Drug smoking tenant denies smoking anything & is suing for harrassment

Status
Not open for further replies.

Contact_High

New Member
Here's the situation. There is an old row house where there are 4 separate apartment units. The new tenant in the basement apartment has been smoking in their apartment (cigarettes, pot, incense and an unknown substance). The entire house smells of smoke and the unit right above the basement apartment gets very bad and sometimes gets a sort of haze because of the smoke. Neighbors in the next house over (connected row house) have complained repeatedly that smoke has permeated their basement. When asked about the smoking, the tenant denies it and attributes the smoke odors that everyone is smelling to incense that is being burned in the apartment.

Granted, the incense smoke is very strong and usually comes on strong right before or right after the smell of cigarettes or pot or the smell of burnt rubber/plastic is detected.
The lease specifically prohibits smoking inside the house and the use of illegal drugs.
The "super", who also lives in the house, is a long-time friend of the landlord and acts on behalf of the landlord/owner of the house. After complaints from the other tenants in the house and the neighbors, and after an incident when the smoking tenant caught a wooden planter of dried mulch on fire (attached to the house - used by the smoking tenant as an ash tray) just outside the backdoor of the house, the super finally instructed the smoking tenant to move out.

Now, neither the super nor the landlord provided an initial written notice of eviction, so the smoking tenant sought legal assistance. The super gave a verbal notice again to the smoking tenant after continued complaints. The smoking tenant continued to deny the accusations of smoking indoors as well as catching the wooden planter on fire. In addition, the smoking tenant informed the super that there is a lawsuit being filed against him and the landlord for harassment and wrongful eviction - suing for emotional distress, etc.

A side note, the smoking tenant smokes all night and has people going in and out of the apartment between the hours of 2am and 7am. The tenant has also put up cameras inside the apartment (according to the super, who saw them while speaking to the smoking tenant) as well as outside the back door of the apartment.

The tenant living right above the smoking tenant went down to request a stop to the smoking (on a particularly bad night of smoke, creating the "haze" in their apartment) and the smoking tenant accused the other of lying and demanded that they all meet right then in the above apartment with the super. They were shocked by the request and asked the smoking tenant if that was really necessary at 11:30pm. The smoking tenant then closed the door on them. The non-smoking tenant went back upstairs and called the super, who did not answer the phone. The non-smoking tenant went back downstairs and invited the smoking tenant upstairs to smell/see the smoke for themselves, talk about it and offered a beer. The smoking tenant refused and accused the non-smoking tenant of denying the initial request, mentioned the harassment lawsuit, instructed them to contact his attorney and then closed the door on them again.

The super and landlord are now working with an attorney and going through the proper legal channels. Meanwhile, the smoking tenant's attorney now states that the tenant living directly above the smoking tenant has been "recruited" by the super to join in the harassment of the smoking tenant and sites the non-smoking tenant's visit as proof of the harassment. In addition, the smoking tenant now claims that his girlfriend was witness to the non-smoking tenant placing cigarette butts in the wooden planter at 5am on the day the non-smoking tenant went downstairs to complain. It should also be noted that this incident was weeks after the wooden planter had actually caught fire.
These claims are completely outrageous and reflect the continued disturbing behavior by the smoking tenant.

What did the super/landlord do wrong, how far can the smoking tenant take this and is the super/landlord responsible to the other tenants in the house who are complaining about loss of sleep, second hand smoke and exposure to drugs and are demanding some kind of compensation?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.
 
What the landlord did incorrectly was (as you pointed out), failed to follow the steps to terminating the tenants lease based on breach of lease for smoking.

This appears to now be in the process of being remedied through the use of an attorney.

The landlord owes nothing to the other tenants as the issue is being resolved (although perhaps slower than the tenants would like; however, neither the landlord nor his/her attorney has any control over how quickly the local court system works).

Gail
 
To perhaps complicate things, the lease was signed by the super, not the landlord and is now said to be unauthorized/null & void by the landlord.
The landlord is claiming that she never approved the lease due to the tenant's level of income. So, in addition to the claims that the smoking tenant has broken the terms of the lease, the landlord
has sent a letter to the smoking tenant stating that he indeed has no legitimate lease. This is the second month of the smoking tenant's rental period.

What are the rights of the landlord, the smoking tenant and the non-smoking tenant?

Also, the smoking tenant is now claiming that the super had threatened his life, and that is part of the lawsuit.
The smoking tenant's attorney notes death threats, wrongful eviction and ceaseless harassment in a letter to the landlord's attorney.
The smoking tenant's attorney writes he has been instructed to seek a judgment for as much money as possible and that the landlord risks
having her house "attached".

Are they looking at months of litigation?
 
This boils down to a fairly simple case. Was the lease "legal" (i.e., if the super can represent the landlord in lease signing, yes) and did the smoking tenant break the lease which forbids smoking by, well, smoking.

Months of litigation? Unlikely. Most judges see through the garbage that some attorneys toss into a case to confuse it. Most of the time it angers the judge for wasting his or her time.

The non-smoking tenants have no dog in this fight unless some are willing to come forward as witnesses and testify that yes, they saw, heard and/or smelled the smoke. It would be to their benefit to do so as opposed to assuming they somehow should receive financial compensation in this entire business.

Gail
 
In the letter from the smoking tenant's attorney, he says that the landlord had refused to go to landlord/tenant court and is wrongfully evicting. Apparently, the harassment suit is being fought with a counter suit right now but still nothing in landlord/tenant court. This started in December. How long can this go on? Thanks so much for the help.
 
Ignore what is being claimed. Nothing is true unless it can be proven to a judge.

How quickly this case will be heard is dependent on how busy the court system is; it is up to the court to schedule a hearing once a claim has been filed.

Gail
 
I'm one of the people receiving a contact high from all of this guy's second hand drug smoke.

How do you know he is the one smoking? Even more, how do you know he is smoking pot?
 
It's him & friends. The other tenants in the house have been there for years, as well as the neighbors on either side of the house. One needs only to enter that house or knock on the the basement door to smell it. On bad days, one can enter the neighbor's basement and get slammed by the smell.

When this guy answered his door, a wall of smoke came floating out and he was higher than a kite. I've been around the block and this is a no-brainer.
 
If you have a nuisance clause in your lease you can complain to the management company or landlord because second hand smoke is a disturbance of the peace and also it falls under nuisance which is grounds for eviction. Just like loud noise is a disruption so is second hand smoke. If he has a "right" to smoke you have a right to breath clean air!! If they passed the no smoking bill in public places then obviously it is a risk to non smokers, du! Come people stop making excuses for people's bad behavior. If smokers want to kill themselves then so be it, just don't take innocent people down with you through negligence. You should not have to move because of a smoker. Non smokers fight your case in court if you have to your health is too important not to and if you have children that's even more reason to go to court if you get no resolution from your management company because yo have a right to protect your children's health.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top