Q–We live in a vintage 15-unit building. Each winter the snow and ice melts off the roof and roof leaks down one side of the building. The water then refreezes as a solid sheet of ice on the steps. There also are icicles hanging from the gutters.
Luckily, no one has been injured, but I feel its only a matter of time before an icicle falls onto a passerby or someone slips on the ice and falls down the stairs. Because these are the stairs we use to bring our trash down and to get to the laundry facilities, many of the tenants are more than slightly concerned about this situation.
We have asked the janitor to take care of the problems, but there seems to be little he can do. Salt just hasn’t done the job on ice this thick. Is there any action we can take to make the landlord address this problem?
A–Strangely enough, there is little you, as tenants, can do about this situation. In addition, as bad as the conditions may be, you probably don’t want to take matters into your own hands.
Illinois is one of very few states which adheres to relatively old law that states that a landlord is not responsible for natural accumulations of ice and snow.
Thus, if the natural accumulations of snow and ice, and the melting and refreezing of the water, create dangerous conditions, so long as those conditions are solely an act of nature, and are not affected by the actions of any individual, there is no liability imposed in the event of injury.
However, if the janitor attempts to rectify the situations, and does not alleviate the dangerous conditions, the landlord can face liability in the event of an injury.
For example, if the janitor has attempted to melt the ice with salt, and the ice remains after the salt treatment, the landlord can be held responsible for someone who slips and falls on the ice.
If the landlord, or the landlord’s representative, is going to try to help the tenants of the building, the landlord must be certain that the dangerous conditions are fully abated.
It is entirely possible that the janitor reported to the landlord that despite his best efforts, he was unable to remove the ice. The landlord may have consulted with an attorney or an insuranc eagent, who may have informed him that he faces less exposure if nothing is done than if a good-faith attempt is made. In this situation, the janitor’s failure to act may be deliberate.
Similarly, if you, or other tenants, decide to try to take some action to alleviate the problems, you face the same liability that the landlord would face in his attempts to remove the hazardous conditions.
If you or other tenants alter the naturally accumulated conditions, for better or worse, and someone is injured as a result of the remaining conditions, you, or the other tenants who attempted to solve the problem, could be held responsible for those injuries.
Probably all you can do is determine whether the janitor’s inaction is deliberate or simply neglectful.
If a conscious decision has been made to leave the natural conditions unaltered, you must recognize that these hazards are likely to remain so long as you reside in the building.
On the other hand, if, in speaking with the janitor, you determine that the janitor is being neglectful, you might want to communicate with the landlord and let him know that insufficient efforts are being made to abate the dangerous conditions.
Q–I have a judgment for eviction against a tenant, and I know that I have 90 days to evict him. I agreed with the tenant to entry of an order for possession which allowed him to remain for 90 days before I take this action. When does the 90-day time limit on enforcement of the judgment for possession begin running? Also, if I have to go back to court, do I have to notify the tenant that I am doing so?
A–The sheriff is allowed to execute the order for possession, and evict the tenant, during a period of 90 days from the date of the entry of the judgment.
Therefore, if you have agreed not to execute the judgment for 90 days, the time for the sheriff to evict the tenant will expire virtually on the first day you can place the order.
You will have to appear before the court on a motion to extend the time for execution of the order for possession. Traditionally, the court extends the order for additional 90-day periods of time.
In your situation, you might as well appear before the court on your motion before you even place the order with the sheriff, because if you place the order first and the time expires, you may lose your place in line while you are preparing to appear before the court for an extension.
As is the case in all motions to be brought before a judge, all parties affected by the order or who have appeared in the case must receive notice of the motion, so that those parties can appear and present their arguments to the court.
———-
Robert A. Boron, a Chicago attorney who specializes in leasing matters, writes about landlord and tenant issues for the Tribune. Questions to him can be addressed to Rental Q&A, Your Place section, Chicago Tribune, 435 N. Michigan Ave., Chicago, IL 60611. He also can be reached by e-mail at rabltd@aol.com. Sorry, but he cannot make personal replies.
