Why is everyone so easy to give the "happy clause"

Why is everyone so easy to give the "happy clause" by P-Bone (NY and OH) on April 22, 2016 @06:55

I understand there is a time and place to just smooth things out and move on to a tenant that is no longer worth keeping in certain situations, but I don't understand it here.

Rather than a gun club, if this property was close enough to a bar or restaurant that has an outdoor music venue on a regular basis during the nicer weather, would you let them out of the lease for that?

I don't understand the difference in any of these cases. Again, if the gun club is abiding by all noise ordinances by ceasing operations at 10pm, then no one has done anything improper.

There is nothing about this entire situation that is the landlord's fault and in no way can the landlord be claimed to have disturbed the tenant's quiet enjoyment. If anyone did, it would be an issue to take up with the gun club and town.

[ Reply ] [ Return to forum ]

Re: Why is everyone so easy to give the "happy clause" by Anonymous on April 22, 2016 @07:39	[ Reply ]

Sorry, I should have said that it 're-opened', it's been in town for 60+ years. And I also mistakenly said it was open from M thru F, it is open on Saturday as well. So from 12pm to 10pm on each day of the week except Sunday nearby residents are subject to loud shooting that can be heard in every room. Now obviously it is not non-stop during those hours, but it is an active club and when they are doing leagues, which are most nights, it is constant. I think you should refresh your take on the enjoyment act, it is one thing to claim that the gun club is doing what is in their rights as a business, but that has no affect on a tenant-landlord relationship and obligations thereof, which given the level of disturbance in this situation I fear could be seriously questioned by a small-claims court, as in NY they often side with the tenant.

Why is everyone so easy to give the "happy clause" - Landlord Forum thread 344578