Tentant has signed contract but wants to pull out

I did... that's why I don't go around asking questions I know the answer to like:

Originally Posted by kathryn d
I wonder what a tenants reaction would be to "I don't want you to move in, I got a better application today" and then maybe add a few tears...

So you don't think the OP should ask any questions either?
It's obvious of what the answer is. It's in the RTA.

I honestly dont' know what the legal answer is, if the LL wants to pull out of the lease. Do you?
 
How ? :confused: When gettingg even would = making it fair :confused::confused:

I don't know how you conduct your rentals, but
We are legal. (I assume you probably are too, I'm not trying to cast any doubt here)

I'm sure some tenants don't see legal as fair.
Getting 'even' to me is receiving compensation.
That is fair.
 
You appear to be ignoring the fact that the tenant in question is not the customer at all, they are a PITA and they also had no care or "humanitarian perspective" whatsoever for the LL position or their financial inconvenience.

Like you said, what goes around comes around so look out tenant.

I was referring to Wylies tenant, the woman who recently separated
 
I was referring to Wylies tenant, the woman who recently separated

and that is fine - as the exception, not the rule.

Imagine what would ensue if people were allowed to pull out of contracts willy nilly because their situations change.

Sorry Mr Bank - I won't be paying my mortgage because my dog just had puppies

Sorry Mr Phone Company - I won't be paying my mobile contract because I found a better one.

Yes - in some situations we can afford to be compassionate because we are all human - but to allow someone out of a legal contract just "because they changed their mind" is not acceptable.
 
and that is fine - as the exception, not the rule.

Imagine what would ensue if people were allowed to pull out of contracts willy nilly because their situations change.

Sorry Mr Bank - I won't be paying my mortgage because my dog just had puppies

Sorry Mr Phone Company - I won't be paying my mobile contract because I found a better one.

Yes - in some situations we can afford to be compassionate because we are all human - but to allow someone out of a legal contract just "because they changed their mind" is not acceptable.

Agree 100%
 
Kathryn, I have had one or more IPs for over 30 years, and had less than a handful of problem tenants. Perhaps the type of tenants you have are very different to the type I have, and perhaps that shapes our perception.

To say that a tenant is lying when their lips move is just disappointing.

In this case, I say it is a case of having to wear the loss, but the poster's friend can try to minimise that loss by either finding a replacement tenant herself (will still have to pass muster for the PM and landlord), hoping the PM can find a replacement tenant quickly in which case she will lose a week or more plus advertising costs, or move in and see out the lease. That way she loses nothing.

i too have only had a couple of problem tenants over a long PI career and multiple properties. problem tenants are the exception, not the rule. Kathryn is obviously doing something wrong.
 
i too have only had a couple of problem tenants over a long PI career and multiple properties. problem tenants are the exception, not the rule. Kathryn is obviously doing something wrong.

I don't think she's doing anything wrong.
She just works in a different place, across a different demographic of people etc etc and on average, compared to the house in a capital cities which many of us appear to own and have to deal with.

I'm sure she does what she does well. But I'm not so sure that we do everything as badly or as wrong as she suggests :)
 
I had a similar incident for a flock of bats and didn't pursue them and got tenants in the next week.
Money isn't everything :D
 
I had a similar incident for a flock of bats and didn't pursue them and got tenants in the next week.
Money isn't everything :D

I can;t help thinking that in some cases, acting otherwise would be sort of the same thing as something like (please remember who you are dealing with, I never suggested my examples were very good)

Some kid bought a coke from our deli and then realised he didn't have busfare -

BAD LUCK KID. YOU'RE NOT RETURNING IT HERE, THE LAW SAYS I DON'T HAVE TO GIVE YOU A REFUND IF YOU CHANGE YOUR MIND.... HAHA BAD LUCK WALK HOME, I DON'T CARE, IT'S NOT MY FAULT. NEXT TIME BE MORE CAREFUL. I CAN'T GIVE EVERYONE A REFUND EVERY TIME EVERYONE CHANGES THEIR MIND.
SO BAD LUCK KID
 
I can;t help thinking that in some cases, acting otherwise would be sort of the same thing as something like (please remember who you are dealing with, I never suggested my examples were very good)

Some kid bought a coke from our deli and then realised he didn't have busfare -

BAD LUCK KID. YOU'RE NOT RETURNING IT HERE, THE LAW SAYS i DON;'T HAVE TO IF YOU CHANGE YOUR MIND.... WALK HOME, ID DON'T CARE, IT'S NOT MY FAULT.
Please explain?
 
Please explain?

The letter of the law states that a retailer has no obligation to give a refund simply on a change of mind. In the example, the kid accidentally overspent; the retailer doesn't HAVE TO refund the money and take the coke back. But what would any 'reasonable' person do?

jaycee, I think it's a good example.
 
Please explain?

I was agreeing with you - you simply use a bit of common sense...., like in your scenario and usually you find it's part of the "swings and roundabouts" of doing business and not the end of the world

Legally, a shopowner can tell a kid bad luck, no refund, I'll give you store credit - but who besides a d**k head would do that to an 11 yr old who just realised he spent his bus-fare and has other way of getting home if he doesn't get a refund for his coke. With all the justification in the world of how a business person is not there to fix everyone else's problems, how he has to make money to live also and how the law is on his side to protect him from being ripped off, he's still a d**k head.
 
I don't think she's doing anything wrong.
She just works in a different place, across a different demographic of people etc etc and on average, compared to the house in a capital cities which many of us appear to own and have to deal with.

I'm sure she does what she does well. But I'm not so sure that we do everything as badly or as wrong as she suggests :)

Thank you jaycee.

You are probably correct. We have the tenants, most on SS wouldn't even rent to. Most would never pass the credit check or past LL check.

About 10% of our 40 tenants are a problem.
10% are what we would consider perfect tenants.
80% will be fine most of the time, but have had late rent on occassion, or minor issues.

As soon as we get rid of a problem tenant, another one from that 80% pool is happy to take their place.

We accept this as part of the game.
Maybe that is why we have very little tolerance for misbehavior.

We have to take control really quickly. Our livlihood depends on it.

Believe it or not, we do have tenants, who want to come back and rent, after they have left :)
 
Thank you jaycee.

You are probably correct
. We have the tenants, most on SS wouldn't even rent to. Most would never pass the credit check or past LL check.

About 10% of our 40 tenants are a problem.
10% are what we would consider perfect tenants.
80% will be fine most of the time, but have had late rent on occassion, or minor issues.

As soon as we get rid of a problem tenant, another one from that 80% pool is happy to take their place.

We accept this as part of the game.
Maybe that is why we have very little tolerance for misbehavior.

We have to take control really quickly. Our livlihood depends on it.

Believe it or not, we do have tenants, who want to come back and rent, after they have left :)

Perhaps then you can stop tearing stirps off us every time we suggest how we do thigns here and tell us were are worng and say things like "good luck with your investing then"

:)

take care
 
I was agreeing with you - you simply use a bit of common sense...., like in your scenario and usually you find it's part of the "swings and roundabouts" of doing business and not the end of the world

Legally, a shopowner can tell a kid bad luck, no refund, I'll give you store credit - but who besides a d**k head would do that to an 11 yr old who just realised he spent his bus-fare and has other way of getting home if he doesn't get a refund for his coke. With all the justification in the world of how a business person is not there to fix everyone else's problems, how he has to make money to live also and how the law is on his side to protect him from being ripped off, he's still a d**k head.
I am a little slow sometimes :rolleyes:
 
Back
Top