In addition, the notification provisions suggest that the LL may retain responsibility when the tenant defaults. This is a policy issue and most students spent a paragraph or too summarizing the pros and cons. Unclear whether per repair or cumulative, and if per repair, could become onerous. To receive full credit, it was impt to make this argument in terms of the IWH and not just unconscionability. This is a residential lease and it is likely that LL will be able to withhold consent for any reason.
Damages are likely to be the only remedy.
If the LL seeks to evict on the basis of expiration of the lease rather than non-payment of rent, T can claim retaliatory eviction because of the IWH violations and the fine from the housing authorities. So the notification provision in the lease, if otherwise valid, might also give the LL a measure of protection from tort liability. In general, however, I awarded the major credit for the discussion of the validity of the lease provisions, not the tort claim, per the call of the question. The language of the will could be read as most consistent with this result. If, however, the housing authority were to attempt to levy on the building to secure payment of the fine before Terry died, it would sever it.