Do You Owe Rent During Repairs that Prevent You From Living in the Rental Unit

My question involves landlord-tenant law in the State of: Michigan

Hi. Due to a lengthy power outage a pipe burst in the old home that my husband and I are renting (we did what we thought was right to try to prevent a burst pipe... it didn't work). We have already been out of the home for four weeks and are looking at another three to five until the restoration process is complete. Part of what is taking so long is not directly due to the water damage but all the crap they are finding that was already wrong with the house hidden under the walls and ceiling.
Our renters insurance is providing us with money for temporary housing and other cost of living expenses. I was under the impression that we are not required to pay rent during this time since we cannot live there. My landlord's insurance company is claiming otherwise (my renters insurance says it's a legal issue and they don't know). There is nothing in my lease agreement about this issue and I'm having a hard time finding anything in Michigan law that relates to this scenario.
Anybody know the answer? And can you provide me a link to documentation that I can share with my landlords if I'm not to pay rent during this time? Thanks!

Quote:

---

Quoting mittenstate

---

My question involves landlord-tenant law in the State of: Michigan

Hi. Due to a lengthy power outage a pipe burst in the old home that my husband and I are renting (we did what we thought was right to try to prevent a burst pipe... it didn't work). We have already been out of the home for four weeks and are looking at another three to five until the restoration process is complete. Part of what is taking so long is not directly due to the water damage but all the crap they are finding that was already wrong with the house hidden under the walls and ceiling.
Our renters insurance is providing us with money for temporary housing and other cost of living expenses. I was under the impression that we are not required to pay rent during this time since we cannot live there. My landlord's insurance company is claiming otherwise (my renters insurance says it's a legal issue and they don't know). There is nothing in my lease agreement about this issue and I'm having a hard time finding anything in Michigan law that relates to this scenario.
Anybody know the answer? And can you provide me a link to documentation that I can share with my landlords if I'm not to pay rent during this time? Thanks!

---

I would be very surprised if the law in MI would require you to pay rent while you cannot occupy the home, when YOUR insurance is covering the cost of your temporary housing and living expenses. If your landlord's insurance company was covering the cost of your temporary housing and living expenses, or your landlord was covering the cost of your temporary housing and living expense then yes, you would still be required to pay the rent...assuming that the temporary housing was comparably adequate.

If YOUR insurance company is attempting to get reimbursed by the landlord's insurance company then again, yes, you would be required to keep paying the rent...again, assuming that the temporary housing was comparably adequate.

So...is the temporary housing comparably adequate?...or is your family stuffed into a single hotel room and miserable?

Honestly temporary housing so far has consisted of our parent's houses and friend's apartments. No one offering short-term housing has been willing to accept our 5 month old golden retriever. Since finding out it's going to be another 3 to 5 weeks, we found a 2 bedroom condo that'll be somewhat acceptable... the other option was tiny miserable hotel room.

So..essentially you're getting money for temporary housing and cost of living expenses but not having to pay anyone for this since you've been living at your parents and friends apartments, correct?

Gail

No not quite, I'm actually a little offended by that. We already spent a few nights in hotels, spending about 500 of the allotted 2000. If we do the condo we'll spend another grand or an extended stay hotel would cost us 1400 plus tax. We have spent money on food and would like to reimburse friends for utilities if there is any insurance money left.

Quote:

---

Quoting mittenstate

---

(we did what we thought was right to try to prevent a burst pipe... it didn't work).

---

Can you tell us more about what you attempted? Should we infer that your landlord and his insurance company are taking the position that you were negligent, and that the damages and need for repair resulted from your negligence?

Quote:

---

Quoting mittenstate

---

I was under the impression that we are not required to pay rent during this time since we cannot live there. My landlord's insurance company is claiming otherwise (my renters insurance says it's a legal issue and they don't know).

---

Why would the landlord's insurance be taking a position on this issue? Does the landlord have coverage that would apply to the lost rent income if the damage were from an "Act of God", but the insurance company is denying the claim based upon its contention that you were negligent? as llworking asks, is your insurance company arguing that it should be reimbursed for temporary accommodation by the landlord or the landlord's insurance?

Quote:

---

Quoting mittenstate

---

Honestly temporary housing so far has consisted of our parent's houses and friend's apartments. No one offering short-term housing has been willing to accept our 5 month old golden retriever. Since finding out it's going to be another 3 to 5 weeks, we found a 2 bedroom condo that'll be somewhat acceptable... the other option was tiny miserable hotel room.

---

If your insurance company is offering accommodation that is not adequate, check the terms of your policy for what they are obligated to provide. They may be required to provide accommodation that's reasonably equivalent to your rental unit. But if the problem is that you are turning down the housing they're offering due to problems finding a hotel or short-term housing that accepts pets, that's more complicated.

Quote:

---

Quoting mittenstate

---

No not quite, I'm actually a little offended by that. We already spent a few nights in hotels, spending about 500 of the allotted 2000.

---

How was the $2,000 figure "allotted"? Is that a maximum amount under your policy? One way or another, you seem to be telling us that the figure is close to sufficient for the remainder of your time out of the rental unit, so if it's not a matter of a $2,000 cap on the coverage you can argue with your insurance company about bumping up the amount to cover taxes (assuming you're actually going to rent short-term accommodations).

Quote:

---

Quoting mittenstate

---

We have spent money on food and would like to reimburse friends for utilities if there is any insurance money left.

---

You have to pay for food no matter where you live, so that's not part of your coverage or something the landlord would be responsible to pay.

Quote:

---

Quoting mittenstate

---

No not quite, I'm actually a little offended by that. We already spent a few nights in hotels, spending about 500 of the allotted 2000. If we do the condo we'll spend another grand or an extended stay hotel would cost us 1400 plus tax. We have spent money on food and would like to reimburse friends for utilities if there is any insurance money left.

---

I submit, for your review, the following Michigan statute:

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(sx1...me=mcl-554-139

Read it.

Then read the following Michigan Court of Appeals decision:

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_ca...en&as_sdt=4,23

You have the option of not paying rent while the dwelling is uninhabitable.

However, understand that this does not prevent the landlord from bringing an action for possession and/or past due rent, it just gives you a defense if he does bring it.

I can't tell you what to do. It's your choice.

However, I can tell you one thing. Don't take advice from the landlord's insurance company. His insurance company is acting in the landlord's interest, not yours.

Thank you adjusterjack. That is exactly the type of information I was going someone could help me find.

Quote:

---

Quoting mittenstate

---

Thank you adjusterjack. That is exactly the type of information I was going someone could help me find.

---

I don't know how helpful that was.

Neither link addressed the issue of insurance reimbursements for temporary housing...and the cited case was from 1972. That is was 42 years ago. I do absolutely agree that landlords have a duty to properly maintain the premises...the issue is the insurance coverage...and where that money is coming from.

If, in the end it comes from the landlords or the landlord's insurance company's pocket, then you are still obligated to pay the normal rent.

Let me see if I can give you an example of what I mean with real numbers...

Lets say that your normal rent is 600.00. You have to spend 2 months in an extended stay suite hotel that costs 1500.00 a month (and provided adequate space for your family). You would be responsible for the first 1200.00 because that is the amount that you would normally have to pay for rent. The landlord would be responsible for 1800.00 because that is the additional cost you incurred in housing for that 2 month period.

However, if your insurance covered the entire 3000.00, then the landlord would have no claim against you for rent, because the landlord did not have to pay the 1800.00 that he should have had to pay. However, if your insurance company goes after the landlord's insurance company for the 3000.00 then you are back to being responsible for 1200.00...because again, you had adequate housing for that two month period.

Basically the bottom line is that the landlord (or the landlord's insurance company) is responsible for no more than the additional cost (above your normal rent) for you being adequately housed for that two months.

Lets give another example:

You can get short term housing for 1000.00 a month, and can kennel your dog for 400.00 a month. In that option the landlord is responsible for 1600.00.

Or another example:

You can get short term housing for 1000.00 a month and your parents agree to keep your dog for free. Your landlord is obligated for 800.00.

In other words, the insurance issue is key to the whole thing...as well as your costs above and beyond 600.00 a month in ADEQUATE housing.

Quote:

---

Quoting llworking

---

If, in the end it comes from the landlords or the landlord's insurance company's pocket, then you are still obligated to pay the normal rent.

---

That's the point. Neither the landlord nor their insurance company is providing or covering the cost of housing. It is coming from my insurance company. So therefore I am not legally obligated to pay rent during the time I cannot live there?

Let's not overlook this:

Quote:

---

Quoting MCL 554.139. Lease or license of residential premises; covenants; modifications; liberal construction, inspection.

---

(1) In every lease or license of residential premises, the lessor or licensor covenants:

(a) That the premises and all common areas are fit for the use intended by the parties.

(b) To keep the premises in reasonable repair during the term of the lease or license, and to comply with the applicable health and safety laws of the state and of the local unit of government where the premises are located, except when the disrepair or violation of the applicable health or safety laws has been caused by the tenants wilful or irresponsible conduct or lack of conduct.

(2) The parties to the lease or license may modify the obligations imposed by this section where the lease or license has a current term of at least 1 year.

(3) The provisions of this section shall be liberally construed, and the privilege of a prospective lessee or licensee to inspect the premises before concluding a lease or license shall not defeat his right to have the benefit of the covenants established herein.

---

So I'm still wondering whether the landlord and the landlord's insurance company are taking the position that the reason that the premises are not habitable is that the tenant's negligence caused a pipe to break. We were told, "[W]e did what we thought was right to try to prevent a burst pipe... it didn't work" - but we still don't know what "it" was.

Also, the statute mentioned in that case has been repealed and replaced. The current statute can be found at MCL 600.5720. The current statute more explicitly sets forth a breach of duty by the landord as a defense to eviction for nonpayment of rent, but in my opinion when possible it's best to resolve this type of dispute without getting to the point of eviction.

I had a similar problem to this a while back concerning damage due to a waterbed bursting. My landlord tried pinning me with negligence too. Did your insurance company know you had a waterbed? If not, good luck getting them to cover any of it! Either way, I don't see why the landlord's insurance should cover your food and housing. That's what renter's insurance is for.

The issue of fault or negligence has not come up. It's an old house and there has already been a water leak/plumbing/pipe issues during the 8 months we've lived there. I think it'd be hard to definitively say if it were us or if it was already at risk due to old pipes.

Since you won't tell us what you did to keep the pipes from freezing, and why it didn't work, we can't comment on that.

We had faucets running at a low stream. Why it didn't work I don't know I'm not a plumber