Landlord and tenant orally modified the lease to include water payments. —
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 argued that because the lease was silent
as to who pays for water, landlord retained the obligation to pay for water, the district
court did not err in denying tenant’s requested offset for water, because the parties
conduct clearly demonstrated an oral modification of the lease agreement requiring
tenant to pay for water. In the absence of a prohibiting statute, a written agreement
which specifies it may only be amended in writing may nevertheless be changed by the
parties’ words or conduct that signify an intention to change the prior agreement.
Cheng v. Rabey, 2023-NMCA-013.
Law reviews. — For survey, "The Uniform Owner-Resident Relations Act," see 6
N.M.L. Rev. 293 (1976).
Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 49 Am. Jur. 2d Landlord and Tenant §
228 et seq.