Responsibility for Damages to property

[redhawk2005]

I have recently negotiated a lease with my landlord, having previously been month-to-month. I haven't signed the new lease yet, but it has a clause that causes me some concern. Specifically, it has a typed-in rider that says: "Tenant will be responsible for all damages to property." Elsewhere, in the "boilerplate" portion of the lease, it says "tenant is not responsible for ordinary wear and damage by the elements."

My problem with this language is that it seems to make me responsible for any damage to the property whatsover, regardless of whether it is my fault or not. I feel my responsibility should be limited to damages due to my negligence or that of my guests, and not due to acts of nature, happenstance or the landlord's neglect. I really do need a lease as I'm disabled and cannnot afford to be evicted with one month's notice. I plan on asking my landlord to modify the language, but if he refuses I am wondering if I will in fact be liable for "all damages" if I sign the lease anyway, particularly with the contradictory language it contains.

Thanks for any advice.

[Aubergine]

A lease provision that purports to relieve the landlord of liability for the landlord's negligence is void and unenforceable (see General Obligations Law section 5-321).

The "ordinary wear" clause you describe is consistent with well-established NY law. See, for example, Taylor v Campbell, 123 App Div 698 (2d Dept 1908) (where lease required tenant to pay for damages to chattels on the premises, "the ordinary reasonable use and wear thereof excepted," tenant was not liable for damages to crockery, etc., caused by a falling picture that had been hung by the landlord, absent evidence that an act of the tenant or his family caused the picture to fall).

<small>[ April 06, 2006, 12:00 AM: Message edited by: aubergine. ]</small>

[Downtown]

It is also wise to note on the lease any damage that is already present (broken window, scratched stove, etc.) Also take dated pics of apt., provides the before in case of later damage claims.

[Anna]

There are other clauses in the boilerplate lease that are either null & void or unenforceable because they violate public policy or laws like the typed-in clause.

[redhawk2005]

Thanks a lot to aubergine, Downtown and Anna for the responses. I truly appreciate the advice and the time and effort you all take to answer questions on these forums. You've all been a great help on this and other subjects and I've learned a lot reading what you write here.