Welcome to the Arizona landlord and tenant BLOG

Welcome to the Arizona Landlord and Tenant Blog - a blog with FREE information for both landlords and tenants.

This is where you can get FREE information about Arizona landlord and tenant law (both residential and commercial).  You will also learn about helpful products and services that are available for purchase.

Comments

[Lee]

AZ Tenant requested a repair for the garage door. While at the property it became evident that there were unauthorized dogs, clearly a violation of our no pet policy. A verbal discussion ensued where Tenant was informed to remove the pets. The next day he calls me by phone to inform me that the pets are gone at which time I verbally requested to inspect the premises at a reasonable time that would be convenient for him. He has informed me in writing that he is aware of my request for inspection but he will not allow me entry for inspection or needed repairs. Pets have also done some damage to the back yard fence which I want to fix myself. Given that his letter confirms his awareness of my request for entry, am I still required to send 48 hours notice for entry to the tenant, then wait for him to refuse access again before I take further action? If he refuses again, can I just enter on my own at that point, maybe with request of officer assistance in case things get ugly? It seems lawful that I should be able to enter my property when a breach of contract has knowingly & admittedly occurred. I should add that I have never abused my access rights as this is my 1st time requesting entry (didn't even enter the home when the garage door was being serviced and dogs were discovered when heard barking inside.) My tenant is aware that this request is for repair/maintenance purposes in addition to inspection. The lease provides for access at reasonable times for inspection, repair, etc. Please advise on how to proceed lawfully. Thank you. Response by Carlton C. Casler: The landlord has the right to inspect the rental property. See ARS 33-1343. If the landlord gives the tenant two days advance notice, the tenant must allow the landlord to inspect. If the tenant does not permit the landlord to enter, the landlord CANNOT simply go in over the tenant's objection. But the tenant has breached the lease and the LL/T Act. In your case, you have a written document from your tenant that confirms the tenant received your request and that the tenant is refusing access. Some judgments, however, require that the landlord's notice be written, which was not done in your case. The tenant has committed a "material noncompliance" with both the lease and the LL/T Act and, therefore, you may serve the tenant with a "10-Day Notice of Material Noncompliance." You have two choices: (1) serve the 10-Day Notice now or (2) repeat the notice to inspect, but do it in writing and then serve the 10-Day Notice if the tenant continues to refuse access. The latter will avoid the risk of a judge ruling against you because your notice to inspect was not written. Note: The statute does not require "written" notice, merely "notice," which should include oral or written notice, but some judges insist that all notices be in writing. If, on your inspection, you see evidence of pets (i.e., food, water, dog house, etc.), then also add "unauthorized pets" to the 10-Day Notice. Good luck.

[Pickle]

Can a landlord take a deficiency judgment against a residential tenant for the difference in rent upon re-rental after the tenant breaks the lease by early termination? Can a tenant be excused from liability for early termination - if so, under what conditions?

Anwer by Carlton Casler: A "deficiency judgment" is what a lender may obtain against a borrower on a mortgage or deed of trust if the collateral (i.e., the house) is sold at the foreclosure auction for less than the amount owed to the lender. What you are really asking is, "Can a landlord sue and obtain a judgment against the tenant if the tenant moves out before the end of the lease term?" Yes. If the tenant moves, vacates, abandons, etc., the rental property before the lease term ends, then the landlord may sue the tenant for: (1) the rent for the rest of the lease term, (2) any other amounts owed by the tenant to the landlord (i.e., late fees, property damage, etc.), and (3) the costs incurred by the landlord to re-rent the rental property (i.e., advertising, commisisons, etc.). The landlord must reduce that amount by any rent collected from a replacement tenant before the end of the lease term. The foregoing presumes that the landlord immediately takes "reasonable" steps to re-rent the rental property and the tenant had no legal basis for terminating the lease before the end of the lease term.

[Clifford Hussey]

I deducted $550 from a tenant's security deposit for painting. Actual expense was $750.00. I charged for painting since tenant had been in house for a year and three months and she had burned candles in the master bedrm and living room causing soot damage to ceilings. She is now indicating I had no right to deduct this expense as Arizona law does not allow this deduction. Her deposit was $1300 and I refunded $750.00. Candle was also melted on carpet but I did not charge for this expense nor did I charge for paiting any other rooms which was "normal wear and tear". Please advise.

Answer by Carlton Casler: "Normal wear and tear," which cannot be charged to the tenant, is sometimes very hard to define. Dirt, soot, melted wax and/or other damage probably exceeds "normal wear and tear" and, therefore, may be charged to the tenant. Paint and carpet have an expected economic life (i.e., how long they are expected to last). The length of that economic life is determined by the quality of the materials (i.e., "top of the line" versus the cheapest material) and the amount of use (i.e., "normal wear and tear" is different for one tenant than for a family of six). In your case, I would want to know the economic life of the paint in your rental unit and the date that it was last painted. If the paint was at (or very near) the end of its economic life, then deductions for repainting may not be warranted. On the other hand, if it was painted just before this tenant moved in, then her use of the rental unit exceeded "normal wear and tear." In that case, deducting $550 for paint when the actual cost was $750 appears to be reasonable. As for the tenant saying that Arizona law does not allow a landlord to make these kinds of damages, she is incorrect.