Tenant violations and contract disputes in property management agreements

¶ … contract with a property management firm usually provides for various issues that are inherent in a real estate agreement. This will include the individual obliged to pay rent, who is the tenant, the commencement date, the address and the amount to be paid. This contract may be also be passed to real estate's firm for other purposes other than for residence including parking, storage, and business transactions.

A default usually occurs in instances when the tenant fails to follow the terms on the contract. Most common contracts are 6 months, 1 year or 2 years long. Some tenets violate the terms of the contract by moving out before the stipulated date while others move out without proper notice especially in contracts that continues on a month to month basis. In addition, the landlord might also violate the terms of the contract by getting the tenant out before the contract ends.

The other common violation of contract terms occurs when the tenant fails to meet the contracted move-out responsibilities. Contracts or lease agreements usually include clauses that spell out conditions under which the tenant will move out of the property. In the event that the tenant fails to adhere to these conditions requires them to pay a financial penalty to compensate the owner of the house when moving out. Many times the landlord will keep the security deposit in such instances. Moreover, when the tenant leaves the house in a worse state than they found it also results in a violation of the contract.

Contracts are legally binding and are enforceable. Therefore in case of one party violates the terms therein, the other party the other signing party is allowed to demand restitution or go to court.

Issue

It is critical to establish the ways in which violation of contract terms are most likely to occur and specifically in reference to the provided case.

The tenant falling to formally notify the landlord of continued stay is a deliberate violation of the contract terms. Here the tenant deliberately acknowledges that there was no attempt to consult the landlord in anyway what so ever on the renewal of lease contract. We have to establish the benefits associated with this option as the repercussions might be nonnegotiable and most likely to result in penalty.

The other hypothesis is that, the tenant made contact and actually verbally, by calling notified the landlord through the manager on the renewal, but the landlord, here represented by the real estate management forgot to factor it in. In this case, the truth is not established and there is lack of evidence of the communication and that it is the tenant's word against the landlords. Here also the tenant would be subjected to the penalties as stipulated by the contract terms.

Conclusion

The tenant has been given a 400 dollar penalty. It is only possible for him to plead with the management to waive the penalty. However, as discussed in the above paragraphs, it is challenging for the tenant to reverse such a decision as it is in respect to a legally binding contract. He should have done two things; First, he should have called earlier to inform the management of his intentions and most likely in writing. Second, as soon as he learnt of his out of town trip, he should have filled out the lease renewal form and submitted it to the property management office and third. It is important to note that the tenant relied on a phone call he made to the property management office. This phone call apparently was not recorded or even acknowledged by the office, a move that led to the imposition of 400 dollar penalty. It is also uncertain as to the extent, at which the phone call could have gone in deterring the penalty as the contract clearly stipulates that the form is the requirement in lease renewal. Nonetheless, according to the tenant, there was a significance associated with communication to the effect that he was unavailable but would return to follow procedure in renewing the lease.

Reference

Learning Annex Holdings, LLC v. Whitney Educ. Group, Inc., _ F. Supp. 2d _, No. 09 Civ. 4432 (SAS), 2011.

Professional Liability Agents Network. "Get it in Writting: Avoid Verbal Contracts ." www.vgic.com. June 2011. (accessed December 10, 2012).

Varney v. Ditmars, 111 N.E. 822,(N.Y. 1916).