Landlord gave me notice because I got pregnant

DEAR MRS MACAULAY,

I want to know if my rights are being breached in this situation, and what I can do. I rented a property four years ago — a two bedroom apartment. Everything was going fine — I paid my rent on time, took good care of the property, and had an excellent relationship with the landlord for almost two years. I then had a child, and the relationship started going downhill. The landlord raised the rent, and produced a new contract for me to sign, stating, among other things, that I would be liable for replacing any property that he deemed was being destroyed by me, and adding the clause that any additional person residing in the residence would have to be approved by him. I didn’t sign it. I subsequently had another child a year later, and now my landlord has given me notice. On the notice he lists as the cause, that I have breached the terms of the rental agreement, without being specific. I suspect that it is because I came there with no kids and had two since. What can I do? I really don’t want to leave this area, as I have settled in nicely.

The Rent Restriction Act is the law which we must look at to find what a landlord’s rights and obligations are and those of the tenant. This Act was passed to secure for tenants legal protection for landlords’ actions which were extremely harsh in ejecting tenants in autocratic ways. They would remove windows and doors, remove all the tenants’ properties and dump them on pavements, and turn off the supply of utilities making it impossible for the tenant to continue occupying the premises. In fact, they used all sorts of harassing acts and conduct to get rid of tenants they wished to get out of their premises until it was accepted that this could not be allowed to continue and the Act was passed to make the situation of tenancies and their termination more fair and just between landlords and tenants.

The Act also established the board to which landlords and tenants can go to have questions and issues regarding tenanted premises investigated if necessary, and give advice and/or directions to the parties. The board can also ensure that criminal proceedings are taken against landlords for their breaches of the Act in their actions against a tenant’s rights. Some of these charges could be for interfering with the tenant’s utility supplies, fixing or raising the rental outside of the statutory level, and so on.

From your account, it is clear that you had a written contract of your tenancy and I assume that the contract provided that the landlord could raise the rental and when, and by what percentage. If it did not, then you could have gone to or can now go to the Rent Restriction Board’s office and ask for their opinion on the increase which he imposed on you. If they deem it a breach of the Act, he may have to face a criminal charge and he will have to refund the total of the increase he imposed on you. They will consider whether your original contract period had ended or not. Generally, there should be no increase if the landlord is not maintaining the premises and the tenant is doing so. The board has the legal authority to access the premises and fix the rental.

Anyway, let me now focus on the notice to quit that he gave to you. The Rent Restriction Act also governs the requirement for such notices and their contents and periods of effectiveness. The Act requires that a Notice to Quit can be given for a tenant to quit at the expiration of 30 days after the date of the notice and its service on the tenant. It requires that the notice must contain the landlord’s reason for giving the tenant such a notice and that it must be in line with those provided in the Act. These are (1) Non-payment of rental for 30 days prior to the notice. However if the rent is paid up before the period of the notice expires, that notice is nullified. (2) That the landlord needs the premises for their own or their family’s use. (3) That such substantial repairs are required that it would be unsafe for the tenant to continue occupying the premises during the period of the repairs.

Your letter makes it clear that your landlord’s reason in his notice to you to quit does not fall within those provided in the Act. You say his stated reason is that you have breached the terms of your tenancy agreement without any details. This is clearly not a proper reason and you can clearly show that he gave you the notice because you had your second child. You can effectively prove your case from his change of attitude after your first child and that he then presented the new contract to you, in which he specified that he had to approve any additional person who resides with you in your apartment. I hope you still have a copy of it, as producing it would be the best evidence, but if you do not you can still give the evidence vocally. Your evidence must then continue that though you refused to sign it, you paid his increased rental until you had your second child when he gave you the notice to quit and you are certain that his real reason is that he does not want your children there and he knows that this is discriminatory.

You have asked what you can do. You can go to the Rent Restriction Board’s office and relate the whole situation to an officer, taking the unsigned contract and the notice to quit with you and explaining that you wish to remain in the premises and that you need their determination that he is really trying to get you out because he does not like the fact that you had your children. If they agree with this assessment they will deal with the landlord and set him right because in effect he would be trying to get you out in breach of the Act, and illegally.

Or, you can ignore the notice to quit and let him take you to court and you then submit that his notice to quit is of no effect as he does not have any of the reasons for it as the Act requires, and state that you have evidence that his real reason is illegal and discriminatory and that his claim should be dismissed with costs to you. This is my preference and I find it impossible to conceive that any judge will disagree with your defence and find against you. I do, however, advise you to be prudent and retain a lawyer to put forward your defence as you would have to submit on the provisions of the Act and proffer precedents to support your facts.

If I may, I feel constrained to urge you, a single mother of two children, to try to save while looking for a property to purchase in the area and then apply to the National Housing Trust (NHT) for a mortgage to purchase it. You can seek information from the NHT to know all you will need to have in place in order to qualify for such a loan. If you do so, you may find that it is doable now or in the not too distant future. Owning your own property, paying mortgage instalments monthly, instead of rental, will give you independence and peace of mind to bring up your children in a settled home.

I hope I have clarified the position for you and I wish you and your children all the very best.

I take this opportunity to wish all women in Jamaica and our region and the world, a happy International Women’s Day. I also hope that the numbers of killings; incidences of violence (sexual, physical and mental) in public or private; and all forms of discrimination, and especially those who suffer double or more discrimination because of their sex, race, ethnicity and financial status and other vulnerabilities, will stop increasing as all abuses have done in recent years, and especially since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, and that both sexes, indeed all people, live together in peace and the equal enjoyment of all our basic fundamental human rights.

Mar garette May Macaulay is an attorney-at-law, Supreme Court mediator, notary public, and women’s and children’s rights advocate. Send questions via e-mail to allwoman@jamaicaobserver.com; or write to All Woman, 40-42 1/2 Beechwood Avenue, Kingston 5. All responses are published. Mrs Macaulay cannot provide personal responses.

DISCLAIMER:

The contents of this article are for informational purposes only, and must not be relied upon as an alternative to legal advice from your own attorney.