Roommate/Roommate disputes

State-california

i entered a lease agreement with a roommate through the months of september 2000-december 2000. i moved out at the end of the lease and paid all of my rent responsibilies. we had agreed on her paying $750 and i paying $200 throughout the lease agreement. we had made plans for the new lease agreement, january 1, 2001 for me to start paying $475 and her to pay $475. however, when i moved in with her, we did not get along and she breach the lease agreement by allowing a third party to live with us for free. i told her that i will not sign a new lease with her in january 2001 and i will be moving out at the end of lease. previously, we made the agreement for me to pay $200 a month from sept 1 to dec 1 and then jan 1 i will start paying the $475 a month. we communicated this agreement both verbally and through email. she claims that this is not the agreement and that i was suppose to start paying $475 in the last month of the lease which is december. she also states that since she was planning on me to stay and continue the lease with her in january she wants to sue me for an additional $275 + $25 = $300. does she have the right to do this?

If you complied with all the requirements of your (Sep 2000 through Dec 2000) lease (including any required move-out notice), then you should not be obligated for any rents beyond the term of your lease.

The fact that you may have discussed any extension of that lease does NOT obligate you for that extension.

However, based on your post, it sounds like there may be more to this than just the written lease or agreements. I suggest that you ask her to document her reasons for believing any rent extension or changes should apply to you. Then when you get the written justification, you can respond with your opinion. Besides, getting her position in writing could help a lot in defending against a potential lawsuit.

thanks for the quick reply

the roommate claims that she believes that by me saying that i was going to pay $200 rent from sept 1 - dec 1 means that i agreed to pay $475 beginning dec 1. this is entirely untrue and she always knew that i was planning to start paying $ 475 on jan 1 which is the start of the new lease. she has all of this information in writing via email. however she is trying to hold the email against by saying that if i meant jan 1 i should of written that i agree to pay $200 from sept 1 - dec 31.
this is the only thing she has in writing. does she still have a case? can she still make me pay an additional $300.

Without reviewing ALL the appropriate documents, emails and hearing all the relevant issues that might be raised in this case, no one can tell you if she has a case or not (after all, remember we are only hearing your side of this).

If (and that is a big IF), she does decide to sue, she will have the burden of proving her claim (since she is the Plaintiff). Can she prove her claim against you?? Can you defend against her claim??? The answers to those two questions should determine the legal outcome of this issue.

And as stated before, after reading YOUR post with your version, it sounds to me like you should prevail. But we all learn to NEVER try to second guess a legal decision.

Stale rent

Isn't it too late for to try to sue me for Dec rent anyway?

No.

What makes you think it is too late???
The statute of limitations is in years, not months <grin>.