Rental Owner Asks Where the Buck Stops

QUESTION: While I was out of the country the past few months, I hired a management company to handle my rental property. Shortly after my return, one of my tenants mentioned that he had been overcharged on his rent by the management property. I asked him why he had not addressed the management company with the problem, and he explained that he had, but because I am the owner, he feels I am responsible. Am I obligated to reimburse this tenant or is the management company the one he should go after?

ANSWER: As the owner of property, you are responsible for the actions of anyone you hire to manage your property. Although you were out of the country at the time the problem occurred and you were not actively involved with the situation, the tenant can demand that you reimburse him for the management company’s mistake. You have the right to seek reimbursement from the management company. You should check with the management company first to be sure that the tenant is correct, by requesting documentation of all payments made, and if an overcharge occurred, suggest to the company that they reimburse the tenant directly.

Extended Move-Out Date Under Dispute

Q: On the 15th of last month my tenants gave me a 30-day notice that they would be moving. Last week, they asked if they could have a 15-day extension because the home they were buying would not be ready. I told them it would be OK, as long as they allowed my maintenance man to come in and start doing repairs while they still were there. They agreed to this, but when I sent the maintenance man over, they refused to let him work. They told him he could only work on the weekends. Because of this, I sent them a letter stating that their request for a 15-day extension was denied and that if they were there past the 15th of this month, I would start an unlawful detainer. Do I have the right to decide not to extend their tenancy?

A: The ancient Romans used to say, “verba volant, scripta manent” or “words fly, writing stays.” Although verbal agreements are binding, sometimes it is difficult to prove that they were reached. In your situation, your agreement with your tenants had a specific condition. You were willing to extend their notice period if they allowed your repairman to work in the house. If you gave your tenants a 24-hour notice, and if the repairman was working during normal business hours, then they were breaking their part of the agreement.

For practical purposes, it would be better for you and your tenants to work out a new agreement, and put it in writing, instead of going through the legal eviction procedure, which would probably not get them out any sooner. Possibly you could work out a detailed time schedule for the repairs to be done that would not inconvenience either of you. If you need assistance in resolving this problem, your local mediation program may be able to help you.

Advertising Controlled by Fair Housing Laws

Q: When I called the newspaper to place an ad for a house I own, I tried to make it sound as attractive as possible by saying it was “great for kids,” and in an “exclusive family community.” The classified advertising representative told me I could not use those words because it sounded discriminatory. Can she refuse me the right to advertise as I want?

A: The advertising representative was correct in warning you about the ad that you proposed. In advertising property you should, of course, emphasize its assets, but not in a way that suggests limiting the pool of potential renters.

Although a family would certainly enjoy the neighborhood you describe, so would other renters who should be given equal encouragement. It would be best to advertise the home as “in a good neighborhood” and “close to schools” or “large back yard.”

The Federal Fair Housing Act has been amended to make it illegal to discriminate against anyone on the basis of their familial status. This law is enforced and carries penalties for both newspapers and advertisers who engage in discriminatory advertising. For additional information about this subject, call (213) or (714) HOUSING.

Landlord Responsible for Phone Wiring

Q: My telephone does not work well, so I called the telephone company. They told me that the problem is within the wiring, and it would be expensive to correct. My landlord refuses to pay for this work, saying that I am responsible for my telephone. Do I have to pay for repairs to the wiring inside the walls of my apartment?

A: No, you don’t. A new addition to California Civil Code (Section 1941.4) makes it easier for renters to reach out and touch someone. Most owners acknowledge that it is their responsibility to provide working phone lines inside the walls. The new law makes this a common practice of the business mandatory; the wiring and the jack are considered part of the building, and they must be in good working condition. All rental units must have at least one working phone jack. You are responsible only for your telephone and the line from the phone to the jack.

This column is prepared by Project Sentinel, a rental housing mediation service in Sunnyvale, Calif. Questions may be sent to 582-B Dunholme Way, Sunnyvale, Calif. 94305, but cannot be answered individually. For help in the Los Angeles area, call the Metro Harbor Fair Housing Council at (213) 539-6191 or the Westside Fair Housing Council at (213) 475-9671.