Signed a lease in hand, utilities in my name and current tentant wont leave

[sjpmom]

Unforunately, your only recourse would be to file a small claims. Expect a counter-claim that is asking for unpaid rent for as long as the house sits empty because of the signed lease (which he might even win). Probably better to just move on. It really sucks. It's the current tenant's fault for not moving out with the notice she was given (assuming he did it properly. Also sounds like he might have stopped the eviction because she was in the process of 'quitting' the lease, but then she decided to stay, so he had to restart the eviction process.

Colorado law is very much in favor of the landlord, but it still takes about 2 weeks to get the tenant on the street.

Tom

I am not following you on the counter suit for unpaid rent when the house is occupied by the current tenant and probably will be for awhile.

 

[ecmst12]

'Tom' does not seem to have much of a clue. LL COULD counter sue for rent, but considering he's the one who breeched the contract, he'd get laughed out of court.

 

[johnd]

Is it considered negligence because the owner had listed the house as available effective 5/15/2008 on the website ad that I originally responded to, was told she needed more time to move and would be out by 5/30 then again told around the 6/10 that it was an eviction and she was being served on 6/11 and would be removed from the house yet the Sherriff's department nor the Colorado Springs Police department could find any evidence that an eviction had been filed.

Run on, and incorrect punctuation. You asked multiple questions in that one run on sentence. To reiterate, it is not negligence if she acted in good faith. It's that simple. Just because the deputies could not find the record, does not mean the case was not filed.

Let me it plain to you like this BS'er's cannot: If you tried suing my firm with this cause of action, I would file a motion for frivolousness, and barring your substantiation that I had been negligent or had colluded, you would lose. It's that simple. So take these nitwit's advice, file, and please post back the results. If you're really brave, provide me with the name of the dfendant so I could ask him if he knew anything about frivolous actions. Take these tenant's advice...and roll the dice. You'll lose with even a dimwitted attorney on the other side. But be litigous if you must. Some people learn the hard way...if at all.

I feel that he misrepresented the situation to me and was negligent for not starting the eviction process sooner...

You're feelings have no place in a lawsuit. That's law 101. Sue because of your feelings. That's a new one. Unless you know eviction law, the notice process, when the LL first filed his notice(s), and the claim...this is really none of your business. If you can substantiate (not "feel") that he was derelict in his timeliness of serving notices and filing the claim...and that the advertisement was premature in light of the aforemention [assumed] derelictions: you haven't a leg to stand on. Get whatever money back from the LL that you gave him (curiously you've omitted this amount, if any), and be happy with it. Else, cut and paste the signed documents (omitting all personal information) and I'll be happy to respond further.

 

[ecmst12]

House was not available on the agreed date. When that happened, tenant's obligation to pay rent ceased.

 

[xylene]

Run on, and incorrect punctuation. You asked multiple questions in that one run on sentence. To reiterate, it is not negligence if she acted in good faith. It's that simple. Just because the deputies could not find the record, does not mean the case was not filed.

Let me it plain to you like this BS'er's cannot: If you tried suing my firm with this cause of action, I would file a motion for frivolousness, and barring your substantiation that I had been negligent or had colluded, you would lose. It's that simple. So take these nitwit's advice, file, and please post back the results. If you're really brave, provide me with the name of the dfendant so I could ask him if he knew anything about frivolous actions. Take these tenant's advice...and roll the dice. You'll lose with even a dimwitted attorney on the other side. But be litigous if you must. Some people learn the hard way...if at all.



You're feelings have no place in a lawsuit. That's law 101. Sue because of your feelings. That's a new one. Unless you know eviction law, the notice process, when the LL first filed his notice(s), and the claim...this is really none of your business. If you can substantiate (not "feel") that he was derelict in his timeliness of serving notices and filing the claim...and that the advertisement was premature in light of the aforemention [assumed] derelictions: you haven't a leg to stand on. Get whatever money back from the LL that you gave him (curiously you've omitted this amount, if any), and be happy with it. Else, cut and paste the signed documents (omitting all personal information) and I'll be happy to respond further.

Yak yak yak....

The proof is in the pudding.

You can prattle on about filing dates and the like.

The place was not available. It has not even become available.

That is a material breech. Negligence does not have to occur.

---

sjpmom, you have rights in a dispute. I urge you to talk with your own lawyer, one who represents tenants, about your options for recovery.

Get a refferal from an agency or use the yellow pages, call and ask about an initial consultation.

Small claims court is an option too, but you want to know what to ask for.

 

[ecmst12]

Advertising a house as available when you KNEW your tenant had already failed to leave voluntarily, and you did not yet have a Order of Posession in your hands, and may not have even filed for same, is COMPLETELY negligent. You notice that tenant already had agreed to push back her move date several times and simply could not wait anymore. LL should know better then to promise posession of a house that HE does not have posession of or know exactly when he will have it. This is not a situation of prior tenant agreeing to vacate and then suddenly not, LL had been fully aware that prior tenant was a problem and had been refusing to leave.

OP, check the county court records to find out for sure if an eviction was ever filed. If not, that makes your case that much stronger. And consult a lawyer before you file any lawsuit.

 

[sjpmom]

johnd, as you pointed out I did neglect to speak of the deposit and rent. The rent was to $1175 first months rent plus 587 deposit which has been returned. He has changed all the utlities from my name to his effective 6/13 and assumed the connection fees that I was to be charged. Also, what documents do you wish me to paste here? I have a standard lease agreement.

As to costs incurred... well He had told me last Thursday that if I had a problem moving in he would cover my moving and storage fees. He did not qualify that statement with only if you agree to wait until I get rid of my current tenant. As I copied in an earlier post, he made that offer with the assumption I would be patient and wait for the house. How he could assume that? He knew I had no where to go.... My husband is deployed and all of our family back east so there are no relatives to put me up!

Just as an FYI, he listed the house on the website again on Saturday as available 5/15/2008, MIL complained to the website and he now has chage the available date to 7/1...

 

[xylene]

He had told me on Thursday that if I had a problem moving in he would cover my moving and storage fees. He did not qualify that statement with only if you agree to wait until I get rid of my current tenant. As I copied in an earlier post, he made that offer with the assumption I would be patient and wait for the house. How he could assume that is what gets me as he knew I had no where to go. The owner knew my husband is deployed and all of our family back east so there are no relatives to put me up!

It is past the point of what the 'guy said'

He owes you money, it isn't optional.

Your husband is deployed. Use the resources available in that fashion to find legal help, that would be a good plan.

 

[Alaska landlord]

It does appear the LL did everything in his power to meet his contractual obligations. The landlord could not have predicted that the tenant would do an about face. If you speak to an attorney he will tell you that the person to sue is the tenant, but since the LL has deeper pockets he would probably sue both.

 

[johnd]

johnd, as you pointed out I did neglect to speak of the deposit and rent. The rent was to $1175 first months rent plus 587 deposit which has been returned. He has changed all the utlities from my name to his effective 6/13 and assumed the connection fees that I was to be charged. Also, what documents do you wish me to paste here? I have a standard lease agreement.

So he has refunded to you the rent and sd you gave him. And he has reimbursed you the utilities connections fee. I'd say you're already ahead (all things being considered).

Let me help you: there is really no such thing a standard lease agreement. I'd be willing to bet there isn't a state in the Union with fewer than 1,000 "standard lease agreements"...meaning hundreds or more in use. The ones at Office Depot and the sort are invariably the worst. In fact, they're often outright illegal. As pertains to your contract, I'm interested to see what language, if any, is expressed in the lease about failure to deliver. Also, things out of the LL's control (acts of God, strikes, tenant breaches/failures).

I understand your angst, and what happened is unfortunate. But these nitwits assuring you that you have a cause of action know not of what they speak. You do not have a cause of action against the LL since he refunded all of your monies (and then some), barring some enforceable agreement, collusion or neglect (advertising and re-leasing prior to the unit being vacant is not negligence (as some here keep insisting), it is common practice). My advice is unless you can prove the LL was at fault for this, ask him for a little more $, and be happy with it. Then move on. Good luck.

 

[BL]

Nitwits ?

I haven't seen you back up your claims with Law , as you claim you are absolutely right .

I'd say you're already ahead (all things being considered).

Already ahead ?

Let me put this to you in simple high school grade English .

The Landlord " HAD TO " return the rent and SD , and had an obligation to cover the cost of utilities , ether voluntarily , or by court order .

Subsequently , agreeing to cover storage fees , and only after this tenant with a valid lease paid for , rented another place because the unit was NOT available , did the LL try to weasel out of storage fees .

 

[Zigner]

John's "advice" is bad and wrong, to be quite frank. The LL was negligent because he did NOT have the unit available when he was contractually obligated to. The OP reasonably relied on the LL fulfilling his contractual obligations and incurred costs based upon that reliance. OP is allowed to recover those damages from the LL.
John seems to think that this situation wasn't under the control of the LL. He's just plain wrong on that too!

OP - file in small claims court and recover what you are rightfully entitled to! And...ignore John - his wiring has apparently shorted out.

 

[johnd]

As a recap, since the two above apparently answer to "nitwit" (by their own volition...I'm not calling anyone any names): their failure to provide case law, a statute or even at a minimum any legal theory (the genius that proffered "breech"...well, that just about says it all, doesn't it?) are apparently the type that adheres to the notion of entitlement. I for one, do not. Take their advice, sue (for "breech") and update us when the matter is adjudicated. I'm not a gambling man, but I'd temporarily set aside my virtues on this bet.

Do what you want. The advice of the overly litigous posters above is part of the problem of this society: any fault is always someones. That's just not the way it works. Not in a courtroom. I see no way you can attribute fault to the LL given what you have posted. None. Good luck.

 

[BL]

As a recap, since the two above apparently answer to "nitwit" (by their own volition...I'm not calling anyone any names): their failure to provide case law, a statute or even at a minimum any legal theory (the genius that proffered "breech"...well, that just about says it all, doesn't it?) are apparently the type that adheres to the notion of entitlement. I for one, do not. Take their advice, sue (for "breech") and update us when the matter is adjudicated. I'm not a gambling man, but I'd temporarily set aside my virtues on this bet.

Do what you want. The advice of the overly litigous posters above is part of the problem of this society: any fault is always someones. That's just not the way it works. Not in a courtroom. I see no way you can attribute fault to the LL given what you have posted. None. Good luck.

Nice try , but again you come up with the majority as being nitwits ( yes you named called ) , and acuse failure to provide case law, a statute or even at a minimum any legal theory , when you yourself have done the same .

The advice of the overly litigous posters above is part of the problem of this society: any fault is always someones. That's just not the way it works. Not in a courtroom.

Please take your meds .

The poster wanted to know their rights , the poster was given advice .


IMPORTANT NOTICE
THE VIEWS EXPRESSED ON THIS PAGE WERE NOT REVIEWED BY THE EDITORIAL STAFF OR ATTORNEYS AT FREEADVICE.COM. Thousands of professionally prepared and reviewed questions and answers in 130 legal categories are to be found at the Question and Answer pages at FreeAdvice.com.
FreeAdvice Forums are intended to enable consumers to benefit from the experience of other consumers who have faced similar legal issues. FreeAdvice does NOT vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any posting or the qualifications of any person responding. Use of the Forums is subject to our Terms and Conditions which prohibit advertisements, solicitations or other commercial messages, or false, defamatory, abusive, vulgar, or harassing messages, and subject violators to a fee for each improper posting. All postings reflect the views of the author but become the property of FreeAdvice. Information on FreeAdvice or a Forum should not be relied upon and is not a substitute for advice from an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction who you have retained to represent you. To locate an attorney visit AttorneyPages.com. Copyright since 1995 by Advice Company. All Rights Reserved.

 

[johnd]

Nice try , but again you come up with the majority as being nitwits ( yes you named called ) , and acuse failure to provide case law, a statute or even at a minimum any legal theory , when you yourself have done the same .

Please take your meds.

You just don't get it, do you? And you refuse to listen, and learn?

Let me help you: I haven't posted any "case law, a statute or even at a minimum any legal theory" because I'm not the one with a cause of action. Get it? The one (plaintiff) with a cause of action needs these things...not the defendant. Sheeesh. You're now prompting me to go and look over your other posts for other drivel.