On Apr 1, 5:37*pm, mm wrote:
On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 07:20:49 -0700, Smitty Two



wrote:
In article ,
mm wrote:

On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 00:21:07 -0700 (PDT), Evan
wrote:

Tenants are responsible for insuring the contents of their units
(their furniture, clothing, small appliances, etc.) which are not
provided by the landlord...

It depends on whose fault the fire was. *I doubt it was the fault of
all the tenants or a group of them. *More likely one of them, or
lightning, or much to the disgrace of this newsgroup, possibly Mr.
ransley.

I'm with Evan here, tenants are responsible for insuring their own
stuff. This is so well-established

It's well established that a tenant should have insurance. *If he
wants to be sure to be reimbursed, but that doesn't mean the landlord
can't be liable. * A tenant needs insurance because *A) The tenant
himself may start the fire, so of course the LL won't pay. *B) The
landlord probably owns the building through a corporation that owns
only this one building, so with a big enough fire, the corporation may
go bankrupt, etc. *C) If a neighbor starts the fire, he may skip or
have no assets.

that short of the landlord being
caught intentionally torching the place I doubt that a tenant or his
insurance company would ever win a suit against anyone else for loss of
personal possessions.

You're way off base. * If the landlord's intentional act OR negligence
causes the fire, the LL has to pay. *

I'm not talking about where a repair is needed in an apartment and the
tenant doesn't notify the ll, or doesn't let him know it's gotten
worse, or doesn't stop using something where using it creates a bigger
risk. *In that case, the tenant may be all or partly liable for the
damage to his apartment and its contents (and the rest of the
building), and the LL will likely rely on his own insurance for
repairs to the building.

But in a suit by a different tenant who also had fire or water damage,
both a negligent tenant and a less negligent landlord can be held
liable, either proprotionally or jointly, depending on the US state
one lives in. * *

But fires start in the hall and common areas, in the landlord, super,
or janitor's apartment, or in the basement, and if it's the LL's
negligence or attributed to him, he owe tenants for their
possesssions, and if they have to move out, may well owe them if their
rent at another location is more than their rent under the lease.

BTW, some tenants have money; some are rich. Most apartment buildings
in NYC are cooperatives now, but I'd be surprised if was every single
one of them was. *Some tenants have enough money to make it worth
suing them, by the LL and by the neighbors. *Of course most of these
people aren't jackasses and don't start fires, but accidents happen.

And come to think iof it, even if it is a co-op or a condo, the co-op
or condo will sue the resident and/or owner who starts a fire, and so
will his injured neighbors. *


Let's address your inept reply:

A tenant can try to sue someone for such things, but unless they
can obtain really good absolute proof that such and such is
responsible for starting the fire through an intentional act, good
luck getting any money -- that is what insurance is for and why
a mature adult would have it...

What part of "landlord is not responsible for the tenant's contents"
period are you unable to grasp... The only way to have the landlord
or another tenant be responsible for contents is to have them on
video tape or have WITNESSES who saw them start the fire...
But that would be of little utility when the civil suit comes around
as they would already be convicted of arson by then and serving
a 20/25-ish year sentence... Prisoners don't have many assets...

A fire could start anywhere, the basement, the roof, a stairwell,
the front entry door -- for the landlord to have any liability you
would
have to prove an intentional act of negligence or malfeasance...
Not just that the fire originated in an area that was the
responsibility
of the landlord...

BTW, in a co-op or condo building -- the "apartments" or "units"
are separately deeded premises and taxed as such to their
individual owners... NOT the same as an apartment building
owned by one entity and rented by another... And the douche
bags who go nuts and sue for such things often end up surprised
that they end up paying part of the settlement to themselves as
they are an owner in the co-op and/or condo and every unit gets
special assessed to pay off a special expense... :-O Such things
are paid equally by all owners based on the square footage of
space owned...

Right, but in a co-op or condo, like I stated above the unit occupants
have property rights to a portion of the structure which they own
unlike rental apartment dwellers... Any damage caused to a co-op
or condo common area would be assessed a fee or a fine to repair
and if the party who caused such damage doesn't live up to their
responsibility, then either a lien on the deed which would need to
be paid off first from the proceeds of any sale would be attached,
a forcible foreclosure/eviction process begun or a lawsuit to recoup
the damages started depending on the decisions of those in charge...

~~ Evan