If GE, Whirlpool have no liabilities, why should landlords?

How can landlords guarantee that frig does not breakdown?

If tenants informed landlord that refrig is broken but landlord does not replace/repair in a reasonable time, it may be landlord's fault. But if landlord did, and tenants ate rotten foods, does landlord still incur liabilities? :)

所有跟帖： 

• 同感。 -朱颜- ♀ (151 bytes) () 12/28/2012 postreply 09:43:49

• 别问律师了。知道了一个极端的例子，那就就要怪妈干吗让你来到这世界上 -煎饼加油条- ♀ (38 bytes) () 12/28/2012 postreply 09:47:52

• 是对的。不见得会发生。准备好总没错的。 -youxi88- ♀ (0 bytes) () 12/28/2012 postreply 09:51:28

• 泳池的风险比较大，由于冰箱被告还真没听说过呢 -MICKEY222- ♀ (0 bytes) () 12/28/2012 postreply 09:53:08

• 同意你。另，如果连这种低概率的事情都担心，估计什么事情也做不了了。 -Lex2004- ♀ (0 bytes) () 12/28/2012 postreply 10:54:05

• GE, Whirlpool has liabilities as well.if it's still under Warran -youxi88- ♀ (392 bytes) () 12/28/2012 postreply 09:49:15

• 等开庭就收不到租子吗？是不是应该case是case，不交租照样可以轰人啊 -说的好- ♀ (27 bytes) () 12/28/2012 postreply 09:53:40

• 是case by case，有的律师很厉害的，他们完全可以STOP EVICTION. -youxi88- ♀ (58 bytes) () 12/28/2012 postreply 09:58:36

• There are laws, there are insurance companies. -天下多蚤- ♀ (535 bytes) () 12/28/2012 postreply 09:55:50

• 弄个雨伞险全搞定，扯不了那么远。 -瞎问瞎说- ♂ (350 bytes) () 12/28/2012 postreply 09:54:43

• 是的，是要弄个雨伞险。不过碰上一回也很头大吧。 -youxi88- ♀ (0 bytes) () 12/28/2012 postreply 10:02:10