Here are some key points others made:- Ideally the tenant will fund half or more of the cost - You do not want the tenant to do the install - Link the improvement to a new or extended lease - Make it clear in writing that the improvement stays with the property and she is not entitled to any monetary compensation when she leaves.

This to me far outweighs any monetary damage the land lord can put on you. 

They will feel the monetary impact first when paying for water; they will feel the monetary impact second when paying for oil heat as winter sets in. 

But, if you understand the monetary system, which clearly tells you to borrow, how do you reconcile it with the common sense of personal finance, which clearly tells you not to borrow...?

Bankruptcy may reprieve them of their monetary debt to you, but you should be able to evict for other reasons.10.

Your personal time (and any monetary value for it) is NEVER deductible as a landlord/owner. 

They would have to prove emotional distress or monetary damages due to the "discrimination" to get any kind of money settlement, in my opinion.So, really, unless their case is a slam dunk discrimination case, I really don't see anything major happening to the landlord here.  

The second element is a breach of the duty owed by one person to another. ...The Breach Directly Causes Injuries. ...Proving Monetary Losses.So, what was your duty as her landlord?  

Even if it's not all monetary gain - but peace of mind, knowing you have a renter you can count on now.  

It should be a monetary slap in the wrist....a nuisance, not an opportunity for profit.Also, circumstances can play a part.