On Feb 2, 3:50*pm, "Robert Green" wrote:
"Evan" wrote in message

I also would not ever install any sort of remotely accessible video
surveillance equipment in a single unit rental property as that can
be considered wiretapping and trust me, you never want to be
accused of that...

Well, there are lots of things you never want to get caught at, and if I
were to install some sort of remote property protection, I would make sure
it was completely legal, and if I couldn't arrange that, then completely
undetectable. *Hmm, I could see where leaving a copper phone line active
could have its advantages, though. *Most modern alarm consoles have "listen
in" capabilities and it would take a battle of expert witnesses to prove it
had been hacked and used as a monitoring device by an unscrupulous tenant..
Having intimate access to the property before it's rented means a great deal
of ingenuity in placing illegal but useful bugs of every sort in play.


The difference there is called consent... The persons paying for
alarm monitoring service which allows an agent of the central
monitoring station to speak to them through the installed alarm
equipment grants consent for that to occur in the monitoring
agreement -- said agreement doesn't allow for the landlord or
any one else to tap into said equipment to listen to or intercept
the authorized and consented to communications or using the
installed facilities to perform any sort of snooping as the consent
for the monitoring station to use that communication channel is
only granted during an alarm event per the agreement... Discovery
of the any of the taps would be sufficient prima facie evidence that
you tapped into the system, no expert witnesses needed... Just
the testimony from the alarm installer that such devices were not
installed when the system was commissioned and the tenant
stating that you are the only other entity with unrestricted access
to the premises... Civil court is by persuasiveness of the evidence
and inferring an explanation which would favor your side of the case,
not by proving anything beyond a reasonable doubt, just by providing
more evidence than the other side which is determined reliable
by the jury (or judge if a bench trial)...


Also, if you cut off the heating to your tenant to try and entice
them to leave, you WILL LOSE the battle in court and pay at
the very least a fine... *That is a code violation, a unit without
heating is not habitable...

What if they have no heat because they've failed to pay the gas bill and are
now running on space heaters (electric if they've still got power - kerosine
if they're getting power out of the neighbor's gas tanks at night)?


In that case if they are also in non-payment mode on your rent,
the fact that they failed to pay their own gas bill is demonstrative
of a pattern of conduct of non-payment of bills... That would be
a check mark in your win column as far as evidence goes...


You can not remove water, power or heat from a rental unit...
Those facilities are required by law for a structure to be used
for human habitation as its primary non-emergency purpose...

The power and gas companies do it all the time. *Even the water company will
shut off service if you don't pay. *Why do they get a better deal than a
landlord does, the entity with the most $ at risj from a rat tenant?


Because the power company and the water company are not in the
business of renting properties... They just distribute their service
to
the community until a customer is in delinquency...

You can not collect rent on a unit which is no longer provided with
such utilities because of some action you took...



It would NOT make sense for you to keep the utilities in your
name, as you can not cut any of them off to try and entice
your unwelcome tenants to leave...

Even if they had not reimbursed me for the power? *How does my insertion
into the chain of payers confer fewer rights on me than on the power
company? *It's a bad idea, I've come to realize, because a vindictive tenant
could turn on the heat full blast, open all the windows, leave the fridge
door open and run hot water all day and stick me with the bill. *But I
really wonder what would happen if utilities were passed thru, they failed
to pay me and I didn't pay the utilities - and the heat and light got cut
off. * Obviously it takes a while for a heatless, lightless placed to become
condemned - although I wonder if a place CAN be condemned for not having
power or gas?


It is because you as the landlord are taking on the burden of
supplying
the utility service and then creating a bill for your tenant each
month for
that out of pocket cost... You can not knowingly lease a residential
unit
which does not have access to those utilities, so the moment YOU have
those utilities disconnected because your tenant fails to reimburse
you
for them, YOU are no longer entitled to rent because you no longer
have
a legally rentable unit due to an action you willfully took...

If the tenant is a deadbeat and fails to pay the utility bills in
their own
name and those services get disconnected by the utility, then that is
independent evidence from a disinterested 3rd party to the rental
contract dispute at issue in the eviction proceedings and definitely
evidence of a pattern of conduct of non-payment of their financial
commitments...


~~ Evan