problems with tenants

[Semidevil]

I'll probably consult a lawyer soon, but I still want to see if any one had any experience in this situation.

I own a single family home and have been using the home as an investment property. For the past 3 years, I have rented it out to a family. Since December of last year, they have been late on their payments every single month and as of now, they are having a lot of trouble paying. my management company is asking me if I want to evict him.

Question:
He currently has a contract with me until April 2012. If I evict him this month, can I sue him directly for monthly rent on the remaining of the contract? we are looking around 1400/month for about 7 to 8 months. Does evicting him nullify the contract, or does he still have the duty to fulfill the contract?

 

[LucJoe]

I'll probably consult a lawyer soon, but I still want to see if any one had any experience in this situation.

I own a single family home and have been using the home as an investment property. For the past 3 years, I have rented it out to a family. Since December of last year, they have been late on their payments every single month and as of now, they are having a lot of trouble paying. my management company is asking me if I want to evict him.

Question:
He currently has a contract with me until April 2012. If I evict him this month, can I sue him directly for monthly rent on the remaining of the contract? we are looking around 1400/month for about 7 to 8 months. Does evicting him nullify the contract, or does he still have the duty to fulfill the contract?

Can't collect if evicted. You might be able to get back rent tho..

edit: shouldn't this be obvious? You can't say "Get out, and you owe me $10k rent for the rest of the year"

 

[BassBomb]

I would think evicting means you want him gone and therefore contract is done... but I know nothing about this subject matter and therefore I should have not even posted this.

 

[Jeeebus]

Question:
He currently has a contract with me until April 2012. If I evict him this month, can I sue him directly for monthly rent on the remaining of the contract? we are looking around 1400/month for about 7 to 8 months. Does evicting him nullify the contract, or does he still have the duty to fulfill the contract?

You're under a duty to mitigate your damages, meaning you need to make a reasonable effort to rent it to someone else.

So, lets say you can rent it same month you kick him out for $1000/mo. and he is currently paying $1500/mo. Your damages are now $500/mo. for the contract period.

Ultimately, the language of your lease is going to control.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

I can't imagine being able to collect rent after evicting them, but it's not something I've looked into.

 

[nageov3t]

if they can't even pay back rent, how are you expecting them to magic up some money to pay future rent?

 

[Gibson486]

you sue for damages caused by their actions. If you evict, those damages are due to your actions. You decided to break the contract, not them.

 

[Texashiker]

Question:
He currently has a contract with me until April 2012. If I evict him this month, can I sue him directly for monthly rent on the remaining of the contract? we are looking around 1400/month for about 7 to 8 months. Does evicting him nullify the contract, or does he still have the duty to fulfill the contract?

Why do you want to be a butt-munch for? If the people are having money problems, why do you want to make it harder for them?

If there is an issue, get some other renters in there.

 

[Krynj]

I'll probably consult a lawyer soon, but I still want to see if any one had any experience in this situation.

I own a single family home and have been using the home as an investment property. For the past 3 years, I have rented it out to a family. Since December of last year, they have been late on their payments every single month and as of now, they are having a lot of trouble paying. my management company is asking me if I want to evict him.

Question:
He currently has a contract with me until April 2012. If I evict him this month, can I sue him directly for monthly rent on the remaining of the contract? we are looking around 1400/month for about 7 to 8 months. Does evicting him nullify the contract, or does he still have the duty to fulfill the contract?

No. You are terminating the contract when you kick him out. You are terminating it, not him. He's having trouble paying his bills, but most states give you a few weeks after the due date before it's considered late. If you want to terminate your agreement, and throw him out on the street, he's not obligated to fulfill his end of a nullified contract.

Unless of course your contract/lease says you have the right to evict him whenever you feel like it, yet he still owes you rent for a place he's been legally ordered to vacate.

 

[CrackRabbit]

you sue for damages caused by their actions. If you evict, those damages are due to your actions. You decided to break the contract, not them.

Technically the tenants have already broken contract with Semidevil by not paying rent on time.

Semidevil, if you want the tenants out it would be a very good idea to consult a lawyer that has expertise in that area of law as it varies greatly from state to state. Depending on the laws it may be more of a pain to evict them than to get late rent every month until their lease is up. Once up you can choose to not renew it with fewer consequences.

<-Not remotely a lawyer.

 

[sygyzy]

The fact the OP is asking this question (getting future rent from a deadbeat tenant) shows the level of intelligence we are working with here.

 

[Jeeebus]

No. You are terminating the contract when you kick him out. You are terminating it, not him. He's having trouble paying his bills, but most states give you a few weeks after the due date before it's considered late. If you want to terminate your agreement, and throw him out on the street, he's not obligated to fulfill his end of a nullified contract.

I just want to confirm that you know you're speaking out of your ass, right?

 

[Chrono]

watch out. check the laws in your state.

 

[Gibson486]

Technically the tenants have already broken contract with Semidevil by not paying rent on time.

Semidevil, if you want the tenants out it would be a very good idea to consult a lawyer that has expertise in that area of law as it varies greatly from state to state. Depending on the laws it may be more of a pain to evict them than to get late rent every month until their lease is up. Once up you can choose to not renew it with fewer consequences.

<-Not remotely a lawyer.

sure, but the damages are from past due rent, not future payments that will not be paid b/c the landlord terminated the contract. If the tenants officially broke the lease (they write a letter for intent of breaking the lease), you can only hold them accountable for the months the unit is unoccupied after the departure.

Also, you are correct. He may be better off just getting late payments than eviction. Eviction can get ugly. So much that most lawyers will tell landlords to give them money to leave instead of going through the eviction process.

 

[Krynj]

I just want to confirm that you know you're speaking out of your ass, right?

You're more than welcome to prove me wrong.

 

[Gibson486]

I just want to confirm that you know you're speaking out of your ass, right?

No he's not. He can only sue for damages. Future rent can't be considered damaged because he can easily find a replacement tenant. If he finds a replacement, there are no damages to collect. Landlords can't double dip in most states. that is, they cannot have someone break a lease and expect them to pay for the remainder of the contract while they found another tenant.

 

[xSauronx]

if they can't even pay back rent, how are you expecting them to magic up some money to pay future rent?

this is what i was wondering. he isnt giving you money now like he should, even if the lease entitles the OP to some kind of compensation, its probably not worth going after.

i say evict the family and put out ads to rent it again. *shrug*

 

[Jeeebus]

No he's not. He can only sue for damages. Future rent can't be considered damaged because he can easily find a replacement tenant. If he finds a replacement, there are no damages to collect. Landlords can't double dip in most states. that is, they cannot have someone break a lease and expect them to pay for the remainder of the contract while they found another tenant.

See what I said above. Landlord needs to mitigate his damages, so if he can reasonably rent to someone at or above the lease rent, then yes, he has no damages. If the rental market has tanked, however, and he can only get half of what he was renting to the original tenant, then yes, generally speaking he can get that difference in rent as damages (this does not take into account issues with collection, which is usually why landlords don't bother chasing down deadbeat tenants for future rent).

Krynj is of the belief that if you evict someone still under a lease term, you have no rights to chase down future rent. This is nonsense.

 

[Gibson486]

See what I said above. Landlord needs to mitigate his damages, so if he can reasonably rent to someone at or above the lease rent, then yes, he has no damages. If the rental market has tanked, however, and he can only get half of what he was renting to the original tenant, then yes, generally speaking he can get that difference in rent as damages (this does not take into account issues with collection, which is usually why landlords don't bother chasing down deadbeat tenants for future rent).

Krynj is of the belief that if you evict someone still under a lease term, you have no rights to chase down future rent. This is nonsense.

You can't. If the landlord broke the contract, he is creating the future damages, not the tenant. The landlord cannot chase down money on a contract that he broke.

 

[BurnItDwn]

Your best solution is to hire a "tough guy" or "wise guy" to ruff the tenants up a little bit, it's also very illegal.

In reality you will need to evict, and kill most of that $$$ good bye, they probably have no $$$ so even with a court order, you won't likely see any $$$ from them.

 

[guyver01]

y'all know jeebus is a lawyer right?

you're arguing law with a lawyer

 

[Jeeebus]

You can't. If the landlord broke the contract, he is creating the future damages, not the tenant. The landlord cannot chase down money on a contract that he broke.

I don't think we're talking about the same thing. I'm only referring to a situation where the landlord evicts the tenant for whatever reason allowable by the lease - failure to pay rent, keeping a pet llama, etc.

The landlord is not "breaking" the contract - he is enforcing his rights under the lease.

Since Krynj seems to think otherwise on this issue, I'll use his state, Maine, as an example. Here's the statute for Maine, saying that if you're evicted, you may still be on the hook for future rent payments. This is very basic contract law.

Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 6010-A:

1. Scope of section. If a tenant unjustifiably moves from the premises prior to the effective date for termination of the tenant's tenancy and defaults in payment of rent, or if the tenant is removed for failure to pay rent or any other breach of a lease or tenancy at will agreement, the landlord may recover rent and damages except amounts which the landlord could mitigate in accordance with this section, unless the landlord has expressly agreed to accept a surrender of the premises and end the tenant's liability. Except as the context may indicate otherwise, this section applies to the liability of a tenant under a lease or tenancy at will agreement or the tenant's assignee.

2. Measure of recovery. In any claim against a tenant for rent and damages, or for either, the amount of recovery shall be reduced by the net rent obtainable by reasonable efforts to rerent the premises. “Reasonable efforts” means those steps which the landlord would have taken to rent the premises if they had been vacated in due course, provided that those steps are in accordance with local rental practice for similar properties. In the absence of proof that greater net rent is obtainable by reasonable efforts to rerent the premises, the tenant shall be credited with rent actually received under a rerental agreement minus expenses incurred as a reasonable incident of acts under subsection 4, including a fair proportion of any cost of remodeling or other capital improvements. In any case, the landlord may recover, in addition to rent and other elements of damage, all reasonable expenses of listing and advertising incurred in rerenting and attempting to rerent, except as taken into account in computing the net rent. If the landlord has used the premises as part of reasonable efforts to rerent, under subsection 4, paragraph C, the tenant shall be credited with the reasonable value of the use of the premises, which shall be presumed to be equal to the rent recoverable from the defendant unless the landlord proves otherwise. If the landlord has other similar premises for rent and receives an offer from a prospective tenant not obtained by the defendant, it shall be reasonable for the landlord to rent the other premises for his own account in preference to those vacated by the defaulting tenant.

3. Burden of proof. The landlord must allege and prove that he has made efforts to comply with this section. The tenant has the burden of proving that the efforts of the landlord were not reasonable, that the landlord's refusal of any offer to rent the premises or a part of the premises was not reasonable, that any terms and conditions upon which the landlord has in fact rerented were not reasonable and that any temporary use by the landlord was not part of reasonable efforts to mitigate in accordance with subsection 4, paragraph C. The tenant shall also have the burden of proving the amount that could have been obtained by reasonable efforts to mitigate by rerenting.

4. Acts privileged in mitigation of rent or damages. The following acts by the landlord shall not defeat his right to recover rent and damages and shall not constitute an acceptance of surrender of the premises:

A. Entry, with or without notice, for the purpose of inspecting, preserving, repairing, remodeling and showing the premises;

B. Rerenting the premises or a part of the premises, with or without notice, with rent applied against the damages caused by the original tenant and in reduction of rent accruing under the original lease or tenancy at will agreement;

C. Use of the premises by the landlord until such time as rerenting at a reasonable rent is practical, not to exceed one year, if the landlord gives prompt written notice to the tenant that the landlord is using the premises pursuant to this section and that he will credit the tenant with the reasonable value of the use of the premises to the landlord for such a period; and

D. Any other act which is reasonably subject to interpretation as being in mitigation of rent or damages and which does not unequivocally demonstrate an intent to release the defaulting tenant.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

I'll probably consult a lawyer soon, but I still want to see if any one had any experience in this situation.

I own a single family home and have been using the home as an investment property. For the past 3 years, I have rented it out to a family. Since December of last year, they have been late on their payments every single month and as of now, they are having a lot of trouble paying. my management company is asking me if I want to evict him.

Question:
He currently has a contract with me until April 2012. If I evict him this month, can I sue him directly for monthly rent on the remaining of the contract? we are looking around 1400/month for about 7 to 8 months. Does evicting him nullify the contract, or does he still have the duty to fulfill the contract?

Where do you live that eviction happens the same month you initiate it?

 

[Krynj]

Well then. I will happily admit that I was wrong.

 

[NetWareHead]

This is why you define this sort of crap under the lease. Here is an excerpt from one of my leases I have my tenants sign.

"After eviction, the Tenant shall pay Rent for the remainder of the Lease or until Apartment is re-rented. If the Apartment if re-rented for an amount that is less than the Rent due under this Lease, Tenant will pay the difference between the Rent the Tenant was paying and the new rent, through the end of the Term of this Lease. If the Apartment is rented for an amount in excess of the Rent under this Lease, the Tenant is not entitled to the excess rent.

Tenant shall also be responsible for all reasonable expenses incurred in preparing the Apartment for a new tenant and the commission paid to a broker or agent for re-rental to a new tenant."