• 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.

landlord let the new tenant in before our lease was up

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

xylene

Senior Member
It goes from,

You lucky tenant, they could and should charge your the whole month...

to

Stop complaining. No biggy, its just a 1000 dollar fee, when the landlord never had any time without collecting rent, and the new tenant got to take possession early...

I am sorry. I didn't realize a lease and subsequent WRITTEN agreement is trumped by the "Oh that's just petty and personal" legal principle.

Let the landlord pay his own agent's fee, since it it obvious that the notice of tenant was enough to mitigate the damages he might have had. They did get to take possession early, and that said, then rest is just ordinary costs of doing business.

That's enrichment, not damages.

-----

And it doesn't matter whatever he changed his story to, or if he did at all.

He can't kept the fee for early termination after he let the new tenant take possession early.

Changing his story just reinforces how wrong he is.
 
Last edited:


BL

Senior Member
xylene said:
It goes from,

You lucky tenant, they could and should charge your the whole month...

to

Stop complaining. No biggy, its just a 1000 dollar fee, when the landlord never had any time without collecting rent, and the new tenant got to take possession early...

I am sorry. I didn't realize a lease and subsequent WRITTEN agreement is trumped by the "Oh that's just petty and personal" legal principle.

Let the landlord pay his own agent's fee, since it it obvious that the notice of tenant was enough to mitigate the damages he might have had. They did get to take possession early, and that said, then rest is just ordinary costs of doing business.

That's enrichment, not damages.

-----

And it doesn't matter whatever he changed his story to, or if he did at all.

He can't kept the fee for early termination after he let the new tenant take possession early.

Changing his story just reinforces how wrong he is.
The agreement was in " LUE " of the rent they owed for BREAKING the LEASE .

One day letting the new tenant in to CLEAN " IS " petty .
 

xylene

Senior Member
Blonde Lebinese said:
The agreement was in " LUE " of the rent they owed for BREAKING the LEASE .
But they wouldn't have OWED squat, since the landlord can't collect DOUBLE RENT.

One day letting the new tenant in to CLEAN " IS " petty .
I don't care if it IS Richard Petty.

If a tenant held over a day, would you be singing your petty tune?


I don't have much sympathy for the landlord who does something so dumb as to give a new tenant possession while the current tenant still had possession, particularly since it proves that he suffered no damages from the current tenants breech of lease, and the 1000 dollar fees go from being covered by the agreement to compensate for damages to just part of the ORDINARY COSTS of doing business.

I hope this petty favor ends up worth 1000 dollars.
 

BL

Senior Member
xylene said:
But they wouldn't have OWED squat, since the landlord can't collect DOUBLE RENT.



I don't care if it IS Richard Petty.

If a tenant held over a day, would you be singing your petty tune?


I don't have much sympathy for the landlord who does something so dumb as to give a new tenant possession while the current tenant still had possession, particularly since it proves that he suffered no damages from the current tenants breech of lease, and the 1000 dollar fees go from being covered by the agreement to compensate for damages to just part of the ORDINARY COSTS of doing business.

I hope this petty favor ends up worth 1000 dollars.
We broke our lease by one month becuase we bought a home. Our landlord negotiated that we should pay the agent's fee of $1000 deducted from our security deposit of $3300 in lieu of paying the last month of our lease.
Maybe I'm dense , but I can't see DOUBLE rent here . I see the tenant breaking the lease ONE whole month early , and the LL is still refunding much of the security deposit , even though He did NOT have to . The Grand is in " lue " of breaking the lease . Geesh . the tenant got a deal and they're PETTY and personal.
 

xylene

Senior Member
Blonde Lebinese said:
Maybe I'm dense , but I can't see DOUBLE rent here . I see the tenant breaking the lease ONE whole month early , and the LL is still refunding much of the security deposit , even though He did NOT have to . The Grand is in " lue " of breaking the lease . Geesh . the tenant got a deal and they're PETTY and personal.

On July 15 (last day of our lease and the period through which we paid the rent I drove by the house to see the new tennant in the house cleaning.
They would not need to pay 1000 dollars for there lease to just expire.

Move out early (july 15) and not pay last months rent and pay us 1000 dollars

The monkey wrench is the landlord letting the new tenant take possession on the 14th or 15th, rather than the 16th... :eek:
 

BL

Senior Member
They breached their lease early by one month . They DID-NOT pay the last months rent ,They broke their lease 1 month early and made an agreement , I'm done with this thread .
 
Last edited:

ENASNI

Senior Member
We All know, sad as it is.. though the law is supposed to be good and just. The Judge can rule whatever he can see his way. and in this case ... whatever... i am tired. very tired.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

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