California Family Gets $1.6 Million After 3-Year-Old Was Scarred by Bedbugs

[Steeleballz 7,550]

3 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

You say that and yet we know juries award large settlements all the time based on nothing more than sympathy.  Just look at the headline, if the jury was sold this, they may have awarded this purely for sympathy reasons.

 

  Yeah, it's America. Try not to ever put yourself in a position where you can get sued. We know this happens.

 

   

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

14 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

  Yeah, it's America. Try not to ever put yourself in a position where you can get sued. We know this happens.

 

   

The landlord should have made better choices.

[TBoneTX 46,693]

13 hours ago, yuna628 said:

other bug problems, like roaches

A man telephoned a pet shop and said, "I'd like to place an order for 25,000 cockroaches."

"What in the world do you want with that many roaches?" asked the clerk.

"Well, I'm moving tomorrow," explained the man, "and my lease says that I must leave the premises in exactly the same condition in which I found them."

[jg121783 3,921]

It seems a little over the top that they would stay for 2 years because they "had no where else to go". A couple months while looking for a new place to live? Maybe. But if they could afford to pay rent there for 2 years they could afford to pay rent somewhere else. If the ruling was based in any way on them staying there that 2 additional years it is a bad ruling. If it is based on the time before that that is a little more legitimate but the money amount is still a little excessive. If I lived in a place with my wife and kids that had bed bugs we would move IMMEDIATELY regardless of what the lease says or any other circumstances. That's horrible parenting to stay (especially that long) with a known problem like that.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

7 minutes ago, jg121783 said:

It seems a little over the top that they would stay for 2 years because they "had no where else to go". A couple months while looking for a new place to live? Maybe. But if they could afford to pay rent there for 2 years they could afford to pay rent somewhere else. If the ruling was based in any way on them staying there that 2 additional years it is a bad ruling. If it is based on the time before that that is a little more legitimate but the money amount is still a little excessive. If I lived in a place with my wife and kids that had bed bugs we would move IMMEDIATELY regardless of what the lease says or any other circumstances. That's horrible parenting to stay (especially that long) with a known problem like that.

My thoughts exactly.  Seems negligent to stay, and even if there were a contract to be honored, they could easily have beaten that with the poor living conditions argument.  Seems almost like they brought some of the pain on themselves.  But maybe there’s more to the story that isn’t in the article.

[jg121783 3,921]

Just now, IDWAF said:

My thoughts exactly.  Seems negligent to stay, and even if there were a contract to be honored, they could easily have beaten that with the poor living conditions argument.  Seems almost like they brought some of the pain on themselves.  But maybe there’s more to the story that isn’t in the article.

Personally I would take my wife and kids and go stay with a family member or friends until I found a new place to stay or worst case stay in a hotel and sue later to recover the costs of that. I understand maybe they didn't have family or friends that could take them in or money for a hotel. That is why I said a month or two might be reasonable. But they should have immediately been looking for another place to rent and in the mean time getting on their current landlord about putting them up in a hotel. Anything less is negligence towards their children.

[yuna628 9,778]

The problem is where would they stay? Look... if your current home is infested with bedbugs, how do you take those belongings that are potentially contaminated with you? What friend or family would want to risk also being infested? As I said, all of the stuff would have to either be destroyed and or removed to another environment to be professionally cleaned and then sealed to prevent contamination. I think there is more to this story, but the owner of the complex isn't going to get rid of bedbugs by doing what they did... and this family likely lost all of their belongings.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

29 minutes ago, jg121783 said:

Personally I would take my wife and kids and go stay with a family member or friends until I found a new place to stay or worst case stay in a hotel and sue later to recover the costs of that. I understand maybe they didn't have family or friends that could take them in or money for a hotel. That is why I said a month or two might be reasonable. But they should have immediately been looking for another place to rent and in the mean time getting on their current landlord about putting them up in a hotel. Anything less is negligence towards their children.

 

   Problem is if they move out while the landlord is attempting to remedy the situation, they are going to have a difficult time recovering hotel costs and they will be responsible for the lease termination fees. Easy to say you would just leave, but that can run thousands of dollars.  The last lease I had would have cost almost $8000 to break, and the vacancy rate was approaching 0 here in Colorado at the time. There's not always an easy way out. 

 

   They didn't have a constant infestation, they had a recurring one because the job was not done properly in the first place. The carpets should have been replaced in the beginning. The only other option they had, and probably the best one, was to get the local rental protection agency involved and have the place declared uninhabitable. This would possibly have enabled them to get out of the lease without cost, but more likely the landlord would have got his butt in gear and fixed the situation properly.