Project Michael Jovin Legal Situation - Case Study Example

Jovin also says that he had always had good tenants prior to Simons and that they never had any complaints about the house and were promptly paying the rent; Jovin had collected security deposits from his previous tenants, which was duly returned as per the written contractual agreement. During her stay, Simons had paid rent for two months and had vacated the house during mid of the third month; and had withheld the rent for that month on the pretext that she was traveling abroad for personal work.

As the agreement stated that the tenant has to pay rent, whether or not he/she stays at the premises for a certain period; to this, Simons had agreed in writing. Before going on vacation, Simons had informed Jovin that she would be paying the rent on her return and that she is expecting Jovin gets the repair and plumbing work done by then. Simons complained that Jovin made false claims that his house was in perfectly habitable condition at the time of signing the contract. Although the house seemed old, Simons did not pay much attention to the looks of the house.

Simons considered her friend’s advice and moved in happily as she did not have to pay security deposit because the house was old; she thought probably Jovin waived the security deposit for the same reason. However, after about a month, Simons started facing weird problems in the house, about which she informed Jovin immediately. She had problems with the drainage in the kitchen, leakage from pipes and taps, and the sorts. She informed Jovin of all these issues and waited for more than a month.

She even paid the second month’s rent to Jovin thinking he would eventually get the repairs done. After much waiting and getting her patience tested, Simons decided to move out without informing Jovin. She wanted to check if Jovin got the repair work done while she was away on vacation; but, this did not happen and she was highly frustrated when she found no improvement in the condition of her house. Moreover, as she did not leave any security deposit with Jovin and that she had nothing to lose, she moved out without informing Jovin.

Issue: Whether Jovin’s claim that he should receive rent for a full contract term of nine months from his tenant Sandra Simons as per law? Or whether Simon does not really owe anything to Jovin because the house was not in a habitable condition when she entered? Analysis: The Colorado Warranty of Habitability Statute, CRS, 32-12-503, states that constructive eviction occurs when a residential rental property is an uninhabitable condition, making it unsuitable to live in. According to this statute, the landlord is obliged to make corrections to the house condition and make it livable.

If the landlord fails to make repairs and other corrections during a reasonable time, the tenant can leave the rental property and not be responsible for payment of rent which would have been under the lease or rental agreement. This statute also provides the tenant to sue the landlord for damages and terminate the lease. Moreover, because the landlord breached the warranty of habitability by giving false information, tenant’s retaliation against the landlord is viable as mentioned in Statute section 38-12-505.