Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Let’s put it this way. Regardless of whether you can actually be evicted or not, someone can and should be held responsible.
If you are forced to move, it doesn’t seem overly difficult to file for damages against the LL or real estate agent. They didn’t know what they were doing, and you lost. That’s not your problem, and you shouldn’t be held financially responsible
Save all contact with the agent for court purposes.
It wouldn't be a wrong eviction. The tenant, due to no fault of his own, has an invalid lease. He will asked to leave. If he doesn't leave, he will be evicted.
Don't get me wrong...what happened was aviodable and it's not the tenant's fault, but the HOA doesn't, and shouldn't', care about the tenant. The owner and the agent, need to make this right with the tenant. If that mean suing them both, so be it.
Why is the lease invalid though? The consequences should fall entirely on the shoulders of the LL, period. The HOA should probably take this up with the person renting, as it is clear they have no clue what they are doing and are now trying to forcefully back out of the situation.
The poor girl is a victim here and you are on the side of the people who made a mistake with the lease once again.
I'm not on any side and I don't know how any reasonable person can logically come to that conclusion... I have zero opinion on this matter other than to tell the peanut gallery to back off a tad and get more info before going full "hurr durr they are evil screw then". I know, hard to imagine someone suggests a little caution on the internet these days.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LifeIsGood01
Supreme court judge John Roberts. but I can't confirm or deny.
If you want to help her why no offer her your services? Sometimes all it takes is a letter.
You want to pretend to work for him but can't even show him the proper respect he has earned? It is Chief Justice not Supreme court judge... get a grip on reality and stop arguing with everyone.
I'm not on any side and I don't know how any reasonable person can logically come to that conclusion... I have zero opinion on this matter other than to tell the peanut gallery to back off a tad and get more info before going full "hurr durr they are evil screw then". I know, hard to imagine someone suggests a little caution on the internet these days.
You want to pretend to work for him but can't even show him the proper respect he has earned? It is Chief Justice not Supreme court judge... get a grip on reality and stop arguing with everyone.
You can't take a joke and you are always on the LL side.
You should take the side of a person who moved in to a 3 month lease last week and is being threatened by the RE agent and being told she has to leave because the LL won't be able to rent it out for the rest of the year if she stays.
No caution needs to be taken, Her story makes perfect sense, you just assume the other side is always lying because you can't get good tenants it seems.
If I mess something up I eat it, if you mess something up I expect you to eat it. The LL and RE agent messed up it's on them, it's not the tenants fault at all. Very few honest people who want to take responsibilities for their own actions any more that's what's wrong with the world.
If the LL is going to end up in the poor house over this she can appeal to the HOA to make and exemption for hardship reasons and let her rent out the place for a year when this tenant moves out.
Towards the beginning of May, I signed a 3 month lease for the summer in northern Virginia. I have been in the condo for over 1 week now and was contacted yesterday morning by the realtor. The realtor informed me that the condo owner's association did not allow leases shorter than 12 months and that I would need to move immediately.
Under Virginia law, you are protected even if there was a clause in the lease requiring HOA approval. Had they told you before you started occupancy that the HOA had an issue, the contract could have been cancelled but once both of you entered into the contract as agreed and both parties allowed the contract to commence, they basically can;t cancel it unless you violated the lease.
Now, the HOA shouldn't be able to evict you, they can fine and take legal action against the condo owner, but not you.
Call the real estate agent who signed the lease and explain that you will be very happy to discuss moving when their E&O insurance carrier calls you to discuss resolving this. Inn the mean time, consider seeking competent local legal advice as a standby.
The HOA doesn't say she can't rent out to a tenant for 3 months, it's just that the LL can't rent out the other 9 months to someone else.
This is the key right here. All this talk about fining the LL is a bit premature. The HOA can't fine her, yet. The LL hasn't done anything wrong, yet. The HOA would be unable to fine her unless she attempts to rent out the property in the 9 months after the OP has finished her 3 month lease. So a couple of questions arise to me:
1) Since the lease has already been implemented, would it even matter if the realtor/LL could get the OP out immediately anyway? Hasn't the 12 month clock already started, even if OP left tomorrow? In that case, LL/realtor should just get OP's money for the 3 months and pray that the hardship is granted. Even if landlord wanted to pay a big sum to OP to get her out in order to make profit for 9 months instead of 3, as I said, seems like the clock has already started ticking.
2) If the LL were to rent the property out again after the 3 month period, would this typically be a one-time fine or a recurring fine until the situation was rectified? Either way, it could still be more profitable to the LL to take the fine and rent it out anyway.
And I hate it when people criticize when they clearly didn't read my post. I gave two resources for low or no cost legal assistance.
But the reality is that this IS a legal situation and the OP is being badly served by getting contradictory advice from people who may not know the correct law in OP's jurisdiction. There are times where it's worth going to the expert and this is one of those times.
You're right, of course. The problem is that I happen to know how hard it is for a low income person to actually get legal help for free. I also studied law, but don't have a JD. What I've learned, after working for lawyers and in my own life, is to first of all, call a bully's bluff. Then, if necessary, take it to small claims court, if you can't find a lawyer who'll help you for free, and really, good luck with that for a landlord-tenant matter like this.
And hopefully, just filing the small claims lawsuit gets the other side to deal with you fairly. That's been my experience 99% of the times I have had to do this. I just this week got a settlement from a rotten renter's insurance company who tried to deny most of my claim.
Then, if they don't settle with you before your court date, which is very rare, then you put your trust in the lawyer/judge in small claims court. This usually costs less than $100.
So, even though, yes, in a perfect world, we could all just call a lawyer to help us when we needed it. But, most of us just can't afford to do so, and can't find a lawyer to help us for free.
And this is what the bullies count on. So, when you stand up to them, they are usually taken aback. They'll keep trying to get you to back down, thinking you don't understand the law, pointing to clauses in their contract, that often aren't even legal and/or are unconscionable, hoping you'll let them get away with murder.
I tell people all the time, just because something is in a contract, doesn't make it legal. And to imagine, for instance, that their lease says they have to cut off their left foot if they are ever late on the rent by one day. Now, anyone would know that wasn't legal. But, if the writing sounds legal, people will assume it is. But, it may actually be contrary to their state's laws. So, don't just believe them when they point at a clause in a contract that supposedly says they can't do anything about what is happening. The fact that they're pointing excitedly at some clause in their contract, often means that it's not actually legal, and they're just trying to bluff you into letting them get away with something.
Anyway, my point is just that, you probably have never been in the shoes of a tenant who doesn't have the resources to just call a lawyer when you have a legal problem with some bullies. What people need to know, who can't afford lawyers, is how to call the bluff of a bully threatening you with their legal department.
I just got AARP The Hartford to back down, simply by calling their bluff and filing a small claims action. Cost me about $150 in court fees and service of process for a subpoena for all recordings of my telephone conversations with them and in-house documents regarding incentives for delaying or denying claims (they never sent these documents and I expect they settled because they didnt' want to produce them). I got my costs back in the settlement. So, little, low income senior me vs. giant corporation and I won - without a lawyer. I just called their bluff and filed a small claims lawsuit, where I can get a lawyer/judge to deal with them. It's really the most cost-effective way for low income people to deal with big companies without having to find a free lawyer (good luck) or pay for a lawyer.
HOAs can be in the same state and act very differently one to the other.
I do know that Virginia has a nice Property Owner Association Act that covers a lot. Problem is there's no real enforcement if there is a problem. But it can be useful to quote.
If you are suddenly offered excellent accommodations to move to and the owner who signed the lease with you has in writing this is okay and you are not one to argue...okay...and go to small claims after for whatever is owed if the landlady doesn't pay you all your expenses back.
Or...
First, go by what you have in your hand in writing. Not what an hoa board member got mad about and the realtor said she'd fix it and tell you lies to get you scared.
This realtor may be claiming more than she should. And could get questioned by her board and the state if she lied about not working for a broker, etc. but working under the HOA.
The HOA has rules for the owner. So the relationship is between the HOA and the owner.
That said, I know some HOAs who have managers who manage individual units as well. So it may be the owner contracted with this manager to get his/her unit rented. But that is not your contract.
Looks like, as has been said, someone realized now the place will sit vacant for the rest of the 12 month period. And the owner is mad. Maybe got mad at the board. A few people got mad at the realtor so she is now making stuff up.
You're right, of course. The problem is that I happen to know how hard it is for a low income person to actually get legal help for free.
Then, if they don't settle with you before your court date, which is very rare, then you put your trust in the lawyer/judge in small claims court. This usually costs less than $100.
In MN, it is easy to get a lawyer if you are low income. You do not even pay filing costs for your case. I no longer rent to anyone who is low-income, for that very reason among others. Low-income lawyers always take the side of the tenant, and never look at the facts. A paid lawyer would at least advise on the merits of the case.
The low-income lawyers often abuse the court system to make it more expensive for a LL, and then want the LL to settle, even if the LL is 100% in the right. I won $50 once due to a court no-show, and that was a planned no-show just to keep housing for a bit longer.
Based on the abuses I have seen, I do not ever give money to charities that are for low-income causes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by djsuperfly
This is the key right here. All this talk about fining the LL is a bit premature. The HOA can't fine her, yet. The LL hasn't done anything wrong, yet. The HOA would be unable to fine her unless she attempts to rent out the property in the 9 months after the OP has finished her 3 month lease.
If the OP was in my HOA, the Board would initiate a fine, assuming the tenant moved in without approval of the HOA. All tenants get approved by the HOA, and it includes the requirement for a 600 minimum credit score (all occupants), income, and criminal record standards. If we had a lease length requirement, that would be part of the approval process.
The fine would probably be an escalating fine, $250 a month for three months, $500 a month for three months, and $1,000 a month until the tenant move out. So this LL would get by with only a $750 fine by moving in an unapproved tenant for three months.
If the fine was not paid in 30 days, it would be submitted to a lawyer to foreclose as quickly as possible. We have done this in the past, and legal fees escalate very quickly, and are more than the actual fine. A LL paid almost $5,000 in total on a $1,000 fine. Plus her own legal fees. It did not cost the HOA anything.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
