Blog

Property Management Agreement’s Indemnity Provision Held Void and Unenforceable Under the Construction Contract Indemnification for Negligence Act

By Eric Dobradin

Owners of rental properties commonly rely on third-party property managers to handle the day-to-day aspects of leasing. Many property managers not only list available units, enter into lease agreements on behalf of the property owner, and handle payments under the lease, but they also deal with tenant repair requests and property maintenance. The specific scope of a property managers responsibility is outlined in a property management agreement with the property owner. Commonly such contracts include indemnity and insurance clauses that shift the risk of financial responsibility in the event of a lawsuit onto to the unit owner. Property managers should be aware that if such an indemnity clause is written too broadly, it may very well be unenforceable in Illinois. That is what happened to a property manager hired to lease and maintain a condo unit by owner. The owner was represented by Gardi, Haught, Fischer & Bhosale, Ltd.

A long-term tenant filed a lawsuit claiming the condo-owner, the owner’s property manager, the condo association, and the association’s property manager were negligent in allowing elevated levels of mold to accumulate in the unit, causing the tenant serious and permanent health problems. In response to the lawsuit, the unit owner’s property manager counter-sued the unit owner under the property management contract for the costs of its legal defense and for the amount of any judgment entered against the property manager. The property manager also sued under the joint tortfeasor statute for contribution. The unit owner filed a § 2-619 motion to dismiss the first two counts arising from the contract arguing that the indemnity provision in the property management contract was void and unenforceable under the Construction Contract Indemnification for Negligence Act 740 ILCS 35/1 (CCINA) and against public policy.

The CCINA provides that in contracts or agreements, either public or private, for the construction, alteration, repair or maintenance of a building; every covenant, promise or agreement to indemnify or hold harmless another person from that person’s own negligence is void as against public policy and wholly unenforceable. The issue before the Court was whether a property management contract can be subject to CCINA.

The property manager argued that there are no Illinois appellate decisions making a property management contract subject to the CCINA, the CCINA only applies to construction contracts, and CCINA is meant to deal with injuries in the workplace. The property manager contended that the CCINA should not apply because it was hired to lease the unit and handle tenant repair requests and maintenance, if needed. Since the unit was not under active construction, the property management agreement was not a contract for repair and maintenance, but simply a contract to manage the rental property. Furthermore, if the court grants the motion, the decision would have far-reaching ramifications on all the property managers using the same indemnity provisions.

The unit owner responded by pointing out that the property management agreement specifically included provisions for the repair and maintenance of the unit. It also provided that the property manager would hire and supervise workers performing repair and maintenance on the unit. As such, the unit owner concluded that the CCINA applied to the contract as one for repair and maintenance of a building. Accordingly, the CCINA renders the indemnity provision void and unenforceable because the only claim against the property manager was for negligence. If the provision is enforced, it would make the unit owner responsible for the judgment and legal defense for the project manager’s negligence, undermining any incentive for property managers to act with due care in doing their jobs.

The Court sided with the unit owner reasoning that since the CCINA applies to contracts for repair and maintenance of buildings and the property management contract made the property manager responsible for repairs and maintenance, the property management contract was subject to the CCINA. The provision in the contract is void and unenforceable under the CCINA, because it would indemnify the property manager from any judgments and lawsuits, potentially including those resulting from the property manager’s own negligence, as alleged in the tenant’s lawsuit. The Court granted the unit owners § 2-619 motion to dismiss with prejudice as to the Counts demanding the unit owner pay for the property manager’s legal defense and any judgment against the property manager on the tenant’s negligence claim.

Client Testimonials

Jimmy Su

We just had great experience with Tom Haught and his paralegal Courtney Kropf. The communication is clear and fast. All emails were replied within 30 minutes. We will definitely work with Tom Haught again.

Sagar Kanabar

Jeannette Gonzales

Was recommended to them from my company. They did an excellent job and always answered all my questions. Were always upfront with all things and made sure I understood everything that was explained to me.

Ardus

We used the law firm during the sale of our house. We dealt with Mr Haught and Courtney, who made the process very smooth. They were professional, yet very friendly to deal with.I would not hesitate to recommend them to my family and friends.

vanissa colaco

Our immigration experience with Ann Fischer has been amazing! She has been meticulous, organized and worked on our case in a timely manner. Ann and her team went above and beyond to address all of our concerns and provide a personalized support which made a significant difference during our stressful time.I highly recommend her services to anyone seeking legal representation for their immigration matters.

Mike and Keeley Aulert

We have used Tom Haught for two home purchases and one sale over the years and continue to be impressed by his professionalism, responsiveness, and thoroughness. Reasonable pricing too. Highly, highly recommended.

Waseem Chaudhry

Gardi, Haught is one of professional firm, I have been with G&H since last 8 years in all legal matters.RegardsWaseem Chaudhry

Khurram Ghani

Tom and his dedicated crew recently helped me close on a commercial property, and I must say they did an exceptional job! Throughout the entire process, they were incredibly responsive, attentive to detail, and a pleasure to work with. Their professionalism and expertise made the transaction smooth and efficient. I am thoroughly impressed with their performance and definitely plan to work with them again in the near future. I highly recommend Tom and his team for anyone in need of real estate services!

Ryan B

I'd like to thank Gardi, Haught, Fischer, & Bhosale LTD and the whole Team! For amazing service. They made my selling experience fast, easy and at my convenience. I'm very thankful for the whole team over there. Their service meant alot to me and will be using them in the future. 10/10 !

Roberta Murphy

We worked with Tom and Courtney mainly on our recent closing. While it did not go as planned (all the other side’s issues) they did a great job keeping us informed and in track. Highly recommend.

Request a Consultation

First Name*(Required)

Last Name(Required)

Email Address*(Required)

Phone Number *(Required)

How can we help you *(Required)

How did you hear about us? *(Required)

99456