Help With Lease (VA) - Fire Damage, Tenant shall fees Clause

[CarlitosBala]

These clauses are fairly common.

This doesn't read like a lease from a slumlord, it reads like a lease from a professional. It doesn't sound like this landlord would jerk you around when it comes to repairs, upkeep or other issues.

I imagine that if you pay rent on time, don't destroy or burn the place down, and you do your part, then it'll be just fine. It seems that you think this landlord is waiting for you do the most minimum trespass on the lease and its clauses in order to plan for their retirement, at your cost. That's paranoia and wouldn't hold up in court. This is a just a person trying to protect their investment.

Then again, never ever sign a contract you are not comfortable with.

[ForLoveOnly]

Originally Posted by delfrogo

My wife and I are considering renting a privately owned condo for two years in northern Virginia, thus we are not subject to the Virginia Residential landlord Tenant Act. We had some questions on three (4) things on the lease that we still have not managed to work out.

First is the fire or casualty damage clause: I had concerns with the bold part.

So basically if the landlord believes we caused a fire (accidental) and say we burned down the condo to the ground. We would be liable to pay rent throughout our 2 year lease? Even if we had no place to live in? What can protect us from having to pay rent for 24 months? I mean they would have their insurance money plus the monthly rent for 24 months. That seems a bit crazy, I can maybe understand not getting our security deposit back, but how can this be legal?

No.

In this first section of this clause can they legally put that we are to pay any legal fee's? What if we win the fight in court battle? What are your opinions on this? What is a reasonable attorney fee? $20k!? This clause is pretty scary to us.

More than likely that would happen anyway if a judge rules in the LL's favor. If, in your favor, the LL would probably be ordered to pay yours. The judge would also determine what amount is reasonable.

This is the last part of the lease we had concerns with. We have no problem letting the landlord know that we may be gone for more than 14 days. However, if for whatever reason they claim that they never got the letter or text message stating that we would be gone for more than 14 days. Can we come back from vacation one day to an empty house with all our stuff sold or gone? How would they even be able to prove that 14 days has passed?

This is a very reasonable request. IMO, this is also one of the most poorly worded codes that leave too many tenant's open to dishonest LL's. ALWAYS give notice in writing and get written proof of acknowledgement from the LL. The burden of proof belongs to the tenant in this situation. Many people believe this is not enforceable if you are paying your rent on time, but I believe it is, (under Va common laws) since it is in your lease.

How is it legal to waive my right to any trail by jury? This doesn't seem like it would hold up in court.

You may be exempt from the VRLTA, however, you are protected by the Virginia Landlord/Tenant Common Law. Just because the LL put those clauses in the lease does not mean they are legally binding. I suggest you obtain a copy of the VRLTA Handbook and read the common laws that govern VRLTA exemption. Specifically the codes pertaining to the specific clauses that concern you the most.

You can always have an attorney go over your lease with you before you sign it.

[NoMoreSnowForMe]

Originally Posted by delfrogo

My wife and I are considering renting a privately owned condo for two years in northern Virginia, thus we are not subject to the Virginia Residential landlord Tenant Act. We had some questions on three (4) things on the lease that we still have not managed to work out.

First is the fire or casualty damage clause: I had concerns with the bold part.




So basically if the landlord believes we caused a fire (accidental) and say we burned down the condo to the ground. We would be liable to pay rent throughout our 2 year lease? Even if we had no place to live in? What can protect us from having to pay rent for 24 months? I mean they would have their insurance money plus the monthly rent for 24 months. That seems a bit crazy, I can maybe understand not getting our security deposit back, but how can this be legal?




In this first section of this clause can they legally put that we are to pay any legal fee's? What if we win the fight in court battle? What are your opinions on this? What is a reasonable attorney fee? $20k!? This clause is pretty scary to us.



This is the last part of the lease we had concerns with. We have no problem letting the landlord know that we may be gone for more than 14 days. However, if for whatever reason they claim that they never got the letter or text message stating that we would be gone for more than 14 days. Can we come back from vacation one day to an empty house with all our stuff sold or gone? How would they even be able to prove that 14 days has passed?




How is it legal to waive my right to any trail by jury? This doesn't seem like it would hold up in court.

I wouldn't sign this lease, either. If you really want the place, you can negotiate on the clauses you aren't comfortable with. If they won't change them, don't rent the place.

I agree with you that just because some clause is standard in an area, doesn't mean I'm going to want it in MY contract, or that it's even legal. In CA, anyway, if a clause in a contract is contrary to the law, then the clause is unenforceable.

The contract I used had clauses that dealt with similar issues, but was more fair, IMO. If you want to look at it for ideas on proposing how to change the clauses you aren't comfortable with, send me an email thought the CD contact option, and I can email you a copy of a blank contract. I tried to attach it to this post, but I can't figure out how to save it in one of the allowed formats.

I admit I didn't read your entire thread, so don't know if you already made your decisions. Good luck to you!

[Electrician4you]

Originally Posted by delfrogo

I've been reading a bit since working on this lease. No one can deny protections if it's the law. Obnoxious Lease Clauses. Most of those clauses are things people have concerns with i.e., waiver of trial by jury and tenant agrees to pay all attorney fees and legal cost. Now in regards to paying $2000 in rent for 2 years, if the condo does burn to the ground. I'm working on contacting my renters insurance to make sure they cover rent. This is my biggest issue, because I would go bankrupt if I had to potentially pay $48k in rent + any additional damages to the structure. I've never had a fire, but they do happen. Especially in older buildings. I don't want to leave things to chance. If we can't come to an agreement, they are out a good renter I guess. We are just a bit paranoid from bad past experiences.
.

Nothing wrong with wanting to protecting yourself. As for me I have really very little leeway on my leases anymore. I have a buddy who is a RE lawyer in my state and I paid him to write up property specific lease agreement for each of my properties. So I know my clauses are in compliance with the law. I did it partly because the boiler plate off the shelf leases were too wide range and just were harder to interpret correctly. Partly due to 20 years of LL and all sorts of things that over time became good learning experiences I decided to do this. I carry renters insurance with high limits for the exact reason of anything is possible. Yes it costs me more but it gives me place of mind also. I always give people plenty of time to read and understand what they are signing. If they don't want to rent that's fine. I'll move to the next applicant.

The clause only goes in effect if you are the cause of the fire. But ultimately if you don't feel comfortable don't sign the lease. That is by far your best protection. But most leases will have those type of clauses. And I doubt most LLs will strike them out. Especially if they are not out of compliance with state law.
Losing a good prospective or existing tenant is never a positive experience. But in some cases its best for both parties not to do business if they cannot agree. Good luck with your search.