Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

oscardssmith t1_j4m0x00 wrote

Reply to comment by cambridgecitizen in Air conditioner installation fee - any way out of it? by lilliavert

Well the service charge isn't enforceable (they can't force you to pay $90 to take out an air conditioner that you own, that's just not how any of this works). It's just a landlord looking for gullible tenants.

3

lilliavert OP t1_j4m3c0i wrote

That’s exactly how I feel - like I’m agreeing to being ripped off! I do like my apartment overall and maintenance is usually very helpful/prompt, so maybe I’ll look into alternatives for next summer even though my current units aren’t very old unfortunately.

3

oscardssmith t1_j4mef87 wrote

I'd read your lease very carefully first. Unless there is language there specifically prohibiting you from installing the AC on your own, I seriously doubt they can stop you (note I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice).

1

commentsOnPizza t1_j4of42w wrote

Definitely check the lease. Lots of leases do specify that you can't install AC on your own and there's nothing in Mass that guarantees access to cooling like we guarantee heat. Often landlords don't want people installing AC units because often people put large/heavy units and put all the weight on the window - or they're installing a support structure and making penetrations into the exterior of the building.

For the winter, the landlords probably have a good case argument that it isn't weather tight for a Boston winter and that they don't want the added weight of snow/ice on top of the AC unit putting more stress on the building/window.

You might be able to negotiate it with the management company. You have two units and maybe you can get them down to $45/each. It's just one trip for their service person.

I think they should reasonably come down from the $180 for 2 units, but I don't think it's a scam on gullible tenants, ACs should be taken out for the winter, and there are good reasons to disallow tenant installation of AC units - it's overprotective for sure in most cases, but there are good reasons.

I'm guessing the lease stipulates this and they're going to have to comply, but maybe it doesn't.

There's also the question of whether $90 or 180/year ($7.50 or $15/mo) is the hill one wants to die on. When renting apartments, one often doesn't get to choose the exact rent. If this is the one thing that's pissing you off about this management company, I'd ignore it. Would you rather find a different place that's $100/mo more? Maybe your place is over priced, maybe management is annoying about lots of things, etc. Or maybe it's not worth the fight. Plus, even if you rarely turn on the heat, it's still some money there and probably $50+ even if you rarely turn on the heat.

If it's the hill you want to die on, it's the hill you want to die on. However, if the rest of things are great, I wouldn't make that the hill to die on. Yea, it's annoying, but the cost is minuscule compared to Cambridge rent. What are we talking? 0.5% of annual rent at a time when annual rent increases are in the 5-15% range? I just wouldn't make it my hill to die on.

4

mfball t1_j4m6lfr wrote

Probably still depends on what's in the lease though, because if it says you can't use your own units, then they can probably levy some other kind of fee for "violating the lease."

1

Old_Travel8423 t1_j4nwkl1 wrote

I would assume if it was in the lease that tenant can't install their own and has to pay $90 per unit to have them installed, and the lease contained a requirement to remove them in the winter, then it's probably not illegal. I tried to find some legal language and came up completely empty handed. It's a bizarre situation. All I'm finding about odd fees is landlords can't require payment of amenity fees - but can restrict tenants right to access the amenities if the tenant chooses not to pay the fee.

1