urging him to write a letter complaining of the conditions of his apartment, which the Tenant did
on April 17, 2009 (Exhibit "C").
For reasons not fully explained to the Court, Tenant's letter dated April 17, 2009 was sent to
the attention of "To whom It May Concern". The Tenant did not offer any proof of mailing and
had no idea if his letter was ever received. The Tenant further testified that during the first
eighteen (18) months he occupied the Premises, he did not send any written notice to the Town
Housing Department that the items complained of at the Premises were not repaired, even though
these conditions existed from the first day Tenant took possession. On cross-examination, the
Tenant testified that none of the problems he had complained about in the Premises prevented
him from living there. The only item the Tenant complained of was having to clean the rust
stains.
Even if this Court were to find the testimony of the Tenant as credible, which this Court does
not, the items that the Tenant complained of, while they may be annoying, seem to be minor
maintenance items that are easily repairable and do not prevent habitation.
In addition to the foregoing, the Tenant's testimony during cross-examination, that the
problems complained of did not prevent his habitation in the Premises, coupled with the Tenant's
first written notice, "To Whom It May Concern" eighteen (18) months after Tenant took
possession stretchers the boundaries of credibility.
[*6]
Therefore, based upon the foregoing this Court rejects
Tenant's defense that the Landlord breached its warranty of habitability.
CONCLUSION AND
ORDER
For the foregoing reasons, it is hereby ordered that the motion of the