Landlord

[LtScott14]

Had an apt once and was woke up early by maintance knocking. Broken water pipe on 3rd floor and wanted to check my 2nd floor ceiling for water signs. Yep, bathroom was dripping and they had to drain the extra water or the ceiling would fall in. No problem.
Replace lock cylinder with my own to keep others out. Was unsure if manager changed from old renter or not? No, they did not get a key. Bad boy.

 

[canav844]

The lease rules before your sign are as negotiable as fist months rent or the size of the security deposit or having pets. If you've got other options to back it up, before anything is signed, read through it all, then tell them to strike out anything you don't want and if they won't tell them you'll walk away and if they still don't then walk away and find another apartment.

A vacant apartment means no income for that set of rooms. If they do your background and credit check and want you, most all will be willing to adjust those points for you, even if they need to call up the food chain to get approval. Once you sign the contract you're subject to the terms of the contract.

And it's probably worthwhile if they seem on the fence about it to mention that you're licensed and that target shooting is a hobby of yours (you do go the range to keep proficient and have your LTCH since you're carrying right?). It helps the gun come across as less threatening behavior if the people on the other side of the table are not socialized with firearms.

If they had an experience with a tenant who had an ND that tore up multiple walls, they may flat out say no, and that's ok there are other apartment management companies that won't treat your responsible legal behavior of exercising a natural right, as though you are a criminal in the name of property rights.

 

[BrewerGeorge]

There are lots of decent apartments in the Plainfield area now, so you shouldn't have to put up with that crap. Saratoga is ... not the best part of town, anyway. Not terrible - it IS still Plainfield, after all, but I wouldn't want to live there. Lots of teens wandering around, and lots of foreclosed houses in the "vinyl village" areas. You will also have to drive through the old downtown to get to the airport which is slow, and maybe past the strip at Walmart/Metropolis, depending on the route you choose.

If it were me, I'd look at Stafford Pointe or some of the newer ones back behind Metropolis. They will be a lot closer to your work, and you can easily take the "back way" into the airport via Stafford and Perimeter Road. I don't know if any of those complexes have guns provisions in the leases, though. I lived at Stafford Point 11 years ago, and I had guns but I may have just been ignorant of that lease provision. (I wouldn't have listened anyway.)

 

[bartb]

I just had the office manager of the apartments that I am planning on moving to in May send me their lease. Too my relief, no mentions of guns.

 

[lrahm]

Somewhere in the contract it probably states taht he can come in and "inspect" without consent. If you decide to have a weapon, wahtch what you leave out.

 

[SethDennis]

Thanks everyone! I think I'm going to see if they will fax me a copy of the lease so I can look through it and make some changes before we move down there.

 

[88GT]

IANAL, but I would imagine they could not enforce this rule inside your apartment. IC guarantees you have a right to defend yourself, especially in your dwelling and since the apartment becomes your home they cannot enforce that part. On the property, private property rights kick in, but inside the law would be in your favor. For people that say in your apartment is still their private property, it's not. Once you sign the lease it's your private property, they just have interest in that property. They cannot just come in without notifying you, which shows it's no longer their private property.

Correct, because they still own the property. You are leasing it from them, which makes it your property.

It does not make it the tenant's property. Not even close. And the property owner never just has an interest in the property. It is always first and foremost the property of the owner of record with the full compliment of rights and privileges that come with it. Upon leasing it, the tenant gains a vested interest in occupying it, but nothing more. Not even the remotest say in what transpires regarding the property. And the property owner subordinates his right to occupancy to the tenant, but that it is. Period. Your understanding of the situation is incorrect.

Moreover, Indiana code does not require notification for entry. It simply requires entry according to a standard of reasonableness. If the lease is silent on the terms and conditions of landlord entry, then the only governing standard is what a court would deem is reasonable. But then only if it comes to court. However, the lease MAY state that the landlord may enter without notice.

And, barring some prior case law to the contrary which I do not believe exists, a lease may legally prohibit firearms on the property. Doing so is not a violation of anyone's rights as said someone was not coerced or compelled into signing the lease. Signing the lease becomes a voluntary subordination of one's rights. VOLUNTARY. As long as one is free to exercise his choice of residency somewhere else, there is no violation.

And possession of a firearm in a premises where the lease prohibits it IS grounds for a legal and enforceable eviction. That doesn't mean the judge will rule in favor of the landlord, just that he can.

On a side note, an edit should be initialed and dated by BOTH/ALL parties to provide evidence that it was not made after signatures were affixed.

 

[Dirtebiker]

From what I know of leases, there isn't much about them that is binding once things get to court. They are almost pointless in a way.

Really!?

 

[Dargasonus]

It does not make it the tenant's property. Not even close. And the property owner never just has an interest in the property. It is always first and foremost the property of the owner of record with the full compliment of rights and privileges that come with it. Upon leasing it, the tenant gains a vested interest in occupying it, but nothing more. Not even the remotest say in what transpires regarding the property. And the property owner subordinates his right to occupancy to the tenant, but that it is. Period. Your understanding of the situation is incorrect.

Moreover, Indiana code does not require notification for entry. It simply requires entry according to a standard of reasonableness. If the lease is silent on the terms and conditions of landlord entry, then the only governing standard is what a court would deem is reasonable. But then only if it comes to court. However, the lease MAY state that the landlord may enter without notice.

And, barring some prior case law to the contrary which I do not believe exists, a lease may legally prohibit firearms on the property. Doing so is not a violation of anyone's rights as said someone was not coerced or compelled into signing the lease. Signing the lease becomes a voluntary subordination of one's rights. VOLUNTARY. As long as one is free to exercise his choice of residency somewhere else, there is no violation.

And possession of a firearm in a premises where the lease prohibits it IS grounds for a legal and enforceable eviction. That doesn't mean the judge will rule in favor of the landlord, just that he can.

On a side note, an edit should be initialed and dated by BOTH/ALL parties to provide evidence that it was not made after signatures were affixed.

IC 32-31-5-6
Landlord prohibited from interfering with access, possession, or essential services; unit entry by landlord
(g) A landlord:
(1) shall not abuse the right of entry or use a right of entry to harass a tenant;
(2) shall give a tenant reasonable written or oral notice of the landlord's intent to enter the dwelling unit; and
(3) may enter a tenant's dwelling unit only at reasonable times.

I hate vagueness. I wish they would rewrite it to a defined amount of notice, but it does appear that some type of notice is required by Indiana code.

 

[indytechnerd]

There are lots of decent apartments in the Plainfield area now, so you shouldn't have to put up with that crap. Saratoga is ... not the best part of town, anyway. Not terrible - it IS still Plainfield, after all, but I wouldn't want to live there. Lots of teens wandering around, and lots of foreclosed houses in the "vinyl village" areas. You will also have to drive through the old downtown to get to the airport which is slow, and maybe past the strip at Walmart/Metropolis, depending on the route you choose.

If it were me, I'd look at Stafford Pointe or some of the newer ones back behind Metropolis. They will be a lot closer to your work, and you can easily take the "back way" into the airport via Stafford and Perimeter Road. I don't know if any of those complexes have guns provisions in the leases, though. I lived at Stafford Point 11 years ago, and I had guns but I may have just been ignorant of that lease provision. (I wouldn't have listened anyway.)

^^^This right here.^^^

I work off of Perry south of Stafford, and am regularly the wheelman for folks here at work flying in or out. I can have someone at the dropoff in about 10minutes, maybe less if the stoplights are cooperating on Stafford.

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

IC 32-31-5-6
Landlord prohibited from interfering with access, possession, or essential services; unit entry by landlord
(g) A landlord:
(1) shall not abuse the right of entry or use a right of entry to harass a tenant;
(2) shall give a tenant reasonable written or oral notice of the landlord's intent to enter the dwelling unit; and
(3) may enter a tenant's dwelling unit only at reasonable times.

I hate vagueness. I wish they would rewrite it to a defined amount of notice, but it does appear that some type of notice is required by Indiana code.

Actually 88GT is spot on... As a landlord myself, the vagueness actually makes some sense. Consider the rules that I have in place: 1) I will NEVER enter the premises under normal circumstances without the tenant's consent or 24 hours notice. I think that's reasonable. I also always take a witness with me, and I don't snoop through people's stuff. If I'm there, it's to fix something.

One case where that does not apply - if I see smoke coming from the premises, or hear water running and no one's home or something like that, I'm going in NOW! I think that's reasonable too. And I don't know of any court that wouldn't back me in that. That said, it's never happened, either... and I don't abuse it.

For the record, gun owners are ENCOURAGED to be my tenants...

 

[LawDog76]

One case where that does not apply - if I see smoke coming from the premises, or hear water running and no one's home or something like that, I'm going in NOW! I think that's reasonable too. And I don't know of any court that wouldn't back me in that. That said, it's never happened, either... and I don't abuse it.

This part of the IC allows you to do so.

IC 32-31-5-6
(f) A landlord may enter the dwelling unit:
(1) without notice to the tenant in the case of an emergency that threatens the safety of the occupants or the landlord's property; and
(2) without the consent of the tenant:
(A) under a court order; or
(B) if the tenant has abandoned or surrendered the dwelling unit.