Ask DrewDevil your legal questions

[PokerintheI]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

While she understood that she had to pay for the original sign, the owner initiated and desired the remodel (probably to help fill some vacant locations) and removed her sign that she was completely satisfied to keep. She doesn't think she should have to pay for the new sign.

Does she have any legal ground to require them to pay for some/all of her new sign costs?

[/ QUOTE ]

Based on what you wrote, it sounds like the tenant has the option but not the duty to install a sign. Unless the lease requires the tenant to provide signage at the tenant's expense, then I don't see how the tenant has to pay for the new sign.

Also, where's the old sign? Tenant gets that back.

[/ QUOTE ]

I realize this is Drew's thread, but this question wandered into my arena.

Depending on property laws in your state the lessee often has no right to signage once installed. In many states, any physical improvements made to leased real property immediately become the property of the lessor (landlord). The purchase and installation of the sign is generally considered a "leasehold improvement", is considered part of the physical structure and as such becomes the property of the landlord.

It kind of sucks, but the lessee might well be out of luck.


*And just in case anyone might wonder what business I have weighing in here, I'm an Assessor (property tax) in Michigan.*