• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Uncashed rent checks

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

south

Senior Member
So your saying the landlord lost the rent check once a month for the whole time you were there?

Besides this being filed in my far fetched draw and being suckered into responding to this post, I believe you will find the checks are an instrument to promise to pay a debt which you have not paid yet.

A check is a written order directing a bank to pay money, which your bank has not done yet.

As for 'Do I have to pay my rent AGAIN??'

You have not released any funds to the landlord so you cannot say do I have to pay AGAIN because you have never paid before, if you give the landlord the money now it means you have only in theory paid once not AGAIN.



AChamberlain said:
What is the name of your state? Michigan

My landlord never cashed any of my rent checks the whole time I rented from him. I moved out 5 years ago, and never received my deposit back either. The landlord told me I'd get it back as soon as he "found and cashed" all my checks. Well, 5 years later, now, he has apparently found them. Of course they are all invalid; a personal check is only good for a year. He has acknowledged that he does have the checks, so I did pay on time, and he now wants me to write him a big check for about $9,000. Do I have to pay my rent AGAIN??
 
Last edited:


panzertanker

Senior Member
Devedander said:
Again OP states he has a letter stating no oustanding rent. If that is available it puts a lot of weight in his corner.
Agreed.

Davedander said:
OP kept funds available for checks for 2 years. Checks are only valid for one year. Legally it's up to the local statutes but I don't think any court would have a problem with mitigating a payment schedule for a debt over 2 years old for which payment was attempted.
Don't know the law and don't care...
If it is true, OK.

Davedander said:
Why is everyone pointing it out like the OP dropped the ball? How many businesses do you engage with who require you to keep all records and follow up on their mistakes? Should the OP also go over the landowners taxes to ensure the property is being reported correctly? Maybe he should hire and attorney to ensure Safeway actually collects the money from Visa when he pays for his groceries too...
Because the OP DID drop the ball.
If you sent the mortgage company checks and they kept telling you "everything is fine, we just haven't gotten around to cashing them yet", would that be an acceptable answer to you?
Would you not try to make sure that you had some sort of proof that the payments were made so you did not have the headache this guy possibly has now?

Comparing groceries to rent is not the same when using a credit card, and you know it.
Neither is checking to see if the LL has been reporting the property correctly on his taxes.
His responsibility was to PAY his rent, or PROVE that it had been accepted as payment.
I have heard nothing of receipts for checks he wrote to the LL.
I have heard that he has a letter stating that he did not have any LATE FEES and would be eligable to rent again, that is not the same as "he doesn't owe me any money".
 
south said:
So your saying the landlord lost the rent check once a month for the whole time you were there?

Nowhere does he say that.

Besides this being filed in my far fetched draw and being suckered into responding to this post, I believe you will find the checks are an instrument to promise to pay a debt which you have not paid yet.

Checks are not an instrument to promise anything. Checks are a release of legal tender to be transfered to the entity listed on the check. No obligation or debt is implied. I can offer a check to a charity for no reason at all and it is not a promies to pay, it is simply saying that they now have access to the funds listed for the time the check is valid.

A check is a written order directing a bank to pay money, which your bank has not done yet.

Again, a check is a release of funds which your bank must abide by should they be provided the documentation. It is not an order to the bank or it would be given to the bank and not to a third party. A transfer slip is an order to a bank to make payment. And in any case a check bears an expiration date and has no meaning or value after that date.

As for 'Do I have to pay my rent AGAIN??'

You have not released any funds to the landlord so you cannot say do I have to pay AGAIN because you have never paid before, if you give the landlord the money now it means you have only in theory paid once not AGAIN.

Agreed rent was never paid.



And agreed this sounds like the tallest tale I have ever heard, but it seems this forum is named "freeadvice" not "freejudgementonyourcharacter"
 
Last edited:
panzertanker said:
Because the OP DID drop the ball.
If you sent the mortgage company checks and they kept telling you "everything is fine, we just haven't gotten around to cashing them yet", would that be an acceptable answer to you?
Would you not try to make sure that you had some sort of proof that the payments were made so you did not have the headache this guy possibly has now?

I think the OP could have protected himself more by demanding reciepts, but I don't think he dropped the ball on any of his direct responsiblities. But that would have to come down to a court to decide.

And yes if a mortgage company tells me everythings fine, I would probably believe them as long as I am doing what I am supposed to do. Yes it might end up with me fighting them in court but how far is far enough to protect yourself from possible issues?

And if that mortgage company wrote me a letter saying I made all payments on time, and contacted me 5 years after I paid off my house saying they forgot to cash my checks I would question the validity of the debt. Just like you have a certain amount of time to pay a debt, you have a certain amont of time to hold someone in debt, if no action is taken during that time you relinquish claim on the debt. That time I believe is what's in quesiton here.


Comparing groceries to rent is not the same when using a credit card, and you know it.
Neither is checking to see if the LL has been reporting the property correctly on his taxes.
His responsibility was to PAY his rent, or PROVE that it had been accepted as payment.
I have heard nothing of receipts for checks he wrote to the LL.
I have heard that he has a letter stating that he did not have any LATE FEES and would be eligable to rent again, that is not the same as "he doesn't owe me any money".
I am not sure how the groceries thing does not apply? You have a debt, you made a good faith payment, if the grocery store does not follow through to collect payment it is no fault of yours. Case in point: I have a weekend job at a restaruant, when a person leaves a credit card tip if I fail to put that into the credit car machine that day, then I am out the tip. I do not have recourse to go get the tip again. The same for the actual charge. If the charge is not sent through in 3 days the restaruant gives up claim to the charge. I have verified that with the owner. This is California though.

If a letter is written at the end of a rental period at moveout stating there is no late rent how is it possible someone still owes rent? Woudlnt it be late?

Technically you could argue a non payment is not a late payment but in the context I don't think anyone would read that into it.
 
Last edited:

south

Senior Member
Time to get up Devedander...

A check is an instrument for processing for collection.

In this case the lanlord never collected the funds this does not mean the tenant does not owe any rent because a check expired.



Devedander said:
And agreed this sounds like the tallest tale I have ever heard, but it seems this forum is named "freeadvice" not "freejudgementonyourcharacter"
 
south said:
Time to get up Devedander...

A check is an instrument for processing for collection.

In this case the lanlord never collected the funds this does not mean the tenant does not owe any rent because a check expired.

Agreed, you will see that when I mentioned that point I simply said it would be reason enough for a court to mitigate a pay schedule. And the reason I would even quesiton if the tenant owes rent is that the rent collection is being attempted 5 years post and with no reasonable attempt to collect in the interim.


You are right, I was mistaken it is a written order to a bank to make payment. It is not, however an admission of debt and does not carry that value at any time.

I still hold that it is the fault of the manager in this case for not making use of that order. Again, laws that put a limit on the life of a debt are there for use in this type of scenario.

And what does it mean "Time to get up"?
 
Last edited:

panzertanker

Senior Member
Devedander said:
If a letter is written at the end of a rental period at moveout stating there is no late rent how is it possible someone still owes rent? Woudlnt it be late?
No, he said that he received a letter saying that he had not paid his rent late.
Not that there is "no late rent."

Semantics anyway.

No one has judged him on his character, I even said if he could legally NOT pay this, he should, b/c the LL was a moron for not cashing the checks that were due him.

But it doesn't change the fact that he should have made sure the rent was PAID, not given a check FOR the rent...
 
The judgement on character statement was directed at south. It was not inteded to apply to you.

I would have to see the actual wording of the letter, and I am jumping to some conclusions here but it seems:

You don't ask for such a letter until you are soon to move out.

Such a letter at the time of vacating would be accurate up until the last month or so at least.

You don't say you would rent to someone again who is a non payer.

Therefore:

If you say someone has not paid rent late (then they are either paying on time or are non payers) and that you would rent to them again (pretty much ruling out the non payer) you leave only that the person has paid rent on time.

Again wording, indeed symantecs, and interpretation all play a part, but it seems like you woudl have to dig a lot harder to read into it that he indeed did not pay rent than to get out of it that he did. In this case I would belive context puts the letter in favor of a good standing, paying and punctual tenant.
 
Last edited:

south

Senior Member
Tenant has not paid his rent.

The funds should still be in tenants Bank account awaiting release, there should not be a problem because tenant should not be spending funds ear-marked for rent.

The tenant was very much aware the rent checks had not been cashed the landlord had all ready stated he lost the checks and was trying to find them.

The only thing the tenant does not owe here is a late fee for handing over a negotiable instrument on time, the instrument itself that the tenant chose to pay with has expired that does not mean his obligation to pay rent expires as well.



Devedander said:
The judgement on character statement was directed at south. It was not inteded to apply to you.

I would have to see the actual wording of the letter, and I am jumping to some conclusions here but it seems:

You don't ask for such a letter until you are soon to move out.

Such a letter at the time of vacating would be accurate up until the last month or so at least.

You don't say you would rent to someone again who is a non payer.

Therefore:

If you say someone has not paid rent late (then they are either paying on time or are non payers) and that you would rent to them again (pretty much ruling out the non payer) you leave only that the person has paid rent on time.

Again wording, indeed symantecs, and interpretation all play a part, but it seems like you woudl have to dig a lot harder to read into it that he indeed did not pay rent than to get out of it that he did. In this case I would belive context puts the letter in favor of a good standing, paying and punctual tenant.
 
south said:
Tenant has not paid his rent.

The funds should still be in tenants Bank account awaiting release, there should not be a problem because tenant should not be spending funds ear-marked for rent.

The tenant was very much aware the rent checks had not been cashed the landlord had all ready stated he lost the checks and was trying to find them.

The only thing the tenant does not owe here is a late fee for handing over a negotiable instrument on time, the instrument itself that the tenant chose to pay with has expired that does not mean his obligation to pay rent expires as well.
I guess it all comes down to the local statutes as to the life a debt of the nature with the possibility that the letter may even be construed as waiving claim to outsanding debt.
 

south

Senior Member
Tenant should not hold his breathe

Devedander said:
I guess it all comes down to the local statutes as to the life a debt of the nature with the possibility that the letter may even be construed as waiving claim to outsanding debt.
 
It has been shown that holding your breath (and even your breathe) for a prolonged period can cause temorary or even permanent brain damage in extreme cases. Therefore my free advice is to attempt to breathe consistantly and regularly and never hold your breath unless you will be introduced into an evnironment where breathing could be hazerdous.

And I agree with the point you were making too, OP go check the local statutes, without that info all this is conjecture.
 

Veronica1228

Senior Member
SOL for all debt in the state of Michigan is 6 years.

Any other banking issues I can clear up for you guys? Let me know.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top