 350 Judgment (by Gwen [OH]) Sep 19, 2017 1:36 PM
 350 Judgment (by NE [PA]) Sep 19, 2017 3:28 PM
350 Judgment (by WMH [NC]) Sep 19, 2017 3:48 PM
350 Judgment (by RB [MI]) Sep 19, 2017 4:09 PM
350 Judgment (by Kurt [MI]) Sep 19, 2017 5:34 PM
350 Judgment (by NE [PA]) Sep 19, 2017 5:52 PM
350 Judgment (by Jeff [OH]) Sep 19, 2017 6:01 PM
350 Judgment (by NE [PA]) Sep 19, 2017 6:09 PM
350 Judgment (by Mike45 [NV]) Sep 19, 2017 6:19 PM
350 Judgment (by BRAD 20,000 [IN]) Sep 19, 2017 11:34 PM
350 Judgment (by Barb [MO]) Sep 20, 2017 8:49 AM
350 Judgment (by David [NC]) Sep 20, 2017 9:01 AM
350 Judgment (by Vee [OH]) Sep 20, 2017 9:20 AM
350 Judgment (by Robin [WI]) Sep 20, 2017 12:04 PM
350 Judgment (by NE [PA]) Sep 20, 2017 2:44 PM
350 Judgment (by Gwen [OH]) Sep 21, 2017 2:29 AM
350 Judgment (by BRAD 20,000 [IN]) Sep 22, 2017 10:38 PM
350 Judgment (by #22 [MO]) Sep 23, 2017 6:50 AM
350 Judgment (by Gwen [OH]) Posted on: Sep 19, 2017 1:36 PM
Message:
Akron OH LL today settling case. Has to pay 350K to estates of 4 tenants who died in a fire. No smoke detectors. Started by unattended cooking. They are also suing the stove manufacturer. --67.141.xxx.xx |
350 Judgment (by NE [PA]) Posted on: Sep 19, 2017 3:28 PM
Message:
Document functionality and locations at move in. Hardwire when possible. Insure to the max and pray.
As terrible and unfortunate it is, we can't control these things. All we can do is prepare for the worst and hope for the best. --50.39.xx.xxx |
350 Judgment (by WMH [NC]) Posted on: Sep 19, 2017 3:48 PM
Message:
Why no smoke detectors? What a stupid mistake...or where they there, and removed (which we have seen way too often!) --173.22.xx.xx |
350 Judgment (by RB [MI]) Posted on: Sep 19, 2017 4:09 PM
Message:
It's Always the fault of someone else.
(Who turned the stove on?) --71.13.xx.xxx |
350 Judgment (by Kurt [MI]) Posted on: Sep 19, 2017 5:34 PM
Message:
What if tenants take down detectors and this happens? --204.52.xxx.xxx |
350 Judgment (by NE [PA]) Posted on: Sep 19, 2017 5:52 PM
Message:
Kurt, if you document them in there at the onset of tenancy and they remove them, not your problem.
If you see them down on an inspection, by all
means replace them. Nothing keeps them from removing them the second you walk out the door though.
You can't live in the units with these people. --50.39.xx.xxx |
350 Judgment (by Jeff [OH]) Posted on: Sep 19, 2017 6:01 PM
Message:
I have my tenants sign and date a smoke detector piece of paper that states that there are working smoke detectors And that they will keep them working during their tenancy. I actually walk with him to eat some of detector and push the button to make sure they work, and if they hear them work. --67.23.xxx.xxx |
350 Judgment (by NE [PA]) Posted on: Sep 19, 2017 6:09 PM
Message:
The landlord in the original story of this post probably lost due to no documentation. His argument was "Yes your honor, they were in there." The plaintiffs attorney's argument was most likely, "Prove it."
There's nothing else you can do besides paperwork and pictures. --50.39.xx.xxx |
350 Judgment (by Mike45 [NV]) Posted on: Sep 19, 2017 6:19 PM
Message:
I have photos showing the smoke detectors in place in every bedroom, in the hallway, living room and kitchen of every property. The photos do not show that the smoke detectors are working, but the Move-In Inspection Report includes an acknowledgement that they are working.
I make sure that all smoke detectors are present, I replace the batteries (which all have labels showing date of installation), and I test each smoke detector at every turnover.
I make new tenants initial the clause in lease that requires them to test the smoke detectors every month.
Despite all of this, if there is a fire, I will be sued!! And my insurance company will probably offer to pay off the tenants instead of defending me against the bogus claims!!
--71.38.xx.xxx |
350 Judgment (by BRAD 20,000 [IN]) Posted on: Sep 19, 2017 11:34 PM
Message:
Sad that people died. I hope the LL's insurance is covering this judgment.
Never assume. Until recently, Indiana law said the LL was responsible EVEN IF the res removed the battery.
Indiana now requires the LL to include a SMOKE DETECTOR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT signed by the res, stating the RES is responsible for the care and feeding of the SDs from the moment of possession.
I have their signature on the form, on the move in inspection form, and move in photos.
We have them sign again at our twice a year visits.
BRAD --68.50.xx.xxx |
350 Judgment (by Barb [MO]) Posted on: Sep 20, 2017 8:49 AM
Message:
Thanks for the suggestion of the Smoke Detector Acknowledgement. I just found and adapted one that I'm going to take around in the next set of inspections, scheduled for the next week or so. All my tenants have been in for a month or more, now, so time to check them all.
i replaced a bunch of them already this year, along with a number of CO detectors.
I'm now doing the one with the 10 year batteries for everything, and telling the residents they have 10 year batteries. They don't usually have them at Lowe's, but Amazon does! --131.151.xx.xx |
350 Judgment (by David [NC]) Posted on: Sep 20, 2017 9:01 AM
Message:
Taking pictures of the smoke detectors is on my list of pre-rental things to do and it is on my quarterly inspection list
smoke detector present and working - check --71.50.xxx.xx |
350 Judgment (by Vee [OH]) Posted on: Sep 20, 2017 9:20 AM
Message:
This is as bad as allowing dogs banned by the insurance company to remain on the property, wallet training in reverse... --76.188.xxx.xx |
350 Judgment (by Robin [WI]) Posted on: Sep 20, 2017 12:04 PM
Message:
If each life was valued at $87,500, no wonder the insurance company settled. That's pretty cheap compared to the cost and uncertaintly of a lawsuit.
I follow the precautions above. Can't believe IN law held LL responsible for the tenant's irresponsible actions! --204.210.xxx.xxx |
350 Judgment (by NE [PA]) Posted on: Sep 20, 2017 2:44 PM
Message:
Robin, that's right. Can't believe IN held the LL responsible. What's even more crazy is that no one mentions how irresponsible it is of the tenants to live in a unit without at least installing THEIR OWN!! Fire safety is taught in elementary school! --50.39.xx.xxx |
350 Judgment (by Gwen [OH]) Posted on: Sep 21, 2017 2:29 AM
Message:
Its Ohio, not Indiana. Did anyone notice they are also suing the manufacturer of the allegedly defective stove next? Good thing they sold that division to the foreigners.
Robert in CA had a case once where they were going to prosecute him for no batteries in the detector. He was able to prove they were installed only because his handwriting was on the batteries found in the kids toys. Our fire dept hands batteries out free. --40.133.xxx.xxx |
350 Judgment (by BRAD 20,000 [IN]) Posted on: Sep 22, 2017 10:38 PM
Message:
Please read and know YOUR state law on SDs. Laws are written by politicians and are not based on common sense.
Never assume.
BRAD --68.50.xx.xxx |
350 Judgment (by #22 [MO]) Posted on: Sep 23, 2017 6:50 AM
Message:
They're suing the stove company. What a joke. Bad deal. Gotta be prepared for the worst case before it happens and be proactive! --174.195.xxx.xxx |
Reply:
|
|