Increasing $25 for the existing tenant in newly acquired property ?
- Thread starter JohnHenry
- Start date
And you were ok with this when you settled the purchase? Why?
no there was no lease sign or contract because it was done as private arrangement.
Private arrangement isn't the same as vacant possession. Why were you willing to settle when clearly it wasn't vacant?
Right now, if I were you, I'd issue a notice to vacate, so the clock starts ticking, and offer the tenant a new fixed lease. If they don't want to, get them out and find a tenant who will. Without a fixed lease, parts of your landlords insurance (rent cover, for example) are probably invalid. Is there a registered rental bond? Condition report? Anything?
Seriously, what do you do, look out for these 'weird' situations just to test your luck?
What Alex said. It's not kosher and you need to sort it out. Heaven help you if the tenant suddenly claims they have a ten year lease in place at 100 dollars per week.
Does your sales contract say you will be given vacant possession or does it say the property is tenanted? And if it says tenanted does it say month to month?
Does your sales contract say you will be given vacant possession or does it say the property is tenanted? And if it says tenanted does it say month to month?
That wouldn't work, since the current owner hasn't signed anything. Though a question for PMs out there: what happens if there is no written agreement anywhere? Not just going off a periodic lease into month to month, but not having a lease at all? How is rent determined?
The sales contract no longer matters, since it's already settled. Can't really sue the vendor now unless they hid the tenant and their furniture in a closet during final inspection.
Really? How do you know that? Because the vendor said it to John? And which the vendor might now deny saying?
Two things. 1. It is at least some evidence as to on what terms the tenant is living in the house. 2. If it says vacant possession there is at least some hope of suing the vendor if it all goes badly.
Because John said he hasn't signed anything, and he is now the owner. Having sold, the vendor has no right to rent out the property, nor bind JohnH in contract. If I sign a lease, without your agreement, that you will pay my rent, will you be forced to abide by the lease? If I sell my house to you, can I then go and rent it to someone after it settles and goes into your name?
I would have thought JohnH's willingness to settle implies waiving of the vacant possession clause.
I wonder where the advisors were in all of this? Any decent lawyer should have explained the potential issues.
I was muttering the same words when I just read Alex's post.
John - you need to keep things simple. It seems that every post you create is about a sticky situation that you've either found yourself in or about to embark upon.
Put a lease in please with these tentants - this is a business, treat it as such.
Cheers
Jamie
Whats the chance this is your tenant JH.....................
http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies.cfm?t=1941797
2 forums looking at the same issue from different POV.
Very funny if it is!!!
http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies.cfm?t=1941797
2 forums looking at the same issue from different POV.
Very funny if it is!!!
If the lease was signed before the property was sold then John is bound by the lease. It is irrelevant whether John knew about the lease or was even deliberately misled by the vendor (although he may have a claim against the vendor).
Maybe maybe not. It would likely all blow up into he said she said. Does the contract say that waivers must be in writing? I dunno.
In any event it will probably be fine. Just needs to be tidied up. B
Funny if true !
I would be interested in a (non-advice) legal opinion on this. Anyone? Yes, a fixed lease by the previous owner binds the new owner per the Department of Fair Trading. Is non-disclosure of a lease sufficient to rescind the contract of sale, or does acknowledging the tenant by settling imply waiving the vacant possession clause and/or accepting any current leases?
Yes, it probably will be. But none of this was necessary. A few more phone calls prior to settlement would have prevented all of this. I've seen a similar situation. The previous owner rented the property at below market rent because they knew the tenant. A special buyers condition was put in stating that said either the tenant signs a new fixed lease with the new owner, or it's vacant possession.
Has to be.............same $25 increase, new owner, paid cash, no lease, previous owner was a friend.
Look out JH, Fair Trading is on their way to the Gong.........................
.Your no cynic, just more observant than most!!!!!
John is Alex for sure.............................same topic posts in both forums started by both users.
http://somersoft.com/forums/showthread.php?t=79541
and
http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies.cfm?t=1931095
also
http://somersoft.com/forums/showthread.php?t=79334
and
http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies.cfm?t=1925697
not as funny now...
