Landlord responsible to clean up water?

Question

Due to heavy rains an apartment that's below ground level is waterlogged. Carpet and pad are soaked. A crew is pumping out water and running fans, has removed 1000 gallons so far in 24 hours. The areas under heavy furniture, boxes, etc are still squishy and the place can't be dried out without moving all the furniture and belongings around, so that the carpet can be pulled up and fans and pumps put in place.

Landlord will not move furniture and belongings in order to dry out the carpet, they consider it the tenant's obligation.

Who's responsible for moving the furniture around to get the apartment back to being inhabitable ? (State of Indiana)

Landlord will not move furniture and belongings in order to dry out the carpet, they consider it the tenant's obligation.

Who's responsible for moving the furniture around to get the apartment back to being inhabitable ?  (State of Indiana)

Bill Robinson · Answer

The apartment wasn't flooded due to negligence. It is flooded due to massive rains. And no, absent negligence the landlord is not responsible for the tenants furniture, etc. That is why tenants should get insurance.

Jon K. · Answer

You could deny responsibility for moving tenant's furniture all you want. That doesn't meant the tenant couldn't try to sue you 1) for failing to disclose that property leaked and 2) allowing tenant to rent out basement that's not considered habitable by the city because it leaks.

If the landlord is in violation of city code, don't you have more issues on hand than moving around furniture?

Also, who says the landlord is in violation of city code? Did the landlord know it leaked before and refused to fix it? Did some tenant or wanna-be hobby inspector just assume a visible crack would guarantee such floods? What kind of landlord would knowingly refuse to fix a leaky property if in violation of code?

Your comparison to an accidental mistake by a maintenance worker is not the same situation as a landlord who knowingly rented out a damaged property knowing it would leak again and knowing the code violation basement would flood again. A maintenance worker made a mistake-- the landlord in such a scenario willingly rented out a damaged property knowing it would leak again. Or, am I missing something?

And, what tenant wouldn't move a couch across a room if it's sitting on an inch of water? How about leaving furniture alone and pulling up the sides of carpet where there's no furniture on it?

I can't imagine a landlord and tenant to sit there with a large flood on hand debating who's going to move a couch when 1) tenant's furniture is ruining in the water already and 2) landlord is in violation of city code for renting out a basement they knew leaked.

Is the landlord seriously sitting there letting their carpets mold out to avoid moving some furniture around? What is the landlord going to do... just wait until tenant willingly moves out of the property to fix their flooded property?

Is the tenant seriously sitting there staring at their water that's sitting in water?

And, yes, a tenant could also try and sue a landlord who broke stuff when trying to move furniture.

Of course, a tenant could try to sue a landlord who is in knowing violation of city code who rented out a basement they knew would leak again.

The landlord is going to have to fix the property one way or another. The landlord could be at some sort of fault if they knowingly, purposefully, and admittedly, knew the basement would flood again yet rented the basement out anyway. The landlord will lose money on repairing the property. And, it's unlikely that most tenants would keep paying rent on a property they can't live in while their belongings are floating in water.

Is this a hypothetical situation or not?

Let me guess. You're the tenant here?

P.S.- None of this is legal advice in any way, shape, or form, of course, which is something both this hypothetical landlord and tenant need. Both should get busy fixing the property and salvaging what's left of their furniture and property, too while trying to minimize further liability they might have.

Lynn McGeein · Answer

Well, there you go.  You're answering your own question.  Seems to be a civil case, decided in court, so who knows?  Guess it's simply who has the better argument.  We have recently had our first few experiences renting apartments since we moved across the country for my husband's job, never rented before, but didn't know the area well so not buying until we did.  Had to be dog-friendly, so limited our choices.  Several of them offered below-ground units, usually for less than the other ones.  We just thought, How silly.  Who would actually rent an apartment destined to flood?  And, yet, they did rent.  We saw 2 or 3 of them being repaired during the year and a half we were in those complexes as their bulkhead (don't know what else to call it -- brick wall built around the window or patio to prevent water coming in) failed in heavy storms.  However, if it was a maintenance failure, something negligent done by an agent of the landlord, then I would think it would definitely be a better case for the tenant.

Bill Rainsburger · Answer

The lease says clearly that the landlord is not liable, even in cases of the landlords negligence.  This is the standard contract for this locality. Given the unconscionable nature of this clause, this locality tilts significantly in favor of the landlord. Landlords might say that the tenant doesn't have to sign such a contract, but when 99% of local apartment complexes use the same lease language, it's hard to find a place to live without surrendering.

Bill Rainsburger · Answer

I suggest you're missing the point of the question. Let me broaden it to a hypothetical case in which the landlord's maintenance staff has attempted to repair plumbing in a vacant upstairs unit in a 40-unit building. The maintenance person makes some sort of mistake, a leak results, and the downstairs unit starts becoming soaked just after its occupants have left for work in the morning. When the downstairs unit occupants get home in the evening, they discover half an inch of water standing in the kitchen, and that much water also soaked into the carpet and pad throughout the rest of the apartment. The only way to dry out the carpet and pad is for the tenant's belongings to be moved out of the way, so vacuums and dryers can be deployed. Now, who moves the furniture ?

The original case presented is the same. The landlord admits the unit had been badly flooded by rainwater in the past, yet did not disclose that information to the tenant. The landlord is in violation of city code which states that "No basement may be used as a habitable room unless floors and walls are impervious to leakage of underground and surface run-off water." There is an extraordinarily obvious crack, several feet long, that goes all the way through the slab, which is perfect for letting ground water rise up into the apartment.

In some localities, cases like these tilt in favor of the landlord. In others, in favor of the tenant.

Rob K. · Answer

I think this is where a renters insurance policy would come in handy. Most tenants go without it since it costs a whopping $15 per month, but it's money well spent. Especially if you live below grade.

Arjun K. · Answer

if the apartment was flooded due to negligence of the landlord.. wouldn't the landlord be responsible for bringing everything back to normal?

Bill Robinson · Answer

Lynn pointed out what I couldn't find a nice way of saying. Tenants like to find ways to sue landlords.

Lynn McGeein · Answer

I hope someone on here can tell you an answer.  Only my opinion, but as a landlord, I would never consider it my obligation to move a tenant's furniture or personal property (except proper eviction process).  In fact, I'd be worried about a lawsuit if I did, with the tenant saying I moved it so now I'm responsible for replacement or damage done while moving them.   I would definitely obtain legal advice on any solution other than tenant moving his own belongings himself in a timely manner so I could repair my property.  And if tenant refused, then I would ask my attorney if I must move it but also about my rights to charge tenant for having it moved, any extra fees incurred for holding up my crew in their work, and any further damage to the property by holding up my ability to get rid of the water damaging my unit.  My daughter and her friend had their apartment first floor replaced due to water pipes bursting.  They had to move everything out of their den, store it in a bedroom until the work was done.

Landlord responsible to clean up water?

Most Popular Reply