Philadelphia skyline.

A common misconception about tenants facing eviction is that they are being evicted because they cannot pay the rent. In fact, the situation tends to be much more complicated.

In a recent VIP case, for instance, a tenant was being evicted on a complaint alleging only that the tenant owed money for water, plus attorney fees and costs. As it turns out, the tenant had previously entered into a settlement agreement with the landlord because of terrible housing conditions, and the landlord was breaching that agreement by trying to evict the tenant again. Only after a volunteer attorney began to represent the tenant were the underlying conditions of disrepair finally addressed.

This case illustrates the range of difficult, and interlocking, challenges tenants in Philadelphia face each day, especially when living close to the poverty line. If a tenant is not getting heat in the apartment where she lives with her children and has to rely on space heaters for warmth—thereby causing her electric bill to spike far beyond her budgeted amount—she might fall behind on rent in order to keep the electricity on and the unit habitable.

Under the law, the space heater expense is one the landlord should have prevented the tenant from incurring. It is among a host of additional expenses—e.g., a roach infestation due to a crumbling foundation, mold from a leaky ceiling, a window that does not lock on the ground floor making tenants feel unsafe having their children in the home—that tenants may be forced to bear, illegally, due to the conditions of the property. Solely or in combination, these problems may render a home uninhabitable. And from there, the renter-borne expenses only escalate. Parents might have to send their children to live with relatives, which could mean paying additional expenses for food and child care, while trying to address the serious conditions. A single person might have to move in temporarily with a friend in a neighboring county, resulting in a more expensive and lengthy commute to work.

All of these consequences would be avoided if landlords provided what they are required to offer tenants under Pennsylvania law: safe and sanitary premises that are fit for habitation, as in Pugh v. Holmes, 486 Pa. 272, 289 (1978). This implied warranty of habitability cannot be waived, as in Fair v. Negley, 257 Pa. Super. Ct. 50, 53 (1978).

That means, for example, that no matter how little the landlord is charging in rent, she cannot tell a tenant that he knew of the poor conditions when he moved in and so has to accept them. Some conditions—such as heat, access to potable water, etc.—are so essential to a housing unit being livable that they cannot be waived. Telling a tenant to “deal with” lack of heat because she is getting a deal on rent is illegal—and yet it happens every day in Philadelphia.

Backed up by the warranty of habitability, getting a repair done should be as simple as notifying the landlord of the issue. Far too often, though, especially in Philadelphia neighborhoods where rents are relatively low, landlords are unresponsive to repair requests or make repairs that are improper, unsafe or incomplete. Just as a landlord should not be able to tell a tenant to “deal with” poor conditions, so too she should not be able to evict a tenant who complains about those conditions. And yet each week, landlords do just that—concluding that it is easier and cheaper to do so than to make the needed repairs. If the tenant falls behind in rent, even if the underlying cause is having spent resources to address conditions issues the landlord was legally responsible for addressing, the risk of an eviction action is even higher.

Tenants have a right to withhold rent after providing written notice and giving the landlord reasonable time to make repairs.This is a defense to an eviction case, and the tenant has the option to escrow the rent money, abate the rent, or repair the issue and deduct the repair cost from the rent. Unfortunately, many tenants do not know about these rights and/or the finer details of how to execute them effectively.

Across the spectrum of income, education and occupation, many tenants are ill-informed of their rights and remedies. A friend of mine who is an executive at a large company recently rented an apartment in South Philly. He has resources aplenty at his disposal, including having (in me) a friend who is a lawyer and deals with landlord-tenant issues daily. And yet he has no idea about the terms of his lease.

The chips often are stacked against tenants. The vast majority of tenants who seek legal assistance from Philadelphia VIP have month-to-month leases, which afford scant protection from eviction. In a recent case, a landlord sought to evict a tenant with one month's notice. The tenant had lived in the property for over 25 years and had never been late with the rent. It was of no moment: the landlord simply wanted her out. Even in an eviction case where the court determines that no money is owed for back rent, due to the poor conditions of the housing unit, the landlord still can come away with a judgment for possession because month-to-month lease allow suing for possession at any time and without any cause.

The power disparity in these situations is why it is so important for every tenant facing eviction to have an advocate. For those without a legal education, navigating these issues is overwhelming. Establishing sufficient proof of the underlying factual situation (for example, when the poor condition started, how the landlord was notified, etc.) can be difficult. Without representation, tenants may be pushed into mediation, without understanding their right to be heard by a judge; pressured to enter into unfavorable settlement agreements, even when they have valid defenses to the eviction and counter-claims against the landlord; and have difficulty identifying and presenting their defenses if they do appear before a judge.

The consequences for tenants usually are drastic—eviction within in 21 days that, due to a lack of affordable housing in Philadelphia, often leaves them homeless and saddled with money judgments that impair their ability to rent another home in the future. Simply having a lawyer can prevent this devastating result and is why our VIP volunteer attorneys feel so passionately about their pro bono service. In addition to preventing homelessness, they are leveling the playing field for tenants who otherwise would go it alone against landlords and their counsel, preventing the railroading of tenants who do not know their rights. Attorneys help negotiate the outcomes the tenants desire (which, in some cases, is to move to different housing), and avoid credit-impairing judgments. The mere presence of volunteer attorneys in court helps shift the underlying power dynamics and empower tenants.

By volunteering, you can directly impact the lives of our clients and their families by preventing homelessness and improving access to justice. VIP staff and experienced mentors are at the ready to train and support you. Our training materials include a step-by-step guide to the hearing process and a thorough explanation of the defenses available. Little trial preparation is needed, and cases either resolve on the day of the hearing or shortly thereafter through negotiations with opposing counsel or an appearance before a Municipal Court judge.

We hope this article inspires you to say “yes!” to representing a tenant. Contact VIP (Lindsay Schoonmaker at [email protected]) to start volunteering today.

Lindsay Schoonmaker is a supervising attorney at Philadelphia VIP, where she provides support for volunteer attorneys, assists with volunteer recruitment and trainings, and oversees volunteer engagement in landlord-tenant cases. Prior to joining VIP, she was a litigation associate.