what are the consequences?

[micheloni]

What is the name of your state? VA

we are buying a home after having only lived in our current apt. for 3 months. we are on a 1 yr. lease. we would have stayed the full year if the apt. was worthy in our estimation of the rental price. no, we didn't get to view the apt. before we accepted it, we were overseas. i have several complaints about the apt. it is way to small for us, we were led to believe it had substantial storage, it doesn't. which i know is not the fault of the management company, i'm just stating reasons for leaving. our downstairs neighbors cooking smells permeate our apt. and linger for a long time. these aren't pleasant smells and i have to leave the apt. due to the smells. there are several cracks in the walls, water damage to the ceilings and just in general, the apt. is shabby. none of this makes the apt. uninhabitable, just my personal preferences to live in nicer digs. so, we are required to pay the equivalant of two months rent, $1789 to break the lease. this is not rent, it is the cost of breaking the lease i was informed. in addition to this i had to give 60 days notice, and now we find that we are going to close a few weeks earlier than that move out date. i do not want to throw more money away on this apt. when i will already be in a new home and having to make mortgage payments. i have talked with the property management comp. the person i spoke with even agreed with me that the company policies are cold, but we will still have to pay and there is no reason in the world i could give them that would make them take less money. i guess i want to know the consequences of not paying 11 days rent for march. and if they turn me in to collections, why should i bother paying the almost 2 grand? our credit is in good shape and i would hate to have it destroyed. i also wouldn't want to go to small claims court, i can't afford an attorney. just looking for a worst case scenario if anyone has any advice i would appreciate it. i know we will probably have to bite it and pay the money. also, i was told the day i turned in the keys i had to have the money. i plan on making arrangements and making payments, surely if i offer to pay something, they can't turn us into collections?? thanks!

 

[franklin2003]

Well DUH!

You should have asked this question BEFORE you went and bought a house.

Now you are stuck paying a 2 month penalty plus a 60 day notice, to get out of the lease.

If you were the least bit intelligent, you would have read your lease, looked up the landlord tenant laws for your state, and would have HELPED the landlord find new tenants, so you wouldnt be charged for all this...

But you were LAZY!

 

[JETX]

Ignore Franklin... he is a welfare-sucking forum-troll with no friends in the world. He gets his 'jollies' by posting inane, derogatory posts on the forum just to get attention..... just like a 3rd grader!

Back to your issues:
"i guess i want to know the consequences of not paying 11 days rent for march. and if they turn me in to collections, why should i bother paying the almost 2 grand?"
*** Here is what COULD happen:
1) Landlord take hit due to your breach and suffers monetary damage.
2) Landlord submits the negative credit information to CRA (Credit Reporting Agencies). Depending on timing, this could kill your mortgage attempts... or affect your credit value for the next 7 years.
3) Landlord assigns your debt to a 3rd party debt collector. This will mean you could get some real friendly calls for a few years.
4) Landlord could get a judgment against you for his damages. If he does, then he can seize your non-exempt property to enforce the judgment.

"surely if i offer to pay something, they can't turn us into collections??"
*** Yes they can... though if are making the agreed payments it would be unlikely. But they minute that you breached..... they can turn your file over.

 

[queenofsand]

awwww, happy&lucky, you were doing pretty good as franklin2003. What happened? Getting cabin-fever 'cause NY winters suck?

Bummer. You actually posted some relevant statutes and were on your best behavior but alas...your true self manifested once again and you're back to insults and just being cranky.

Play nice, please.

 

[abezon]

If you are already approved for the mortgage & financing won't fall through, you can not pay & make them sue you. Then you can argue to a judge that $1789 as liquidated damages is unconscionable & ask the judge to limit their award to actual damages. This will also allow you to ask the judge to coid the lease for "fraud in the inducement" -- they lied to you about what you were leasing & you didn't have opportunity to inspect the place first.

Neither of these arguments are particularly strong, but it might be worth a roll of the dice to try to avoid the $2k fee. You may get a sympathetic judge.

 

[JETX]

I disagree with Abezon on this one....
The problem you have is that you made the decision to rent the property without seeing it first. That falls under 'Caveat Emptor' (Buyer beware). Simply, you failed to do your 'due diligence' and now have to accept your responsibility.

Your 'complaints':
- cooking smells from downstairs
- there are several cracks in the walls (can be repaired)
- water damage to the ceilings (can be repaired)
- the apt. is shabby (gee, you probably would have noticed that if you had looked).
And the most telling of all.... "just my personal preferences to live in nicer digs.",
are simply not sufficient for a court to over-rule a written lease and/or state statutes.

Sorry, you made your 'deal' and choice to rent sight unseen.

Further, I disagree with, "This will also allow you to ask the judge to coid the lease for "fraud in the inducement" -- they lied to you about what you were leasing & you didn't have opportunity to inspect the place first. "
There is simply NOTHING to imply that an inducement was made, much less fraudulently. And you had every opportunity to 'inspect' the place..... you just chose not to.

The landlord does have to mitigate his damages (by making a reasonable effort to re-lease the premises), but you are liable for any damages he incurs. No false hope here.

 

[franklin2003]

Hi Queen:

I'm just amazed at how many people finally read their lease AFTER they go out and do something foolish, and then whine about a lousy $1700+ in penalties they have to pay.

 

[queenofsand]

I understand...but couldn't you temper your 'amazement' when you reply?

Most of these folks know they are in a bind because of their actions...they come here to find solutions. We all want the least painful solution, you can't fault them for that. Instead of kicking them when they are down, "lend them a hand, help them up and dust them off" by offering competent advice in a considerate way.

 

[micheloni]

actually, i knew all about the lease and it's numerous little catches. as i said, we had planned on living in the apt. for a full year, then looking for a place to buy once we knew what area of town we liked and so forth. we already signed the lease before we actually got into the apt. and they would have kept our deposit if we backed out. and yes, i also said that the problems with the apt. don't make it uninhabitable, just really stressful for a family of 5. i am not whining, i'm just asking for advice since i have never broken a lease before and am not sure what to expect. my thanks to all who responded, oh 'cept for flamer-boy, if it makes you feel good and boosts your ego Frankie then right on

 

[abezon]

JETX, I think you're absolutely correct. Like I said, I wasn't particularly fond of the arguments I came up with. The only reason I thought it *might* work was because the tenants were overseas when they signed the lease & could not inspect the apt. (Unlike someone who looks at the place at night & doesn't notice something because of bad light. That person is SOL.)

Given the impossibility of inspection before signing, I would argue that 'the diligence that was due' was to closely question the LL as to the size & condition of the apt. If LL knowingly lied about these things, that might be enough to get a judge to find some way to reduce the damages.

But hey, I practice in Washington, where judicial decisions are so result-oriented as to render laughable the concepts of 'binding precedent' & 'judges interpret the law; they don't make it'. Out here, if the judge likes you, you win, regardless of what the law actually says. Thus, in Washington, a sympathetic judge might dust off 'fraud in the inducement' or 'breach of fiduciary duty' or 'rightful rejection after opportunity to inspect' or unconscionability to decide in tenants' favour. I have no idea what VA judicial culture is like, so I don't know if it's a good idea for T to try these arguments.

 

[JETX]

Abezon, thank you for your post.

As for "because the tenants were overseas when they signed the lease & could not inspect the apt.", I feel that holds little (if any) water. They were under no obligation to lease it unseen. There was no duress or coercion (that we know of) that forced them to rent from overseas.... it was (apparently) just their decision. Probably to assure an address when they got here. They could have located a month-to-month..... while looking for "nicer digs". They chose not to.

And even if they questioned the landlord EXTENSIVELY, if his statements as to condition were not in writing, they are unsupported and deniable and... voidable since the written lease would invalidate in verbal promises.