Despite how hot it is, landlords in Tennessee are not required to keep the air conditioning running.
In our changing climate, that probably comes as a surprise.
However, unless it’s in the lease, nothing in Tennessee’s Landlord-Tenant Act gives renters the right to air conditioning.
“I think it’s unfair. It’s inhumane to me because without air we can’t live and breathe,” said Anita Brown.
I actually agree that nobody has a “right to air conditioning”.
But people do have a right to whatever’s been promised in a contract they signed.
This lady rented an apartment with an air conditioner. She’s paying for this apartment. The landlord isn’t allowed to just ignore requests for maintenance because they don’t feel like providing the air conditioner any more.
The air conditioner is part of the deal they agreed to, and the landlord isn’t holding up their end of the deal.
Counter point: do I have a right to engage in activities that cause the overall habitability of the planet to drop for vast swathes of the population?
Edit: I seem to be getting taken out of context here. I’m referring to corporations/landlords in this context, not the humans wanting to be cool.
Poor wording, rip inbox.
That is only a question that can be asked after corporations are made responsible for their damages, considering they account for the VAST majority of emissions
Are you arguing that her running her air conditioner cause the habitability of the planet to drop? On what dimension, and by what amount?
Let’s say in one timeline she runs her air conditioner for six hours. In the other timeline she doesn’t. What’s the difference in Earth’s habitability between those two scenarios?
I have a strong feeling you don’t live in the southern US.
people used to build houses that were designed in such a way where you didn’t need air conditioning. In tropical country such as Vietnam where I live this is still the case. I have to wonder if the United States builds houses inefficiently on purpose.
I think we got lazy with our designs once centralized air was mainstreamed. The house my father grew up in the 1950s was designed like you mentioned. It would only allow light through during certain times of year/day with its overhanges and louvers and it jad more windows which allow more air flow…now according to him it was still a miserable place to live during the 1950s Texas summers…
Modern houses with their insulated walls and double windows are better at withstanding summer than the ones I’ve lived in while my only solace for 85+ degree nights was a fan.
I’m all for demanding proper maintenance from landlords, even if it’s not on the lease. You visit a unit that has a thermostat on it, that’s advertising it has a working AC. It’s disingenuous from the landlord to claim the AC is decorative.
But claiming air conditioning is essential is utter horseshit.
Most of our houses have to stand up to the cold too (at least presently). Idk how much this affects what kind of designs are possible, but some brain roughage for ya.
Surprising keeping the cold out vs in doesn’t change much. You insulate the shit out of the building to minimize unwanted transfer from outside to inside.
The comments two and three levels up were about third-world tropical houses and old houses respectively, both designed to be habitable in hot climates without air conditioning. As such, they are/were designed exactly the opposite way: to maximize cross-ventilation instead.
What you really want these days would be a house that’s tightly insulated but also has lots of operable windows, a whole-house fan, and/or a design that facilitates stack effect ventilation so that it can use either cooling strategy when conditions are appropriate.
I have to wonder if the United States builds houses inefficiently on purpose.
Starting roughly during the housing boom just after WWII, the United States started building houses cheaply on purpose. One of the most noticeable changes is common house designs went from being Craftsman bungalows with high (e.g. 10’) ceilings, lots of windows for good ventilation, and large roof overhangs for shade and protection from wind-driven rain, to “American Small Houses” with 8’ ceilings, minimal windows and no roof overhangs.
As the owner of one of the latter (in the South, BTW), I can tell you that trying to keep it cool via cross-ventilation is largely ineffective.
Sort of. Pretty much all of suburban housing is cookie cutter houses made out of the cheapest possible material available. Really the only improvements we’ve made is better insulation and standardized 2 way heat pumps.
I can’t imagine apartments and buildings are much better when you can just slap an AC onto anything and call it a day.
I am from the US and am living in malaysia at the moment and have traveled throughout South East Asia. I think the issue is not that our homes are built I efficiently, but that we just do not tolerate heat the same way that those in South East Asia do. We could open our windows and doors like they do in asia to create a draft and cool down, but it would still be warmer than we would like. Living in Asia is warmer than we would like in general.
I once lived in an apartment with no windows that could open. They were all sealed.
that sounds bad
deleted by creator
Most varieties of stone (cobble, concrete, brick, etc.) are very expensive, especially in comparison to lumber in places where tree farms are plentiful.
Also, idk if you’ve seen a modern wood house, but they’re practically hollow, save for fiberglass insulation. They use far less material than stone buildings.
If you think US houses are bad, you should see Australian houses. Barely any insulation and very
draughtydrafty, so they’re too cold in winter and too hot in summer. A huge percentage of houses fall below the WHO’s recommended safe temperature in winter.Sure, you can use AC or heating, but it dissipates very quickly.
I’m from Melbourne, and the climate there is fairly similar to the San Francisco Bay Area where I live now. Similar winter weather, but it gets a bit hotter in summer. Bay Area houses are much more comfortable though. My US house is a 1960s build yet it has way better insulation than even a 2010s build in Australia.
This is soon to pass as a bylaw in my city. I hope all the landlords have chapped asses over it. ALAB.
Most of the world can’t afford air conditioning. We’re talking something like five billion people or way more.
I mean first of all, not every part of the world needs it. Second… everyone who needs it and can’t afford it should also have access.
Giving it to group A does not, in cases like this, preclude group B from it as well.
I’m not here to say people don’t deserve air conditioning. I’m just pointing out the lack of equity in life. Most of those poor billions are in places where the heat index is higher than most places in the US.
R U SERTIOUS??11
As an American you don’t have a right to universal healthcare and you’re worried about air conditioning?
Multiple things can be bad at the same time
This is also a lot more achievable than total healthcare reform. Both are achievable for sure, but just forcing landlords to install and maintain aircon is easier
Sure except air conditioning is not a right. It’s a luxury.
i think it is disingenuous to represent that AC is a standard or required by law for a rental anywhere, at least in the US. I do find it shitty that the AC included with the unit is damaged, and land(slum)lord won’t fix it, but again, unless it’s in the lease there really is no requirement that the LL provide it in US. I think it is good to start a discussion on if AC for a rental should be the law, (edit: i also would strongly support this) but i doubt we will see that become the case, especially in southern states which probably would need it most.
I think if the air conditioner was there when she toured the unit, it’s implicitly part of the contract.
i think it is disingenuous to represent that AC is a standard or required by law for a rental anywhere, at least in the US.
Having AC is a standard and required by law in many places in the US
https://www.rent.com/blog/keeping-cool-tenant-landlord-responsibilities-air-conditioning/
that didn’t have any list of states, but my curiosity lead me here https://propertyclub.nyc/article/apartment-air-conditioning-laws#what-states-require-air-conditioning
i was pleasantly surprised to find 24 states that do require it, with some other states that have some loopholes.
I tried to find the list but brain failed me and i kept getting bar association stuff. Did you know that while Missouri doesn’t require AC it does require that units be kept to a ‘habitable’ temperature, and there’s enormous case law defining that word that makes it defacto required but technically not.
If the building becomes unlivable it’s an issue. high temps with high humidity can literally lead to heat stroke since no amount of fans will help since you literally can’t cool off even with sweating.
What that fix is, I’m not sure, but some buildings in areas of the south become ovens during heat waves and without AC people will get sick or die.
i absolutely agree, my point is less that there are or are not health concerns, just that it is currently not a requirement, at least anywhere I have lived. i believe it should be, but I know that the south passing legislation that helps vulnerable people at the expense of those who own property is probably never going to happen. i just felt like it was odd that the article was stating that there is no law in the state, without emphasizing that most states do not either.
Some areas have basic consumer protection. Such as a habitation must be fit to live in.
Renting out an apartment with 2 feet of water in it all times, or black mold, or no water or front door is often covered by specific legislation and then, if not, then by the consumer protection statutes.
Which may be the approach some lawyers will have to take if this gets bad enough.
“I can live in my apartment except for 5 weeks where I have to go someplace else” is what we may start seeing in future civil actions.
Even if people argue it’s fit to live in, it should be covered by consumer protections as you paid for it, so you should get it, unless the contract specifically calls it out as not working
We also don’t technically require that you have a steady supply of oxygen in your apartment, but I’m guessing you’d find it unreasonable if you woke up in a vacuum.
Do we even have a law that says landlords can’t heat your apartment to 100 degrees Fahrenheit? Or a law that specifically proscribes noise machines? Do we really have to specify every fucking thing or can people just be reasonable?
I don’t know if you’ve seen all of human history, but no, people can’t be reasonable. Look at the need for mask mandates if you want a recent example.
can people just be reasonable?
Not when there are pearls to be clutched.
It’s just fucked up that an appliance that’s connected to the actual rental unit doesn’t need to be operational by law. I mean, if the 'fridge dies in a TN rental unit is the landlord required to fix it or does that need to be specified in the lease also?
It’s just basic consumer protection, IMO. The AC comes with the apartment, the landlord should be required to maintain it.
I’d argue that if it’s a feature of the unit that was present when someone signed, then yes it should be required to work.
Of course contracts can’t cover every little thing, so it’s ridiculous to rely on them for that level of granularity. Do we need to mandate contracts have an Entry for every feature of every appliance, every piece of infrastructure, every piece of structure? No. These things were presented as being there and functioning. But we should be able to rely on things working as presented. We should have a legal right that that be true
Honestly we probably already do. Most judges, if you said “Look the thing was there when he showed me the unit. That makes it part of the offered deal”, would back you.
That’s what I would expect and would be consistent with my limited experience, but doesn’t appear to be borne out by the original story
Central Air absolutely needs to be a requirement on all new construction. And window units need to be mandatory unless requested otherwise in every bed room.
It’s way too hot these days in the car majority of the US for this to be safe.
Why would you require both central air and window units?
I meant to imply if there wasn’t central air.
Blame building codes and politics. Including an AC in every build could inflate the costs making it unaffordable too.
I doubt adding AC would make it unaffordable, other than the renter having to pay the electric bill. The federal government, some cities, and most electric providers offer incentives to purchase and install modern HVAC units. window units are also an affordable option included in or allowed in many rentals.
The federal government, some cities, and most electric providers offer incentives to purchase and install modern HVAC units
Which is because there’s a market to sell them, make it mandatory and there is no reason to have sales or grants, it’s a guaranteed sell. Which is also politics….
It’s an extra 3-5k on the sticker price, that’s unaffordable for a large swath of people, especially when the house is only 60k anyways.
Where the hell are you finding 60k houses or 4K hvacs? lmao
I agree with your comment but your numbers are all way too low.
But the post in question says there is AC. It’s just broken and the landlord doesn’t want to fix it. That’s not ok
If somethings not required by code, and if its not part of the lease why would it need to work?
Because it was represented as a feature when someone decided to rent the place. Otherwise it’s a “bait and switch” and should be fraudulent
For example, nothing requires an outlet or switch to work, as long as it’s safe, but we expect that to work. I doubt anything requires all burners on a stove to work, but it’s certainly expected. Nothing requires windows to open but it’s expected.
Because it was represented as a feature when someone decided to rent the place.
Pardon? It wasn’t on the lease, so it wasn’t.
For example, nothing requires an outlet or switch to work, as long as it’s safe, but we expect that to work. I doubt anything requires all burners on a stove to work, but it’s certainly expected. Nothing requires windows to open but it’s expected.
Actually, codes and legislations do! Your entire comment is misguided yeesh. AC IS different since no codes, legislations, or the lease requires it. A stove is require by code, legislations, and lease, so if it doesn’t work, that’s an issue.
So you understand the very important distinction now….? Probably not, but do you?
Because it was represented as a feature when someone decided to rent the place. Pardon? It wasn’t on the lease, so it wasn’t
It’s been a long time since I rented but maybe purchasing a house has an analogy.
- I was told I had to leave behind wired in speakers when I sold my townhouse. The buyers had seen them in their tour so could legally expect them, and my contract hadn’t called them out as an exception. Legally they had the advantage
- The house I bought was missing a ceiling fan that I had seen during the tour and it hadn’t been called out as an exception. Legally I had the advantage and the sellers had to replace it at their cost
It’s not any different.
- Maybe in some situations a stove is required but as long as it’s safe and can be used, there is nothing requiring every feature to work, nor is it in the contract. There is no explicit requirement that all four burners work. However, if it is there we all expectant to work
- electrical code has requirements for safety and for minimum level of service, but after that, nothing requires everything to work nor is that detailed in the contract. There is no requirement for electrical service beyond the minimum. However, we do expect them all to work and have the legal advantage
In the same way, AC is not required feature. However if it is there when I decide to rent and I have decided to rent with that information then I do expect it to work and I do call it fraud if it doesn’t
The lease isn’t the only information on which the deal is based.
It is part of the lease. She was shown a certain apartment, with certain appliances. She signed a lease for that apartment. It’s understood the lease covers the facilities in the apartment.
When I was 21 and moving into a shitty rental with my now wife, the place didn’t have AC and we moved in during a terrible heat wave. We bought one window unit so we could at least sleep at night. Later bought one more to make the whole space livable. Those units aren’t expensive, pick up an extra shift or two and you can buy one. When we moved into a place with central air we sold one and gave one away.
pick up an extra shift or two and you can buy one
If all it takes is a shift or two, then landlords can surely recoup the costs with an extraordinarily small increase of rent (pennies or single digit dollars).
Or just their hard earned money through doing nothing at all and sponging like the parasites they are.
Agreed. If it’s law they’ll get it done (mostly, there are always bad landlords in court). But there are still a lot of places where it isn’t law, and I’m not just talking about the US. But if it’s too hot to be at home, spend a little extra time at work and fix the problem.
I had jury duty once and the air conditioning was acting up. Judge announced we would all be moving to a different room as a result, which we did.
Guess it isn’t a luxury when it’s a judge’s place of work.
For ambulances, if the air conditioning is broken in the patient compartment it’s considered a critical fault and the vehicle needs to be out of service. In the cab it’s a minor. Maybe it’s in case a judge needs to be transported.
It’s very much a selective thing. Humans vs meat machines.
I’m a meat machine. The factory I work in regularly gets over 90°F in the summer and being on long Island its also humid as fuck like 75%+.
I checked the NY state laws on factory conditions and wouldn’t you know it, the fucking laws are vague as shit to allow essentially anything… “All factories must maintain a reasonable temperature and humidity.” That’s the fucking law. “Reasonable” is not defined anywhere in that law… I contacted my
business cuck"R"epresentative about what that law means or how we determine what is reasonable, and yet again wouldn’t you know, he never responded…Been there done that too when I was a toolmaker. Old buildings with no air flow, (except in the winter on sub-zero F days). But hey, sometimes on the really bad days we would get an extra 5 minutes at break. And maybe on very rare occasions, a Popsicle.
Good times…
Start a fire
Bohemia area by the mini airport? Did some factory work in that part of LI. Yes it can very much feel like you are working in a sauna there.
That’s actually the area where I went to learn HVAC! I’m much more east now past Riverhead actually, I couldn’t deal with the traffic lol
Happy cake day apparently! Lol
anything to fuck over poor people…
We could just start building houses so they don’t need them like they do in Hawaii. The well designed houses are designed in a way that allows maximum airflow when the windows are open because the price of running an ac there is astronomical.
There’s a lot more regular breeze in Hawaii
Ya, you got me there. You can also build them like termites in Africa do with their hives. They build them in a way to vent heat, and so they catch the minimum amount of light and heat.
There’s also windcatchers, the “ancient air conditioners” of Iran.
And finally, there’s air conditioning
Let’s not go crazy here.
If you’ve ever been to the deep south usa like Tennessee you would know that’s not viable. Temps hit 100 F easily most summers. Humidity is often very high in combination with the scorching heat.
Fortunately it is definitely NOT the norm for homes to be built and/or rented that do not have AC. I’ve rented numerous cheap homes and apartments in the South, every one had AC. My cheapest rental home was $300/mo and it had all utilities (and central HVAC) working except Internet.
Ah yes, Hawaii, where it gets to a scalding 85F on the hottest of days
But it is done in SE asia where it can reach 40C at even greater humidity… Why not Tennessee?
Because it also gets down to 0C in Tennessee in the winter and houses need to be able to handle that, too
I’ve been to a house with extremely thick brick walls, it’s almost never an uncomfortable temperature.
My dad built two earth-sheltered, passive-solar houses that were always comfortable, required no cooling, and cost about $100 a month to heat over the winter. It’s absolutely do-able but you won’t get a house that looks like a “normal” house so people won’t be interested in buying them.
I’ve still got the plans and if I had my druthers I’d build a whole mess of them all over so people can see that sometimes weird is much better.
Just isolate the walls well and make sure the window seals are tight. Simple as.
There ARE designs that work. Just not found in the USA. Designs from 2000 years ago throughout the hot and humid southeast Asia that work fine.
If you’ve ever been to India for example, you’d know. The USA does not have a monopoly on humidity and isn’t close to the high for temperatures.
We could just…?
Maybe we could just limit the temps in other hot areas to the same as Hawaii which gets around 85° and rarely goes over 90°?
How about other parts or the US where temps regularly exceed 100° or even 110°? Those airflow designs would do little more than pipe summer heat through their homes.
You can design homes in hot areas to do well, but it’s not an airflow issue. You can do earth berms, thicker walls, much better insulation, and design windows and eaves to prevent the high summer sun from coming in windows to heat the interior. Unfortunately a lot of these kinds of efficient building styles are seen as crunchy-granola and don’t lend themselves to mass produced, cheap material, suburban tract homes and McMansions. The problem is crappy construction and our insistence on the prevalent suburban style.
I think the best you can do passively is keep the home at the average daily temperature, which is still uncomfortable in some areas at some times of the year. Average daily air and soil temperatures where I live are typically in the 90s in August. I guess that’s better than the 100F-110F highs though. I think I’ve read it’s better to insulate homes from the ground in areas where it’s hot or cold both day and night. AC can be pretty efficient in well-sealed highly-insulated buildings.
It is with a great sadness that I do agree with you.
My childhood friend had a farmhouse that had a back door facing west (I believe that was the direction), and when you opened the door and a specific set of windows, the whole house turned into a wind tunnel. It was pretty cool. I remember his dad saying they’d design the houses that way on purpose.
Can’t. Zoning board says it’s not in neighborhood character.
Downvoted as irrelevant to the topic of apartment rentals, but it’s a great separate topic with several appealing approaches that could make a big difference
Downvoted for announcing that you downvoted the comment instead of just doing it.
(I took the liberty of downvoting my own comment as well so as not to be hypocritical.)
I had a friend that was not allowed to run air conditioning in his flat. The landlord said the old wiring could not handle it. I said that all you needed was a decent UPS (they make these just for window units in India), but my friend just moved instead. 100+ F is too hot in a flat during Summer.
I used to live in an apartment that also explicitly disallowed window units. The apartment did have a fireplace though, and I figured hot air rises, so we just shoved a window unit in there and let the hot air vent out the chimney.
It did the trick, and we never agreed not to install a fireplace unit.
While I admit I didn’t pursue it when I lived in a similar situation, there’s a case to be made that would violate electrical code. You should be able to safely plug in any appliance which meets the limitation of the outlet.
In my case, I just ignored that and got a window AC anyway. Granted it was a lot smaller than needed and even that made the lights dim, but it did plug in to a standard outlet. Probably not a good choice but the easy choice
The landlord said the old wiring could not handle it.
If wherever it was was dry, you can use an evaporative cooler. They can only cool so much, but they’re far more energy efficient than an air conditioner.
You can also get low-end portable air conditioners. These are noisier and not as energy-efficient as a window unit, but you can get pretty small-capacity ones that will run on regular 120V lines, don’t need 240V. It’ll maybe keep a room cool.
https://www.amazon.com/GE-Conditioner-Dehumidify-Evaporation-Installation/dp/B09WSH44RQ
Here’s an 850 watt one. Most microwaves will pull more power than that.
I feel like the habitability requirement might be governing on issues of extreme heat.
Yes. Temperature range is one of the basic requirements not just for life but for all physical phenomena.
In the mean time instead of dying from heat exhaustion do an internet search for DIY AIR CONDITIONING and at least see what your options are. Good luck. Climate change is a thing by the way.
I do not know why you are getting downvoted. The state is in the wrong here, but its a redstate so you cannot expect change on their part. making your own air conditioner is the only option.
something in common with prisoners! Hell yeah Tennessee!
If this was Phoenix Arizona we wouldn’t be having this conversation because all the tenants would already be dead. If there’s a danger to tenants the answer seems obvious.
