parties and misbehavior.
Careful screening of tenants is far less expensive than the cost of evicting a problem tenant.
Security And Last Month’s Rent Deposits: Should I Take One?
I advise landlords not to take security deposits because any misstep, however innocent, under the complex Massachusetts security deposit law can subject the landlord to far greater liability than the deposit. Among other requirements, the security deposit law provides:
a landlord must give the tenant a written receipt with information as to where the deposit is being held;
a landlord must hold a security deposit in a separate interest bearing account, and pay interest to the tenant yearly;
at the beginning of the tenancy, a landlord must provide the tenant with a written “statement of condition” of the rental unit detailing its condition and any damage;
the tenant may note any damage on the statement of condition
At the end of the tenancy, if the landlord desires to deduct repair costs from the security deposit, it must provide the tenant with written notification and copies of all estimates within 30 days of the tenant’s move-out.
Under the law, any slip-up on these requirements can subject the landlord to liability for 3 times the deposit plus the tenant’s attorneys’ fees. That’s why I advise my landlord clients that security deposits aren’t worth the money. If you need a deposit, take a last month’s deposit, the requirements of which can be found here in the Massachusetts last month’s deposit law.
Due to the high interest in security deposits, I wrote a full post on the topic. Click on Massachusetts Security Deposits to view the article.
My Property Has Lead Paint, What Do I Do?
Under the Massachusetts Lead Paint Law, landlords (and real estate agents) must disclose to tenants the presence of known lead paint for property built before 1978. The property must be de-leaded if a child under 6 will live there. That means if a young couple moves into a unit, then has a baby, the landlord must de-lead the property. There is no way around de-leading other than risking a discrimination claim for not renting to families with small children which is illegal. (Of course, many landlords unlawfully reject families with children). Exposing children to lead paint puts a landlord at huge legal risk. Financial aid and tax credits for de-leading are available to qualified property owners. For all Massachusetts rental property built before 1978, landlords must provide all tenants regardless of family composition with a Massachusetts Tenant Notification and Certification form, and all lead inspection reports and testing information, if available.
Can I Take A Finder’s Fee?
Only a licensed real estate broker can lawfully collect a finder’s fee for bringing together a landlord and a tenant. Landlords who don’t work with brokers cannot charge a finder’s fee.
Richard D. Vetstein, Esq. is regarded as one of the leading real estate attorneys in Massachusetts. With over 25 years in practice, he is a four time winner of the "Top Lawyer" award by Boston Magazine, a "Super Lawyer" designation from Thompson/West, and "Best of Metrowest." For Rich's professional biography, click here. If you are interested in hiring Rich or have a legal question, email or call him at [email protected] or 508-620-5352.
Renter’s Insurance Policy Raises Questions
Richard D. Vetstein, Esq. is an experienced Massachusetts Real Estate Landlord Attorney. For further information you can contact him at [email protected].
