BILL ANALYSIS C.S.H.B. 1637 By: Brady 3-28-95 Committee Report (Substituted) BACKGROUND Current law requires landlords to install smoke detectors in rental units either prior to or during occupancy. However, if a unit does not have a detector, it is the tenant's responsibility to submit a written request for a detector to the landlord. In the event of a fire, the landlord is liable only if he failed to respond to the request within a "reasonable time". The tenant's liability is unclear in cases in which the smoke detector is not working because the tenant disabled the smoke detector. PURPOSE This bill would clarify the landlord s duty to install smoke detectors and test it to ensure that it is in working condition prior to occupancy, make a tenant liable for disabling a smoke detector and define remedies available to both the landlord and tenant. RULEMAKING AUTHORITY It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency or institution. SECTION BY SECTION ANALYSIS SECTION 1. Amends (b) and (e), and adds (g), to Section 92.258, Property Code. (b) Requires the landlord to make sure that the smoke detector is in working order by testing with smoke, operating the test button, or following other test procedures recommended by the manufacturer, when a tenant moves into a dwelling. (e) States that the landlord has fulfilled his duty to ensure that the smoke detector is in working order if he tests it with smoke, pushes the test button, or follows other test procedures recommended by the manufacturer. (g) Establishes that a smoke detector that is working at the beginning of the tenant's occupancy is presumed to be working unless the tenant requests its repair. SECTION 2. Amends Section 92.259, Property Code, by providing that a landlord is liable for damages if a smoke detector is not installed at the beginning of the tenant's occupancy. Stipulates that a tenant who gives notice to seek a civil penalty or unilaterally terminate a lease because the owner has failed to install, inspect or repair the smoke detector, may be required to submit written notice to the owner if the lease is in writing. SECTION 3. Amends Section 92.260, Property Code, regarding the remedies a resident may exercise to require that the resident must be in possession of the dwelling unit to obtain a court order directing the owner to comply; clarifying that the tenant may seek a civil penalty or unilaterally terminate a lease if the landlord fails to respond to a written notice to install, inspect or repair a smoke detector and allows the tenant to seek attorney s fees in cases where the tenant obtains an order for compliance or a civil penalty against an owner. SECTION 4. Adds Section 92.2611 to Subchapter F, Chapter 92, Property Code. (a) Makes the tenant liable if the tenant removes a battery from a smoke detector without immediately replacing it with a working battery or knowingly disconnects or intentionally damages a smoke detector. (b) Allows a landlord to obtain a judgment for damages against a tenant who violates subsection (a), except as provided by subsection (c). (c) States that the tenant is not liable if the landlord failed to repair the smoke detector within a reasonable time of the tenant's notice for repairs. (d) States what the landlord of the tenant must include in the notice of a smoke detector. (e) If the tenant is liable under Subsection (a) and has not complied with the landlord s notice in Subsection (d), the landlord may obtain the following remedies: (1) a court order directing the tenant to comply with the landlord's request; (2) a judgment against the tenant for one month's rent plus $100; (3) a judgment against the tenant for court costs; and (4) a judgment against the tenant for reasonable attorney's fees. SECTION 5. Effective date: September 1, 1995. SECTION 6. Emergency clause. COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL TO SUBSTITUTE Requires the notice which must be contained in the lease if the landlord wishes to pursue civil remedies against a resident, must be underlined or in boldfaced print. The lease provision must state that a resident who disables a smoke detector may be subject to damages, civil penalties and attorney's fees. Codifies the common law standard that it is not necessary for the landlord to give notice for a resident who disables a smoke detector to be liable for damages. Provides that a tenant is not liable for damages suffered by the landlord, if the damage is caused by the landlord's failure to repair the smoke detector within a reasonable time after receiving notice from the resident. Requires that, in addition to the lease provision, a tenant must receive notice from the landlord and have a seven day opportunity to reconnect, repair, or replace a smoke detector before the landlord can seek civil remedies against the resident. Provides that a tenant's guest or invitee who suffers damage because of a landlord's failure to install, inspect, or repair a smoke detector as required by the statute, may recover damages. If the guest or invitee suffers damages because the tenant disabled the smoke detector, they may recover damages against the tenant. SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE ACTION H.B. 1637 was considered by the committee in a public hearing on March 14, 1995. The committee considered a complete committee substitute for the bill. The substitute was adopted without objection. The following persons testified for C.S.H.B. 1637: Pamela Brown, representing Texas Legal Services Center; David Mintz, representing Texas Apartment Association; Larry Niemann, representing Texas Apartment Association. The bill was referred to subcommittee on smoke detectors; a subcommittee consisting of Representatives Giddings-chair, Brady, Corte, Janek, Solomons. C.S.H.B. 1637 was considered by the subcommittee in a formal meeting on March 28, 1995. The subcommittee considered 1 (one) amendment to the substitute. Amendment #1 was adopted without objection. The Chair directed the staff to incorporate the amendment into the substitute. C.S.H.B. 1637 was reported favorably to the full committee by a record vote of 4 (four) ayes, 0 (zero) nays, 0 (zero) present-not-voting, 1 (one) absent. Pursuant to suspension of the 48-hour rule, C.S.H.B. 1637 was considered on subcommittee report by the committee in a public hearing on March 28, 1995. C.S.H.B. 1637 was reported favorably, with the recommendation that it do pass and be printed, by a record vote of 8 (eight) ayes, 0 (zero) nays, 1 (one) present-not-voting, 0 (zero) absent. The vote by which C.S.H.B. 1637 was reconsidered without objection. C.S.H.B. 1637 was reported favorably, with the recommendation that it do pass and be printed, by a record vote of 9 (nine) ayes, 0 (zero) nays, 0 (zero) present-not-voting, 0 (zero) absent.