Landlord had duty to mitigate flea problem

Where a tenant’s apartment was infested with fleas, it was the landlord’s duty to mitigate the problem, even though the lease purported to shift that responsibility to the tenant.

Under the Virginia Residential Landlord Tenant Act (VRLTA), tenants are entitled to a warranty of habitability, which the parties cannot waive.

VRLTA

“Parrish argues that the circuit court erred as a matter of law in concluding that Parrish (the landlord), not Vance (the tenant), was responsible for eliminating household pests after Vance took possession of the property. Parrish asserts that the lease signed by both parties transferred this responsibility to the tenant. …

“This leads to the question of whether lease agreements may waive rights or remedies made non-waivable by statute. Virginia law says no. …

“The VRLTA imposes different duties on residential tenants and landlords.

“One duty the VRLTA imposes on tenants is to ‘[k]eep that part of the dwelling unit and the part of the premises that he occupies free from insects and pests, as those terms are defined in § 3.2-3900, and promptly notify the landlord of the existence of any insects or pests.’ Code § 55.1-1227(A)(3)[.] …

“This section requires tenants to take an active role in keeping the dwelling unit free from pests by promptly notifying the landlord of any infestations.

“However, under the warranty of habitability imposed on the landlord by Code § 55.1-1220 … , it is ultimately the landlord’s duty to keep the premises habitable[.] …

“[A]landlord must ‘[m]akee all repairs and do whatever is necessary to put and keep the premises in a fit and habitable condition.’ Code § 55.1-1220(A)(2) (emphases added).

“Virginia has not yet expressly defined the terms ‘fit and habitable.’ ‘Habitable’ means ‘adequate, appropriate for residence, capable of being inhabited, comfortable, fit for dwelling, fit for habitation, fit to be occupied, fit to live in, inhabitable, livable, residential, suitable, suitable for living in, tenantable.’ …

“‘[F]it’ means suitable, proper, appropriate, and/or fitting.

“Therefore, ‘fit and habitable ‘means that all conditions in both definitions must be met. The premises must be livable, free from serious defects to health and safety, and have necessary qualities for habitability.

“An infestation of fleas is clearly a condition that can make a dwelling unit not livable, nor free from serious defects to health and safety, and may deprive the unit of the necessary qualities for the particular purpose of human living. …

“[B]ased on a plain reading of Code § 55.1-1220 in context with the rest of the VRLTA and our prior precedent, we hold that Code § 55.1-1220(A) provides tenants a warranty of habitability that a landlord and tenant cannot waive by agreement.”

Sufficient evidence

“Parrish advances several arguments related to the sufficiency of the evidence for Vance’s tenant’s assertion.

“We conclude the evidence sufficiently establishes that (1) there was a flea infestation on the premises; (2) Vance gave prompt written notice to Parrish of the infestation; (3) Parrish had a reasonable opportunity to remedy the infestation but failed to do so; and (4) Vance paid into the court the amount of rent called for under the rental agreement.

“Thus, the circuit court did not err in ruling for Vance on the tenant’s assertion.”

Affirmed.

Parrish v. Vance, Record No. 1687-22-4, March 12, 2023. CAV (published opinion) (Causey) From the Fairfax County Circuit Court (Carroll). James M. Stewart, Jr., for appellant. Karen Leiser (The Leiser Law Firm, on brief), for appellee. VLW 024-7-080, 19 pp.