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.
i think you will have a hard time to break the lease on these grounds. I wonder why you don't want to disclose the amount of theft and what is stolen.....makes me see a red flag go up for what the item can be.
How can you proof it was there and now it isn't? That is what a judge will ask you to proof...
Second, as others have stated you should file a claim towards your renters insurance and since you didn't have it, you probably will loose out.
By saying that it was there and now it is not, is not proof in court who stole it! Even if you are totally right, the burden of proof is on you when you accuse a certain person or company and you have no witness so it is an assumption on your part! What if we all get charged and convicted on assumptions....?
To break the lease you need to have proof they did something unlawful which is not the case.
One if my kids is in College and came home for Winterbreak and always takes everything of value with her since that is not insured and recommended by the College for dorms and also for people living off campus!
I understand how you feel...our child had stuff stolen from her dorm, years ago and without proof we knew we had no case....either you have cameras installed or you eat the loss, because you have no proof.
The first sentence is rational. The second is a redundant and irrelevant generalization.
I was being a little facetious. I am still a little bitter about losing my $1280 deposit for no reason back in the day. But sometimes college housing can be a horrible experience.
You have two issues and they will be viewd as two by any judge.
1. the theft is one issue and in the end, the property owner is responsible since it occured while the actors were under the property owners control (fixing the carpet wtih entry by them not you). How it normally is handled, with or without renters insurance, property owners insurance, contractors insurance, whatever, in the end, they are responsible.
2. can you break your lease over this? Not likely and even less likely that a judge will let you break the lease under the circumstances. You omitted everything about how the property owne/managers is interacting with you on this. So what is their response and what are they doing since that will play a big part in getting ajudge to litent to the issue and not just tossing the request to terminate the lease.
For all those wondering, a check was missing for a grand theft amount.
A check had a name on it.
It was deposited into an ATM machine at a bank--both of which were identified.
The workers were in the apartment and a day later the check was deposited.
I'm waiting to match the name written on the check and those of workers.
Any more ?
Most atms have cameras on them and the bank may have liability since it was a deposit. The bank can simply refuse to clear the deposit. If that fails you can sue your landlord/worker/his company whoever has money. Off topic but I would not give up on the theft yet.
More on topic, you will have to take your chances, on whether you can break the lease. There aren't hard laws about every situation. I would check with a lawyer, if a lawyer cost too much money check into those websites where you pay $30/$40 for an answer to a simple question. I have no way to know if this is legit legal advice but its something to look into.
by being "responsible" what could it mean if not breaking the lease (under breach of "implied warranty of inhabitability", "quiet enjoyment")? I'm not too concerned about the monetary loss--I'm sure the bank will do what they usually do with a relatively small sum.
the managers themselves want proof--proof of the image of the check to see if THEY can investigate it themselves. i'm not in favor of that because once the evidence is in their hands, they can drop the matter by simply saying "there's nothing more to be done." Therefore, i'm having the cops investigate the matter.
@jdm
yes, i used to work at the bank so i know precisely how atm's work. like i mentioned, the atm and the branch themselves were located with respective ID's. checks nowadays have so much security, it's almost impossible to eliminate any paper trails.
would it be illegal for me to administer a boycott among all the renters in the building to not renew their leases for next year?
by being "responsible" what could it mean if not breaking the lease (under breach of "implied warranty of inhabitability", "quiet enjoyment")? I'm not too concerned about the monetary loss--I'm sure the bank will do what they usually do with a relatively small sum.
the managers themselves want proof--proof of the image of the check to see if THEY can investigate it themselves. i'm not in favor of that because once the evidence is in their hands, they can drop the matter by simply saying "there's nothing more to be done." Therefore, i'm having the cops investigate the matter.
@jdm
yes, i used to work at the bank so i know precisely how atm's work. like i mentioned, the atm and the branch themselves were located with respective ID's. checks nowadays have so much security, it's almost impossible to eliminate any paper trails.
would it be illegal for me to administer a boycott among all the renters in the building to not renew their leases for next year?
There is nothing in this scenario which comes even close to a breach of habitability nor that of the covenant of quiet enjoyment, neither of these points of law you obviously understand.
You surely are joking about promoting a lease renewal boycott by other tenants? Did you talk to an attorney today as you said you were going to do? I suggest you do so as quickly as possible before you forge ahead with any harebrained ideas such as this one and you land in jail.
by being "responsible" what could it mean if not breaking the lease (under breach of "implied warranty of inhabitability", "quiet enjoyment")?
As you will see posted many Many MANY times, these terms are not ususally what a person thinks they mean. I think you may have interpreted these legal doctrines contrary to their common and specific law meaning based on the mis conception over the use of some words and phrases in explainations that are not the accepted judicial meanings.
But it sounds like the management of the location is taking this seruiously and attempting to do what is necessary and that ususally is the first thing a judge will want to see. What have you dicsussed with management over this an what demand have you presented to them? No judge will consider a lease termination without a demand for action.
Remember, you most likely have no legal right under these circumstances to terminate your lease without penalty. Any non penalty or compensatable lease termination will probably have to be by a judges order based on the circumstances.
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.
