Co-signer changed locks - Locked me out

[Zigner]

The LL must not have caused the breach, just have notice and fail to remedy it. Get it? Any questions?

Of which, there is no evidence of in THIS thread. Now, do YOU get it?

 

[johnd]

Of which, there is no evidence of in THIS thread. Now, do YOU get it?

Well, you just stated this is not a constructive eviction. Yet the law (appellate decision) (albeit from a different state, but let me tell you this is common law) seems to state otherwise. Huh.

From par. 13:
deprives the tenant of the beneficial enjoyment of the premises.

Sure seems like a constructive eviction can take place w/o the LL causing it, but refusing (or unable) to promptly remedy the matter. Huh.

School's out for today.

 

[Alaska landlord]

My two cents

It IS constructive eviction. However, I cannot be applied to the Landlord until LL is given notice of the constructive eviction and given ample time and opportunity to correct the breach. In this case OP has to notify the landlord and have him give op access to the apt.

 

[Zigner]

Well, you just stated this is not a constructive eviction. Yet the law (appellate decision) (albeit from a different state, but let me tell you this is common law) seems to state otherwise. Huh.

From par. 13:
deprives the tenant of the beneficial enjoyment of the premises.

Sure seems like a constructive eviction can take place w/o the LL causing it, but refusing (or unable) to promptly remedy the matter. Huh.

School's out for today.

Ok - you're being too dense to see this.

The LL has not been afforded the opportunity to remedy the problem. As such, this is NOT a constructive eviction.

I'm glad you stayed a couple of minutes after the bell rang so that we could clear this up. Run along now...mommy is waiting.

 

[Zigner]

My two cents

It IS constructive eviction. However, I cannot be applied to the Landlord until LL is given notice of the constructive eviction and given ample time and opportunity to correct the breach. In this case OP has to notify the landlord and have him give op access to the apt.

Until the LL fails to remedy it, it is NOT a constructive eviction.

 

[johnd]

Ok - you're being too dense to see this.

The LL has not been afforded the opportunity to remedy the problem. As such, this is NOT a constructive eviction.

I'm glad you stayed a couple of minutes after the bell rang so that we could clear this up. Run along now...mommy is waiting.

Why don't you read my first response to the op's question, as well as all of my subsequent responses. I (not you) have stated repeatedly that this is constructive eviction if LL refuses to promptly deliver keys. That is the only caveat here (as well as the tenant must quit the premises). And I've stated that all along. Perhaps a little more court room work rather than computer key punching would make you a more suitable adversary.

 

[johnd]

Until the LL fails to remedy it, it is NOT a constructive eviction.

And this has all become rather academic...for me at least.

 

[Zigner]

Why don't you read my first response to the op's question, as well as all of my subsequent responses. I (not you) have stated repeatedly that this is constructive eviction if LL refuses to promptly deliver keys. That is the only caveat here (as well as the tenant must quit the premises). And I've stated that all along. Perhaps a little more court room work rather than computer key punching would make you a more suitable adversary.

Ok, let's look at the FIRST statement you made:

You have been constructively evicted.

That statement is wrong. Period. End of story. Maybe it's time to to work on your short-term memory.

But wait, you

 

[Alaska landlord]

OP has been denied the use of his rental. This is a breach of the "Covenant of Quiet Enjoyment".
The effect is that he has been constructively evicted by the co-tenant. He has no claim against the landlord till the landlord is given the opportunity to cure the breach.

You often state that only a Judge can evict a tenant. Yet, tenants are illegally evicted on a daily basis. If not for your unwillingness to admit when your are wrong, you would be able to see the correlation between and illegal eviction and an a constructive eviction initiated or set in motion by a co-tenant.

By your logic one can extrapolate that even in the case where a landlord actively constructively evicts a tenant, the tenant is not constructively evicted until the judge declares it.

 

[LeeHarveyBlotto]

OK. But I'm here to tell you both that ANYONE can constructively evict...not just the LL. And this has occurred if the op attempts to gain keys and is refused.

Go to law school. When you've finished, come back and correct yourself. You are incorrect, period.