Despite how hot it is, landlords in Tennessee are not required to keep the air conditioning running.
In our changing climate, that probably comes as a surprise.
However, unless it’s in the lease, nothing in Tennessee’s Landlord-Tenant Act gives renters the right to air conditioning.
“I think it’s unfair. It’s inhumane to me because without air we can’t live and breathe,” said Anita Brown.
i think it is disingenuous to represent that AC is a standard or required by law for a rental anywhere, at least in the US. I do find it shitty that the AC included with the unit is damaged, and land(slum)lord won’t fix it, but again, unless it’s in the lease there really is no requirement that the LL provide it in US. I think it is good to start a discussion on if AC for a rental should be the law, (edit: i also would strongly support this) but i doubt we will see that become the case, especially in southern states which probably would need it most.
Having AC is a standard and required by law in many places in the US
https://www.rent.com/blog/keeping-cool-tenant-landlord-responsibilities-air-conditioning/
that didn’t have any list of states, but my curiosity lead me here https://propertyclub.nyc/article/apartment-air-conditioning-laws#what-states-require-air-conditioning
i was pleasantly surprised to find 24 states that do require it, with some other states that have some loopholes.
I tried to find the list but brain failed me and i kept getting bar association stuff. Did you know that while Missouri doesn’t require AC it does require that units be kept to a ‘habitable’ temperature, and there’s enormous case law defining that word that makes it defacto required but technically not.
If the building becomes unlivable it’s an issue. high temps with high humidity can literally lead to heat stroke since no amount of fans will help since you literally can’t cool off even with sweating.
What that fix is, I’m not sure, but some buildings in areas of the south become ovens during heat waves and without AC people will get sick or die.
i absolutely agree, my point is less that there are or are not health concerns, just that it is currently not a requirement, at least anywhere I have lived. i believe it should be, but I know that the south passing legislation that helps vulnerable people at the expense of those who own property is probably never going to happen. i just felt like it was odd that the article was stating that there is no law in the state, without emphasizing that most states do not either.
Some areas have basic consumer protection. Such as a habitation must be fit to live in.
Renting out an apartment with 2 feet of water in it all times, or black mold, or no water or front door is often covered by specific legislation and then, if not, then by the consumer protection statutes.
Which may be the approach some lawyers will have to take if this gets bad enough.
“I can live in my apartment except for 5 weeks where I have to go someplace else” is what we may start seeing in future civil actions.
Even if people argue it’s fit to live in, it should be covered by consumer protections as you paid for it, so you should get it, unless the contract specifically calls it out as not working
We also don’t technically require that you have a steady supply of oxygen in your apartment, but I’m guessing you’d find it unreasonable if you woke up in a vacuum.
Do we even have a law that says landlords can’t heat your apartment to 100 degrees Fahrenheit? Or a law that specifically proscribes noise machines? Do we really have to specify every fucking thing or can people just be reasonable?
I don’t know if you’ve seen all of human history, but no, people can’t be reasonable. Look at the need for mask mandates if you want a recent example.
Not when there are pearls to be clutched.
It’s just fucked up that an appliance that’s connected to the actual rental unit doesn’t need to be operational by law. I mean, if the 'fridge dies in a TN rental unit is the landlord required to fix it or does that need to be specified in the lease also?
It’s just basic consumer protection, IMO. The AC comes with the apartment, the landlord should be required to maintain it.
I’d argue that if it’s a feature of the unit that was present when someone signed, then yes it should be required to work.
Of course contracts can’t cover every little thing, so it’s ridiculous to rely on them for that level of granularity. Do we need to mandate contracts have an Entry for every feature of every appliance, every piece of infrastructure, every piece of structure? No. These things were presented as being there and functioning. But we should be able to rely on things working as presented. We should have a legal right that that be true
Honestly we probably already do. Most judges, if you said “Look the thing was there when he showed me the unit. That makes it part of the offered deal”, would back you.
That’s what I would expect and would be consistent with my limited experience, but doesn’t appear to be borne out by the original story
I think if the air conditioner was there when she toured the unit, it’s implicitly part of the contract.
Central Air absolutely needs to be a requirement on all new construction. And window units need to be mandatory unless requested otherwise in every bed room.
It’s way too hot these days in the car majority of the US for this to be safe.
Why would you require both central air and window units?
I meant to imply if there wasn’t central air.
When I was 21 and moving into a shitty rental with my now wife, the place didn’t have AC and we moved in during a terrible heat wave. We bought one window unit so we could at least sleep at night. Later bought one more to make the whole space livable. Those units aren’t expensive, pick up an extra shift or two and you can buy one. When we moved into a place with central air we sold one and gave one away.
If all it takes is a shift or two, then landlords can surely recoup the costs with an extraordinarily small increase of rent (pennies or single digit dollars).
Or just their hard earned money through doing nothing at all and sponging like the parasites they are.
Agreed. If it’s law they’ll get it done (mostly, there are always bad landlords in court). But there are still a lot of places where it isn’t law, and I’m not just talking about the US. But if it’s too hot to be at home, spend a little extra time at work and fix the problem.
Blame building codes and politics. Including an AC in every build could inflate the costs making it unaffordable too.
I doubt adding AC would make it unaffordable, other than the renter having to pay the electric bill. The federal government, some cities, and most electric providers offer incentives to purchase and install modern HVAC units. window units are also an affordable option included in or allowed in many rentals.
Which is because there’s a market to sell them, make it mandatory and there is no reason to have sales or grants, it’s a guaranteed sell. Which is also politics….
It’s an extra 3-5k on the sticker price, that’s unaffordable for a large swath of people, especially when the house is only 60k anyways.
Where the hell are you finding 60k houses or 4K hvacs? lmao
I agree with your comment but your numbers are all way too low.
But the post in question says there is AC. It’s just broken and the landlord doesn’t want to fix it. That’s not ok
If somethings not required by code, and if its not part of the lease why would it need to work?
Because it was represented as a feature when someone decided to rent the place. Otherwise it’s a “bait and switch” and should be fraudulent
For example, nothing requires an outlet or switch to work, as long as it’s safe, but we expect that to work. I doubt anything requires all burners on a stove to work, but it’s certainly expected. Nothing requires windows to open but it’s expected.
Pardon? It wasn’t on the lease, so it wasn’t.
Actually, codes and legislations do! Your entire comment is misguided yeesh. AC IS different since no codes, legislations, or the lease requires it. A stove is require by code, legislations, and lease, so if it doesn’t work, that’s an issue.
So you understand the very important distinction now….? Probably not, but do you?
It’s been a long time since I rented but maybe purchasing a house has an analogy.
It’s not any different.
In the same way, AC is not required feature. However if it is there when I decide to rent and I have decided to rent with that information then I do expect it to work and I do call it fraud if it doesn’t
The lease isn’t the only information on which the deal is based.
It is part of the lease. She was shown a certain apartment, with certain appliances. She signed a lease for that apartment. It’s understood the lease covers the facilities in the apartment.