Tenant was not entitled to abatement for repairs. — Where, in 2017, tenant and
landlord entered into a lease agreement that specified that rent was $450 and was due
the first day of each month and that landlord would assess a $50 fee to rent paid more
than three days late, that tenant would pay a $400 security deposit, and that landlord
would make all necessary repairs to the common areas of the building, and where, in
2018, landlord asked tenant to begin paying $10 a month for water, to which tenant
agreed, and where, months later, tenant withheld $40 from his rent after reviewing his
lease and discovering that there was no written obligation for him to pay for water, and
where, the following day, landlord delivered a notice of nonpayment requiring tenant to
pay $450 in rent plus a late fee of $50 for a total of $500, and where landlord filed a
petition for restitution three days after the notice of nonpayment was delivered, and
where tenant counterclaimed that he was entitled to abatement of his rent for repairs not
made, the district court did not err in determining that tenant was not entitled to
abatement for repairs, because tenant did not give landlord any written notice of the
needed repairs until the notice of nonpayment was delivered and did not ask for any
abatement or reimbursement in writing. The Uniform Owner Resident Relations Act,
47-8-1 to 47-8-51 NMSA 1978, requires written notice of conditions needing repair and
the passage of seven days before a resident can withhold rent. Cheng v. Rabey, 2023-
NMCA-013.