I am looking at signing a lease on an apartment, but there are a few phrases that give me pause:

"Resident agrees that Resident is at all times responsible for the conduct and actions of all other persons regardless of any culpability or knowledge on Resident’s part."

I imagine that the intent is to say all other persons party to this lease or guests thereof, but there is no qualification like this actually in the lease.

The second phrase that I'm getting hung up on is this:

"To the greatest extent permitted by law, Landlord shall not be liable to Resident, even for negligent acts or omissions of Landlord or Landlord's agents or employees, for any damage or injury, whether to person or property, loss, or destruction to Resident's property, including but not limited to any damage or injury, whether to person or property, loss, or destruction of property sustained by Resident from any cause including but not limited to the causes and risks set forth herein."

This seems to me to exempt the landlord from responsibility, even in the event that he or she breaks into my apartment and shoots me, given that it is always permitted by law that a victim choose not to press charges. Is this correct?

Also, related to this, if the landlord is not willing to change the wording of the lease agreement, are these pretty standard things to see on a lease that I shouldn't worry about? (Maybe because they're not enforceable?)

Thanks very much

  • 1
    A similar part of my lease says (under the title Tenant Insurance): "Landlord shall not be liable to Tenant, Tenant’s Family, or Tenant’s invitees, licensees, and/or guests for damages not proximately caused by Landlord or landlord’s agents." I don't see anything written as strongly as the term in yours. The modern trend in the law is to assign landlords a general duty of reasonable care and that they will be held liable for injuries of tenants and guests resulting from landlord's ordinary negligence, but landlord needs prior notice and a reasonable opportunity to repair the defect. – A.fm. Aug 11 '17 at 4:12
  • @A.fm. Thanks, I may copy/paste that and request it as a rephrase. That is the same section in which this passage appears. – MAA Aug 11 '17 at 4:15
  • 1
    No problem. FYI, the rest of that section goes on to say he's not liable for Acts of God, strongly encourages me to purchase tenant's insurance, and that I and my possessions are not covered by the Landlord's insurance. Also FYI, in case you're not familiar but want to know what you'd be requesting from the landlord by modifying that clause with the above term, proximate cause is typically determined with a "but for" analysis. So if I would not have had a broken foot, "but for" the landlord negligently installing a set of cabinets, he can be found liable. – A.fm. Aug 11 '17 at 4:20
  • 1
    To expand off of @A.fm.'s comment, you are ignoring perhaps the most important piece of the term: "To the greatest extent permitted by law". The law requires them to be liable in a lot of situations where they simply cannot waive their liability. The term is meant to waive liability in all cases where they are allowed to do so. – animuson Aug 11 '17 at 6:13
  • @animuson ok that is part of what I was wondering. There is a bit later on though that is not about the landlord waiving liability, but rather says: "To the greatest extent permitted by law, Resident agrees to hold Landlord harmless and to indemnify Landlord against and from any lawsuit, loss, cost, expense, damage, or claim including attorneys' fees and costs resulting from any injury, whether to property or to person, whether to Resident, Resident’s family, occupants, guests, invitees, or any person entering the Premises or the community of which the Premises is a part." – MAA Aug 11 '17 at 6:23

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.