A residential landlord is generally subject to Chapter 93A, as they engage in the “conduct of trade or commerce” by leasing residential property unless, as explained by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in Billings v. Wilson, the leased property is owner-occupied. Therefore, a non-owner-occupied landlord must contend with (i) specific Massachusetts landlord-tenant laws1 and (ii) Chapter 93A.
The Massachusetts Appeals Court recently subjected a residential landlord to Chapter 93A in Ndoro v. Torres. The litigation arose from the landlord’s action to recover possession of an apartment. In response to the lawsuit, the tenant counterclaimed and asserted that the landlord had breached the implied warranty of habitability by failing to repair “rotted bathroom underflooring” within a reasonable time. The trial judge found for the tenant on the breach of implied warranty claim and awarded her continued possession of the premises and damages. The judge, however, dismissed the tenant’s Chapter 93A claim. According to the judge, the landlord had repaired the premises within a reasonable time.
The Appeals Court disagreed. Based on the record, the landlord waited approximately nine months to repair the premises. As the defects in the bathroom underflooring presented a safety hazard, that delay breached the implied warranty of habitability. That alone was sufficient to violate Chapter 93A and, independently, 940 Code Mass. §3.17(1)(b)(1)-(2) and 3.17(1)(i). The Appeals Court noted that the landlord had not challenged the trial court’s finding that the landlord was engaged in “trade or commerce.” It is unclear from the opinion whether the landlord also lived at the premises, which may have precluded the tenant’s Chapter 93A claim.
Ultimately, the Appeals Court concluded that the tenant had prevailed on her Chapter 93A counterclaim without the need for further evidence. The Appeals Court remanded the matter to the Housing Court Department to enter judgment under Chapter 93A for the tenant, determine the tenant’s damages (and whether those damages should be doubled or trebled under Section 9), and award attorneys’ fees and costs. This case underscores the importance of understanding the laws governing landlord-tenant rights and when a landlord is engaging in “the conduct of trade or commerce” that falls into the scope of Chapter 93A.
1 See The Attorney General’s Guide to Landlord and Tenant Rights and 940 C.M.R. s. 3.17 (Landlord-Tenant Regulations)