Is sewage in Maryland, USA a utility and what protections come with that? The title of this question might need some work, because my question is really two-fold. I live in a rented Townhouse in Maryland, USA. Water and Sewage costs are separated because the county provides well water for free, but not sewage. A few days ago I received a bill from a sewage company "NWP". The bill is a single charge with no details. Just "Sewage Fee ". The number seemed shockingly high for what I have paid for water plus sewage in the past, so I called the company and discovered that I am being billed for the usage of the entire "community" split based on the number of residents in the Townhouse (just my wife and I). The company also told me that it was impossible for them to even tell me how much my unit is using because there are no meters installed. So my first question is whether or not this is even legal. I'm not sure if sewage is considered a utility like water and is subject to the legal protections, and I also don't know where I would find those protections (I just recently moved here from a different state). My gut tells me this shouldn't be allowed because it discourages conservation. I can't conserve usage because when the bill comes, I'll have no idea what I actually used. But this is just a gut feeling and I'd like to know section and paragraph if I'm going to do anything serious with this. My second concern is that this isn't mentioned anywhere in my lease. The only time the lease ever mentions sewage at all is one time at the top with the line: Tenant Pays For: TENANT PAYS FOR GAS AND ELECTRIC, AND SEWAGE The "Utilities" section does not mention Sewage in any way and it is absent from the rest of the document. I was told during the tour and today at the office that I only pay for my own usage. Unfortunately this was verbal and is not in the lease. After I escalated at the office to the manager, the manager admitted that this is a lie, but since it's not in writing, I think they know they're safe. If I had known that I was on the hook for my neighbor's heavy water usage, I would not have signed, and the lease completely hid this information from me. Do I have any case for breach of lease terms or something like that? I feel like socializing sewage costs is important enough to have been noted in the lease, and it would have affected my decision. In summary: Is it legal to socialize sewage where I am not provided with my own usage? If not, how should I proceed? Is there anything I can do with the fact that this was not mentioned in the lease terms? Thank you.
Your sewage provider is a “Public service company” under Maryland law: (x) (1) “Public service company” means a common carrier company, electric company, gas company, sewage disposal company, telegraph company, telephone company, water company, or any combination of public service companies. (ee) “Sewage disposal company” means a privately owned public service company that owns or maintains facilities for the disposal of sewage. The Public Services Commission sets the rates: The Commission shall have the power to set a just and reasonable rate of a public service company, as a maximum rate, minimum rate, or both. The utilities code paraphrases this in other provisions: In accordance with the provisions of this article, a public service company shall charge just and reasonable rates for the regulated services that it renders. There is no legal process involved in your situation, since it is a political matter what constitutes a just and reasonable rate. You can write letters of protest, but the commission has the power to set the rates. You can, however, investigate whether the charges were actually approved. You do, however, have to contact the utility before filing a complaint with the commission. The landlord has zero control over rates set by the government, so they cannot reasonably be expected to contractually commit to any particular rates. However, if they overtly lied to you about the terms of the lease, you might sue to get out of the lease, but the chances that you would prevail in such a suit are negligible.
user662852 has a good point -- whoever own the property has the right to make the rules. Is the property, land+construction in fact your's or does it belong to the HOA who just grant you access as a lease holder? Different states has different rules, but in my state it is illegal to maroon a property and there must be a access to public streets even when this necessitate passing over somebody else land. However that is irrelevant if the HOA owns the land your house is build on. I think you will have to look at your HOA agreement and see what it says.
Once your rental contract starts, your landlord must give you access to the rented flat. If he doesn't do so he is in breach of contract. You could sue him, but that would be a bad start for a longer term contractual agreement. It might be less time and effort to look for a new flat. And do you really want to be in a long term contract with someone who breaches contract right from the start based on arbitrary reasons? In any case, you can and you should cut the rent proportionally for every day without access to the flat. Your landlord has by no means a right to check your luggage. Even if there would be such a regulation in the contract, it would be void, because of invasion of privacy. It looks to me that you are in for some bad times with such a landlord. I can assure you that most landlords are not like this. Another reason to probably look for a new flat. Legally you are right, but what does that help you if your landlord is trouble?
I gather that the numerous ramifications you outline are merely contexts and that your main concern is about the application of contract law (contract law in the U.S. does not really vary among states). Thus, I will not really delve in the intricacies of --for instance-- privacy or copyright issues arising from the commercial use of a person's likeness that you mention in one of the scenarios. As a starting point, one needs to bear in mind that: a contract is an exchange of considerations under terms and conditions entered knowingly and willfully by the parties, which can be evidenced by the parties' subsequent conduct (that is, not just by signing a document); and a contract is unenforceable if it contravenes public policy and/or the covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Accordingly, the questions are (1) whether a person knew or reasonably should have known about the terms &amp; conditions at or by the time of those events which trigger obligations pursuant to the contract; and (2) whether the provisions therein are unreasonable, illegal, or tantamount to a penalty, especially in the event that the party breaches or repudiates the alleged contract (see the Restatement (Second) of Contracts at § 356(2)). The scenario of house for sale entails various difficulties as per contract law and otherwise. Here are some of those issues: Are visitors properly (including "beforehand") notified about the "walkway clause"? If not, the contract is void because it cannot be said that visitors knew about &amp; accepted that condition. Does the house provide alternatives for lawful &amp; informed visitors to safely avoid the walkway? If not, then the seller/owner might end up incurring premises liability with respect to those visitors who get injured in making their reasonable effort not to trigger the "walkway clause". Is the house owner realistically able to prove that use of the walkway by lawful &amp; informed visitors is sufficiently "inconsistent with the offeror's ownership of offered property" so that triggering a house sale is a reasonable consequence (see Restatement at §69(2))? Is the owner-imposed mortgage rate compliant with state law pertaining to granting of credit &amp; loans? These exemplify only some of the burdensome complications when trying to enforce "contracts" which are extravagant or quite one-sided. Lastly, as a side note, the presumption that a person reading the poster and walking in the intended area does not thereby receive consideration is not necessarily accurate. As an example, the "intended area" could have been devised by an entity in the business of enjoyment and recreation, such as a private park. The person who deliberately walks in (regardless of whether he read the poster) certainly receives a consideration, which is the amusement or recreation for which the park was designed.
No, there is no general publicly accessible directory of lawsuits against private individuals, even if it concerns yourself. The complaint must identify you as the defendant indicating a ladungsfähige Anschrift, § 253 Ⅱ, Ⅳ, 130 ZPO. Commencing an action requires service of process, § 253 Ⅰ ZPO. I presume you are not a De-Mail user. So you will get a hardcopy. You may not know that, but such mail in Germany is usually sent in yellow envelopes. The mailman will carefully compare the mailbox label and in case of a match record the date and time of successful delivery on the envelope as well as a slip of paper returned to the sender, the court in this case. Now this will obviously fail in your case (unless the landlord maliciously attached a corresponding label to a mailbox). In a civil action the court “pretends” to be dumb regarding facts. The landlord must try to track you down. Evidently he knew your email address, so he had some contact details. If he was evil, the next option would be to ask the court for an öffentliche Zustellung, § 185 ZPO. If the court agreed, this means there will be, for instance, in the city hall a paper on a bulletin board “To the attention of Coala, last known address …: There is mail for you to pick up at my office.” Two weeks later the letter is automatically considered to be delivered.Some cities (example: Cologne, NRW) also publish these documents on the internet, but due to GDPR considerations delete them after a certain period now. If there was a lawsuit, there will have been a default judgment by now, i.e. you will have lost just by being a no‑show. However, you said you have never received the bill. This means the landlord must have produced false evidence, claim to have sent the bill and a subsequent warning notice, but there was none. But this is an entirely different issue.
Is this legal for the county to enforce? Yes. And can I sue if they try to enforce it? You could, but you would very likely lose your lawsuit. A more fruitful approach would be to go to the county planning board and seek a variance to permit you to do what you want to do.
To get an answer tailored to your problem, you need to get a lawyer. The general answer is that the water bill goes with the property, not the person using the water. The unpaid bill can become a lien on the property, and the house can be taken and sold to satisfy the lien. There are other factors / questions. Under Florida law (180.135), if the debt arises from a renter who incurred the debt directly with the utility, a lien cannot be placed against the property. Any lien must be perfected (filed with the courts), and the point of a title search is to find such liens – assuming that a title search was done. There is a limit to how long you can wait to collect on a debt (7 years).
Anyone who uses a credit report or another type of consumer report to deny your application for credit, insurance, or employment – or to take another adverse action against you – must tell you, and must give you the name, address, and phone number of the agency that provided the information. Summary of Your Rights Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act Read some more of that document. It tells you that you have a right to see your file. It also tells you who to contact. Promissory estoppel is not something that is violated. It's a legal doctrine which can help enforce a promise made in the absence of a contract. Without more facts it's impossible to predict if promissory estoppel can help your friend. And if there aren't more facts it's unlikely that PE will help as this appears to be a routine job offer contingent on a background check. Now, the action based on a background check might be interesting especially if your friend is a member of a protected class. You can read more about this in the document I linked to.