There are various defenses to landlord tenant court proceedings initiated by a landlord against a tenant.
The first defense is deficiency of the complaint. There are various ways in which a complaint can be deficient, which may lead to the case being dismissed before a judge hears any of the parties on the merits of the complaint.
The second defense is no service or improper service by landlord of the complaint. The landlord is required by law to give notice to the tenant of the pending landlord tenant court proceeding. Additionally, that notice must be given in certain ways prescribed by law. A failure of the landlord to adhere to those rules can cause their complaint to be dismissed before a judge hears any of the parties on the merits of the complaint.
The third defense is payment of rent. This means the landlord is alleging the tenant has failed to pay rent and the tenant is alleging they have indeed paid the rent. In this scenario, the landlord will have to furnish a ledger to show the non-payment of rent. The tenant will have to furnish evidence that he has actually paid the rent. The evidence can include receipts from the landlord of rent payment or cancelled checks used to pay the rent.
The fourth defense is misapplication and/or misappropriation of rent payments. This means the landlord has either misapplied rent payments to other charges and/or the landlord is seeking costs that are not considered rent. Under Maryland law, rent is considered “a periodic sum due for use and occupancy” of the leased premises. This means that a landlord cannot include charges for utilities in a complaint for failure to pay rent.
The fifth defense is a breach of the implied warranty of habitability. Under Maryland law, there is an implied warranty of habitability. The implied warranty of habitability protects tenants from threats to their life, health and safety. Some examples of threats to life, health and safety include but are not limited to rodent infestations, lack of sanitation, lack of heat in the winter, lack of running water and lack of electricity.
If you are claiming a breach of the implied warranty of habitability, the court will want to know whether you have given notice to the landlord about the alleged breach. Notice can be a text message, email, mail correspondence or verbal notice. However, verbal notices are generally not favored by the court because they are difficult to prove.
After notice of the breach has been give to the landlord, the landlord will be given a “reasonable time” to make repairs. What constitutes “reasonable time” will depend on the nature of the breach. For example, reasonable time to make repairs to a broken heating unit during the winter will usually be no more than a couple of days.
If the landlord fails to make repairs after a “reasonable time,” the tenant can stop paying rent to the landlord and/or the tenant can file a rent escrow claim with the court. It is very important to note that failing to pay rent to the landlord is not favored by the court. It is highly recommended that the tenant file a rent escrow claim with the court if the landlord fails to make repairs after a “reasonable time” has elapsed from the time notice was given to him.
A rent escrow claim allows the tenant to explain to a judge their allegations of the breach of the implied warranty of habitability. At the rent escrow hearing, the tenant can ask the judge for rent abatement or lease termination. Rent abatement means the amount of rent will be reduced because of the existing conditions in the premises that caused the breach of the implied warranty of habitability. After the hearing, the judge will order the tenant to pay the rent amount into the rent escrow account held by the court. This means the tenant will begin making rent payments to the court and not to the landlord. The court will then determine who receives the amount in the rent escrow account once the landlord tenant court proceeding has been finalized.
The sixth defense is failure of the landlord to be licensed and/or registered with the county where the property resides. There are many local licensing and registration requirements that landlords must adhere to. These requirements vary from county to county and can vary furthermore depending on local city ordinances.
The seventh defense is failure of the landlord to have the proper lead registration. Landlords with properties built before 1978 are subject to special lead registration requirements. Those landlords must register their pre-1978 properties each year with the Maryland Department of the Environment, unless they have a certificate which states that property is lead-free. In addition, the landlord must provide the tenant with a copy of the risk reduction inspection certificate and lead informational packets before the tenant moves into the property.
The eighth defense is retaliation. A landlord is not allowed to bring a landlord tenant claim against a tenant simply because the tenant was exercising his rights under the law. For example, a tenant calls a city inspector to inspect the leased premise they are residing in because the tenant believes conditions exist on the premises that breach the implied warranty of habitability. The landlord then brings an action against the tenant in landlord tenant court simply because the tenant has exercised his right to have the leased premises inspected.
There are requirements the tenant must satisfy in order to claim this defense. In order to claim this defense, the tenant must be current on rent payments and the alleged retaliatory action must have occurred within six (6) months of the tenant’s action that lead to the retaliatory proceeding.