Smoking at home: IL Apartments

By Jonathan On Jul 5, 2017

Apartment Update

Vacation home’s $300 smoking fine crosses the line
May 10, 2011
By Janet Portman | Rent It Right
Q. We recently rented a vacation house that had a “no smoking” policy. We honored it, but during an evening when we were away, our adult children did not. There was no damage, but you could smell the smoke. The owner fined us $300 for the transgression, saying that by imposing a fine she didn’t have to prove that it actually cost her $300 to deal with the smell. Can she do this?
A. Your owner is attempting an end run around settled principles of landlord-tenant law. Even though this was a short-term vacation rental, the owner can’t circumvent the law protecting tenants from unreasonable charges like these.
When landlords want to charge tenants for damage beyond normal wear and tear, they must be able to prove that the amount claimed was reasonably necessary to fix the damage. In other words, if tenants treat the place like “Animal House,” leaving the owner with six hours of cleaning, she can fairly charge for six hours of her cleaning crew’s time (assuming the crew charges a commercially reasonable price). What she cannot do is arbitrarily charge any amount (most commonly a sum high enough to discourage tenant misbehavior in the first place).
When landlords try to impose arbitrary amounts — sums that aren’t tied to the actual amount of damage caused — on tenants who harm the property, judges don’t allow it. Legally speaking, these sums are “liquidated damages”: monetary penalties set in advance for specific misbehaviors, which are not tied to the actual cost of the damage.
Liquidated damages are generally illegal in consumer contracts. In fact, they are allowed only in situations when it would be very hard to measure the consequences of misbehavior, and both parties to the contract specifically agree beforehand that this is so. Often, liquidated damages clauses must contain specific language in order to be enforceable.
To my knowledge, no state has given landlords the green light to use liquidated damages in vacation-rental settings. Although vacation rentals do get to bend a few of the rules that otherwise apply to the landlord-tenant relationship, this isn’t one of them.
Calling her fee a “fine” won’t disguise the fact that it’s a predetermined price for damage, regardless of its extent. Incidentally, a true fine can be imposed only by a government entity: It is punishment for violating a health or safety law.

Tenants told to stop smoking or move
Jan 5th, 2011
by UPI
CHICAGO, Jan. 5 (UPI) — A firm that manages eight Chicago apartment buildings says it is turning one of its properties into a smoke-free structure, forcing tenants to kick the habit.
The Habitat Co. has told renters at Kingsbury Plaza in the city’s River North area they have to stop smoking in 2011 or move, the Chicago Tribune reported Wednesday.
About 15 percent of the tenants at the 420-unit building are smokers, the management company said.
Once the transition year ends, a first violation of the smoking ban will cost tenants $350. A second violation will result in eviction.
If the transition at Kingsbury is successful, Habitat said it might create a smoke-free environment in its other buildings.
The Chicago Tobacco Prevention Project said a survey completed in November indicated one-third of renters would be willing to pay more to live in a smoke-free building.

December 14, 2007

WE NEED HELP!
ILLINOIS SMOKING BAN
NOW EXTENDED TO SENIOR APARTMENTS?
I received the following letter yesterday. This is another example of the wide-spread evil effects from SB500, The Smoke Free Illinois Act. Our elected officials in the Illinois Assembly need to be exposed for their real and hurtful accomplishments with this smoking ban, and the Tobacco Control bullies also need to have their “public altruism” masks removed to show what they really are doing to society. Is this any way to treat our seniors?

We’re all growing older every year, ourselves. Would you want to be treated this way? Think about it!!! Contact me if you have any suggestions or resources to help.
______________________________
Garnet Dawn – Illinois Smokers Rights – http://www.illinoissmokersrights.com
The Smoker’s Club, Inc. – Midwest Regional Director The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter – http://www.smokersclubinc.com
mailto:garnetdawn@comcast.net – Respect Freedom of Choice!
—————————————————-
We need help!

Senior citizen’s health is being compromised by the new Illinois smoking bans. Most of us have smoked 50-70 years, and have no desire to stop. But we are being forced outside in rain, wind, snow, ice and all other conditions to enjoy our cigarette.We are forced to move 15 feet or more from the building, by the Illinois law. Most of us have disabilities not related to smoking.

We are talking about seniors, age 65 and older. Most are very unsteady on their feet anyway, depending on canes, walkers and wheel chairs to get around at all…even in good weather. There will be an increased danger of falls and pneumonia, and other respiratory problems as a result of this law.

The extra taxes on cigarettes also forces us to cut back on food and other necessities to afford to buy our cigarettes..

We know that the problem is not just local, but a small group of us seniors are trying to fight back. It has also happened in several nursing homes and assisted living centers here locally , as well as in the independent living apartment we are in.

In our case, we are low income, HUD-subsidized housing, but they are independent living apartments, not assisted living. We live in the Westfield Manor Apartments in Belleville Illinois. These apartments are owned by Lutheran Senior Services, but have a PRAC 202 contact with HUD to rent to low-income seniors. Smoking has always been allowed in these apartments, but this year they decided to go Non-smoking on us, starting Nov 1, 2007…. Illinois law clearly states that we can smoke in our private apartments. HUD says they have no policy about smoking, but that House rules must abide by State laws, including laws on smoking. Yet, we are being forced outside, 15 feet from doorways and windows, no shelter or protection from wind rain, ice, or etc.

There are 62 apartments in our building. 16 of us are smokers. Several other non-smoking residents also agree that we should be allowed to continue smoking in our apartments. I am the youngest at age 69. The others are between the ages of 72 and 91 years old. None of us are in perfect health at this age, and there are so few things left for us to enjoy. Stopping smoking at our age is not going to extend our lives, but the stress and hassle we are going thru, and going outside in all kinds of weather is sure to shorten it for us.

Here at Westfield Manor Apartments, they discriminate against smokers by making house rules that they can invade our privacy with searches of our apartments any time of the day or night without previous notice, threaten us with eviction, and have tried financial exploitation to force us to pay to have carpets replaced, walls painted and even claiming refrigerators and stoves will have to be replaced. They tell us that this will have to be done at our expense. We don’t understand how cigarette smoke can harm stoves and etc, any more than regular cooking does. Two to Four years in an apartment , carpets will get dirty, and walls will have to be cleaned. That is normal wear and tear.

The HUD contract says the walls and carpets are to be clean when someone new moves in anyway, and I can’t say for sure, but I have also been told that it also states that walls are to be painted every 5 years, and carpets replaced every 5-9 years, depending on the condition of the carpet. I think this is to be done at the builder owner’s expense.

Moving is not an option for most of us. There is no other place for us to go. We have sought legal council, Management responded with a lawyer of their own, to try to force us outside to smoke or force us to move. What should be our next step???

Edna
Belleville Illinois 62223

Smoking inside apartment a hot-button issue

12/21/2006
By Robert Griswold,INMAN NEWS

Question: My husband, 3-year-old daughter and I recently moved. My husband and I are smokers. The first night in our new apartment, the landlord said she wasn’t aware that we were smokers, and asked that we not smoke in the front room, which is the living room. My husband and I agreed not to smoke in the living room. The landlord informed us that she couldn’t smell the smoke, as long as we weren’t smoking in the living room. After about a month the landlord informed us that she doesn’t want smoking in the house period. My husband and I informed her that we would not smoke in the front room, but that we would smoke anywhere else in the house we wished to. Because we stood up for ourselves and said there’s no law against smoking except in public places, we have been receiving letters from various lawyers saying we have two weeks to stop smoking. I feel this is discrimination, what are our rights?

Landlords’ attorney McKinley replies:

Unless a written lease or rental contract specifically prohibits smoking in the rental premises, you have the right to smoke in the property. That said, being a smoker is not a “protected class” such as race, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, family status, etc., and landlords have the right to “discriminate” against smokers by refusing to allow smoking in rental property, or in the common areas. You did not say whether you rented the property under a fixed-term lease or on a month-to-month tenancy. If you are on a fixed-term lease, you don’t have to worry about anything. You can smoke to your heart’s content, at least until the lease expires. However, if you are on a month-to-month tenancy, under California law, your landlord has the right to change the terms of the tenancy by giving you 30 days written notice. In other words, your landlord could amend the terms of your rental contract, by prohibiting smoking in the premises, after giving you 30 days written notice.

Tenants’ attorney Kellman replies:

Since places to smoke cigarettes are becoming more and more restricted, the last place of refuge for the smoker is in the home. But even there, the smoker is under attack. While smoking is a lawful activity, it still may be limited on private property by rules of the owner or on public property by a law or regulation. The right to breathe clean air is making great strides against the personal right to smoke. Landlords complain about property damage from cigarette smoke, the expense of cleaning up the litter and the fire hazard that smoking causes. Also, nonsmoking neighbor tenants do not want to smell or breathe the smoke or be subjected to the litter of smokers. Unfortunately for those who choose to smoke, there does not appear to be any reason that a landlord cannot limit smoking at the property if done correctly. As McKinley correctly points out, “smokers” are not a protected class of individuals (like race and religion) so the traditional discrimination rules do not generally apply. As a smoker, you still have some protections. For example, if there are no lease rules against smoking and you stand up for your right to smoke, then any eviction based on the lawful exercise of that right may be seen as retaliatory and illegal. Keep in mind that smoking that interferes with the other tenant’s use of the property may be restricted regardless of the lease. If your landlord wanted to impose a specific lease rule about smoking, he/she would need to wait for a lease renewal, or the landlord could serve a 30-day notice imposing new smoking prohibition rules on month-to-month tenants. Of course, this will pose a challenging situation for those who find it difficult or impossible to quit smoking within 30 days.

?
?
?