UMH Properties has entered into a REvolving Line Credit Facility with FirstBank that generates revenues of US$20 million and can be extended to US$30 million with accordion functionality. The financing contract is provided by rental housing and rental housing rentals in a number of REIT construction units and has a duration of three years. The Tennessee Residential Tenant Act („TURLTA“) uniform requires an owner to keep premises in a fit and habitable state and maintain all public spaces in a clean and safe condition. Tenn. Code Ann. Tenn. Code Ann. The complainants allege that the defendants violated the TURLTA guarantee of livability by not deploying the common areas during the tide in a safe and habitable state. The defendant`s initial argument in its dismissal application was that TURLTA did not apply to them because they were not referred to as „owners“ since they only rented pods on which mobile homes were seated.
Pham J.A. recommended that the defendant`s application for release with respect to this claim be dismissed because the defendants explicitly identified themselves as owners in certain documents and because at least one Court in Tennessee applied TURLTA to the rental of a field in a campervan. See accessories R-E. v. Jones, 03A01-9804-CV-00133, 1999 WL 38282 (Tenn. Ct. App. January 13, 1999). On 2 May 2011, the applicants brought this alleged group action by seeking a permanent termination action and compensation for discrimination in the housing construction sector on the basis of national origin. This remedy is covered by the Fair Housing Act of 1968 („FHA“) as amended, 42 U.S.C. Code Ann. violation of the common law`s obligation to disclose a latent defect; violation of the general rule of law of habitability; Violation of the Tennessee Residential Landlord and Tenant Act („TURLTA“), Tenn.
Code Ann. fraud in setting up the contract; Fraud in the adoption of an arbitration agreement; Lack of state; deliberate misrepresentations; and conversion. The defendants have made the decision to interpret the proceedings and require the applicants to disclose their claims because of arbitration clauses in the RISCs signed by many of the applicants. The Tribunal sought conciliation from 19 applicants, but continued the case to 10 other applicants. Sellers of real estate are required to disclose to buyers all essential facts that affect the value of the property and are not known or reasonably recognizable by an ordinary due diligence buyer. Fayne v. Vincent, 301 S.W.3d 162, 177 (Tenn. 2009) (citing Simmons v. Evans, 185 tenn.
282, 285-86, 206 P.W.2d 295, 296 (Tenn. 1947) and Patel v. Bayliff, 121 P.W.3d 347, 352-53 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2003). A lessor is also obliged to disclose a „dangerous state“ (functionally identical to a latent defect) if: 1) the condition existed at the time of a tenant`s performance in the tenancy agreement, 2) the lessor knew or should have known the condition; and 3) the tenant knew nothing of the condition and could not see the latent defect by exercising due diligence. Lethcoe v. Holden, 31 S.W.3d 254, 256 (Tenn. Ct. 2000).
The complainants allege that the defendants breached these obligations by failing to reveal that the motorhome park was in a flood zone and tended to be flooded. The judge held that the question of whether the propensity for flooding was reasonably detectable by the complainants cannot be established at this stage without any further real development, so that the defendant`s request for release must be denied in relation to that allegation.