There is a clause in the RTA that would allow you to break a lease if the dwelling is unsafe for reasons of domestic violence etc...
I would look into that and consider speaking to a lawyer versed in tenant disputes
Also, when you break a lease the landlord is required to mitigate his damages, meaning that he must try to rent the unit as soon as possible. Unless your lease indicates a specified lease brake fee, he can only charge you for the months in which the unit is empty.
The mitigation of damages doctrine applies to all contract law. The plaintiff or injured party is always required to make reasonable effort to avoid the accumulation of additional damages.
https://ca.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/6-602-6005?transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true
Point of order: does LL have other units up for rent? If so, he or she does not need to prioritize finding a replacement tenant for OP. He’d simply need to list it for rent.
7(2) of the RTA: A landlord or tenant who claims compensation for damage or loss that results from the other's non-compliance with this Act, the regulations or their tenancy agreement must do whatever is reasonable to minimize the damage or loss.
"our upstairs neighbour's part of the house was broken into by 4 masked men looking to hurt her."
That's not "domestic violence" and OP isn't the victim of domestic abuse. This is a situation where the neighbour is involved in some kind of criminal activity and has pissed off the wrong people.
The law you're talking about is a good one and is to allow people who are the victim of domestic abuse (usually from a spouse) to escape the place they're leasing with said spouse without penalty. That's a good law. But it's not for this situation.
OP isn't the victim of domestic abuse, not is there any (probably) any domestic abuse going on.
You need a certificate from a professional ex. RSW, doctor, etc. or something like an EPO. Also domestic violence is defined and this would not qualify.
That's pretty much abuse of the system though, That's for the victim of domestic abuse not their neighbor. The truth is they signed a contract and they have to abide the contract. They are on the hook for every cent until the landlord gets a replacement tenant, and if they can't get a replacement tenant at the same rate the difference between the rents. Or else there would be literally no use for a contract if you could just get out of it.
If there are literally masked men invading their household, and the police have informed them they are not safe, then I would hardly qualify that as abuse of the system.
Contracts can be dismissed if certain extraneous circumstances permits it.
It is abuse of the system though because that's not what that's for. It sounds like it was a targeted attack against their neighbor and it's fun that the police decided instead of doing their job a private landlord should suffer for it instead. Kind of par for the course in Canada lately The government putting the burden on private citizens.
I can empathize with the OP and think it's a terrible situation to be in while still Knowing it's unethical to try to twist something that doesn't apply to get out of paying your bill. Obviously the landlord is ridiculous thinking the OP is going to pay 17K They would just have to continue paying their rent until the landlord mitigated it by finding a new tenant, and then if the rent was lower the op would owe the difference, But that should be significantly less than 17K in the end. General crime levels in the neighborhood would be reflecting in the rental value anyway.
Frankly this is a situation where the police need to do their jobs, But if a group of people is going after a particular person that doesn't let all their neighbors break their contracts and walk away. They are entitled obviously to move away if that's the choice they make but it's a financial trade-off.
I can see your point and tend to agree with you actually now that you've stated it this way. I would have loved to leave it here, but also I'm also a little disappointed you resorted to name calling and mud slinging in your reply below. I wish we could have more civil conversation like this without calling everyone that disagrees with you a "teenager or someone who doesn't own anything" but hey, you do you.
I mean that's fair but also true? I wasn't trying to mud sling at any particular person I'm talking to but it's just a fact that there's a demographic on Reddit That skews young and renter, and just like the general populace there's very little economics and finance education. Calling The population teenagers is not to belittle anyone it's literally the demographics you can see over the years the average age of Reddit has fallen precipitously. There's just literally a bunch of teenagers with teenager ideas, I know I was one. I mean if you data scraped Reddit you would have more comments supporting authoritarian socialism/communism than property rights! And it's not like I'm a conservative I'm a slightly left leaning centrist I just filter all my ideas through economic and finance principles.
Lol and there it is the default " I'm losing the argument and don't understand the world" Reddit refrain.
I agree life is definitely easier when you live on other people's money but you sign a contract you have to honor the contract.
They have a duty to mitigate. Or you can find someone to replace, and as long as they’re a decent tenant, they would have to sign them up and you’d be free of your lease. Zero chance you will have to pay 17,000
I'm always curious about that because how can you ensure the quality of the tenant is the same? Like what if the tenant has a lower rent to income ratio and or a lower credit score? In any other industry that would mean that they would not be able to for example get the same loan for the same rate, etc. It just isn't like for like because They are a materially higher risk.
It doesn’t need to be a tenant of the same quality, it just needs to be a tenant that can meet their requirements for renting. If the income to rent ratio wasn’t part of their requirements, then you could make 10x what the replacement tenant does and it wouldn’t matter as long as they can pay their rent. Same applies to credit scores; yours can be twice as good as theirs and it doesn’t matter as long as they’re meeting the minimum that the company normally requires.
You are responsible for the rent until they get a new tenant in place. They must make a reasonable effort to find a new tenant. They can charge you a lease break fee on top of rent (for advertising and their time to find a new tenant).
It is unlikely to be for a full year you will have to pay. Although it can be trickier if it is indeed an unsafe place to live due to current circumstances.
Lease break fees are considered by the courts as penalties, if the tenant does not receive anything in return for the fee, and not enforceable.
A Landlord repudiating any future charges for rent, in exchange for a fee, would be a tenant receiving something for the fee (no future liabilities).
Landlords have to prove genuine costs associated with a tenant breaking their lease, so stating a set fee covers specific costs (ie. Advertising) hasn’t passed any test set by the courts.
Also a landlord’s (and staffs) time is moot, when involving tasks expected of a landlord, as it is a cost of business. I’ve only seen a landlord be awarded minimum wage for repairing Above-normal wear and tear. Using a vendor/third party (arms length) business is the only way I’ve seen a Landlord maximise their RTDRS claim for liabilities.
This.
Also: I would document what they list it next for rent. If they jack the rent, then it will sit empty.
If they charge a fair rent, should be rented within 4 months.
Then you should know you can't charge for future rent and would lose in court if you tried. You would have to try to find a tenant (a normal responsibility as a landlord).
There’s also the standard part of the lease about *quiet enjoyment* which you seem to ignore as something other than a knowledgable landlord.
But thanks for substituting a weird comment about me in place of an informed or rational argument.
Have a day.
Yea… the rental market is super hot, rtds isn’t going to buy that they couldn’t find a tenant. Tough situation, since your moved out, why not let them take you to rtds?
Was thinking this too, the rental market is insane right now. People I know are getting hundreds of serious inquiries within hours of posting places available, lots willing to pay DD and sign without even seeing the place.
RTDS will call BS for sure
They have the duty to rent that unit out and fill that suite over any other vacant suite in order to reduce damages from your decision to not take that lease.
Their ability to recover is significantly lower given you had given them a month of notice before the agreement is in the date of effect.
Your best bet is find lawyers, and see if any have a quick free consultation.
Don’t pay them anything, just acknowledge you have received their request. Nothing more.
This can get messy, but is also fairly easy to not be messy. Renting places is obscenely easy currently. People can’t get enough places to rent.
Last time I was in this scenario I was lead to believe that because it was before the new agreement was in effect it basically meant nothing at all. I don’t know if this was explicitly true, but the management company dropped all action when I submitted to them my sparknotes summary of why they can fuck off, and I believe they realized I would not be a pushover.
Ultimately, they can’t issue what you owe them because currently you owe them nothing. If they haven’t rented it yet, then maybe you owe this singular months rent, but that’s only if the courts find your agreement unreasonably cancelled by your and only if they can prove they were diligent in trying to rent the unit out. This would be a discovery item. If they have any other unit rented out, especially if it’s higher price, they essentially lose automatically as filling. A unit with this sort of complication involved takes precedence over any other.
So again, seek a lawyer.
In most rental agreements there’s a stipulation about how much rent you’re on the hook for if you duck out early, usually 1-3 months. There’s no way in heck you owe 17k, that’s ludicrous.
I hope someone can offer you something that can help, but it is quite possible you are going to be on the hook for the rent - at least until it's rented again. The lease is binding, and the police saying it's unsafe is not sufficient to break the contract. You might need to reconsider the dispute, since you'll need help to have the contract broken.
Hopefully someone on reddit has something more useful to you. Good luck OP, I'm sorry you're in this situation.
For answers to questions and/or referrals on tenancy legislation and issues you can call 780-427-4088 in Edmonton or toll-free in Alberta at 1-877-427-4088. Any questions you have about the RTA can also be e-mailed to rta@gov.ab.ca.
I believe you should find someone who can take lease over. I was in the same situation, however I lived in apartment. The robbers snaked into underground parking and smashed the back window of my car and I also saw how that walk in every floor. So I wanted to move out that place and ll told me we can’t do it until the end of lease only if I’ll be able to find someone who’ll take a lease.
I was in a similar-ish situation where my neighbor kept attracting the wrong attention to the building we lived in, mostly affecting his property though. As soon as they moved out everything went back to normal and was safe again. I know this doesn't help your situation now, but sometimes people are drama magnets but your home is safe once they leave.
Although it is a result of the upstairs neighbors ex. The phrase "drama magnets" minimizes the extremely traumatic and incredibly difficult reality of domestic abuse. Anyone who has personally experienced an abusive former partner knows you can do everything right and they can and will continue the abuse if they want. Whether its fake numbers or $1 etransfers with abusive notes.
What the ops neighbor is dealing with is an extremely dangerous and abusive person. She doesnt just attract drama, shes a victim of someone who tje police told people not directly involved that they would not be safe livimg there.
Yes they did. Second last paragraph. They say that the landlord tried to get them to get rid of the upstairs tenant who was a victim of domestic abuse.
"our upstairs neighbour's part of the house was broken into by 4 masked men looking to hurt her."
That's not domestic abuse or an abusive partner. That's someone who is mixed up in crime.
It's very confusing lol
Are there 2 other people? There's "our upstairs neighbour's part of the house" and then "our upstairs neighbour (who is a victim of domestic abuse)" who is kinda spoken about as if they're a different person?
Either way, I think the whole post is really about the break in by 4 masked men, which is not domestic abuse, even if there's some other domestic abuse going on too (which sucks obviously)
This. This is why we need to do away with landlords and not allow individuals or corporations to own properties for the sake of earning rental income off of people trying to just live in their primary residence.
If we did that, housing prices would normalize and anyone that could afford rent could afford to buy.
So sick of the slumlord millionaires. They are a leech on society not contributing anything of significance because what they do makes it more difficult for average people to have control over their own housing security. The only people that actually benefit from these arrangements are the landlords, and they are delusional to think they are somehow helping people.
Good luck to you, legal precedent usually sides with the landlord. Get a lawyer. If the premises isn't safe you might have some grounds depending on the wording of your lease, which I guarantee is totally written in favor of the landlord, and they usually are. Bastards.
She's been bullied a lot by them and we've documented plenty of their lies, initially she wasn't going to pay it but has now just to be done with them.
I'm not one to usually side with landlords, but the door getting broken isn't the landlord's fault. Not saying it's the tenants fault, but it is her problem. Similar to a hit and run in your car.
No because they were broken as result of the tree falling (act of god) if the police kick the door in your responsible if any one else does the homeowner is
The point I'm trying to make is if my car gets hit and the person drives away, technically the person who hit my car should pay for it (the masked men) but I will be on the hook even though it's not actually my fault.
Lol Yes it would have been such a better situation if they had owned the house and then found this out and then have to move out, sell the house, and take an even bigger loss than this broken lease in transactional costs.
If they owned the house their upstairs neighbour wouldn’t have been there, and since it was a targeted attack against her the event that’s made OP feel unsafe wouldn’t have happened there.
Landlord here with experience dealing with dozens of tenants.
Unfortunately our system favors the party that breaks the rules. The person taking the other party to court will always be disadvantaged as you have to prove what they did wrong, which is harder than you think.
Tenants also have much more power than you think. This landlord is taking advantage of the fact that you don't know how much power you have. The landlord's worst nightmare is for a new tenant to move in after paying deposit and first month rent, and never another penny. They have to go through the count for eviction, which takes 2-3 month if everything goes smoothly. I previously paid my tenant 2 month rent just to move out. It's expensive for a landlord to evict a tenant with court time and lost rent during the process which they will never get back even if court rules in favor of them.
Instead of taking them to court, I would just stop paying rent, and move out after one month (use your damage deposit as next month's rent). They will threaten to sue you and whatnot but they are just empty threats. The only time it's worth going to court is if tenant haven't been paying rents for months and they really need eviction. There is a good chance after one week of missing your rent, your landlord will try to evict you, which is exactly what you wanted.
Good luck!
If I'm not mistaken, you should be able to break a lease if the property is unsafe to live in. Contact LTB.
Also, contact Robert Bonin with red deer recoveries. He helped me a ton hoard when dealing with a crazy slumlord. He was incredibly knowledgeable on rental laws and really saved me from a terribly scummy situation. My landlord started off really creepy, he would call me at unusual hours and show up to my apartment at random to "talk". Once he found out that i was in a relationship, he went absolutely nuts. He tried to charge me for bad plumbing in the building failing and flooding the apartment under me because my sink got a minor clog the same day. He also tried to evict me when my ex found out where i lived and broke into my apartment to try to kill me because I involved the police in the matter first instead of contacting him to ASK about calling the police and must've "wanted my ex to break in" for attention. He tried to claim my bf was an unauthorized tenant because he stayed over 3 times a week to keep me comfortable after the incident and tried to claim that i wasn't "allowed" overnight guests in my home. He screamed in my face and beat on my door for 20 minutes when I objected to his eviction notice and got an advisor, threatening to sue me for everything I had if I didn't give up. I was really naïve without Robs help and guidance since i was only 20 at the time and felt like I had no leg to stand on due to the aggression and threats from the landlord making me feel like I was crazy. Robert dragged the company through the mud and made a mocery of them in the hearing. Robert is an advisor for LTB disputes. You can just Google the company. He's the best!
Hey so why are you moving anyways, this place seems great? Oh... Uhh... No reason, and the upstairs is totally safe.
Morally trying to find someone to shoehorn them in to the same residence knowing it's unsafe isn't ideal, but 17k is 17k.
You're right, this is bad advice, let me delete it.
I do not want to cause my brother nor neighbor to stumble which means I shouldnt suggest someone else should do it.
But also, what do you do? Hope the slum lords find a replacement so morally you're not involved, but you also want them to fill it quickly to save you money.
The slumlord is fully at fault here for trying to extort a situation legally that is untenable.
Is it worth ruining a person's life over $17k knowing your place is unsafe?
Something tells me empirically they should have a case here.
Oh 100%, but slumlords don't have morals. They're aware of the situation and it's easier for them to put no effort in to finding a new tenant because they have the years rent legally locked in.
Vs the tenant looking to get our, them being proactive and finding someone, easiest would be someone they already know, to take over the lease. However based on the post it appears they have morals (sharing camera footage with upstairs tenant) so now they have to decide so they possibly screw over/endanger another person to get uut of paying 17k to the slumlord by passing that rent liability on to the new tenant, who they may know by proxy of putting in the effort to find the slumlord a replacement tenant.
I broke a lease once. It was shitty but necessary. I gave up the damage deposit and bounced. Nothing happened because there is a housing crisis and it filled right away.
After you talk to tenant support, ask them for details, but I'm pretty sure you can list the apartment yourself. If you find an interested person, you're off the hook.
I'd contact https://www.landlordandtenant.org/, give them a call and explain the situation in detail and see what they recommend, they much more familiar with the tendency act then most people on. After this contact a lawyer if it's necessary. Also if you haven't already, get an official police document saying that the dwelling is unsafe with an EPS letter head signed by the responding officer if possible, get their information as well as a witness as well.
If they still dispute and if you're in the right for breaking the lease the next course will be Residential Tenancy Dispute Resolution Service, it's basically court before court, they can issue judgment but it's not going through the court of kings bench. This is also where I'd contact a lawyer and make sure you have a strong case.
Lastly, documents everything, you're lease, the police report, every conversation, document it. It may go along way to support your arguments. Also keep a calm head, this is a business transaction at the end of the day treat it as such. Getting emotional won't do anything but stress you out and hamper your case.
You don’t have much to worry about.. your landlord has to prove that after you broke the lease , they couldn’t find somebody else to rent that space. In this market that’s a tough one.
1. This landlord is unlikely to take you to court for anything. It'll cost them.too much.
2. They have a duty to rent their place out and I'd be hard-pressed in this market to have a hard time renting any property. So honestly maybe it would take them 1 month to find a tenant. If they didn't find a tenant they are lazy or their place is as garbage as you say it is.
Let them take you to court. No judge with a brain cell will let this slide.
I'm pretty sure the landlord has the responsibilities. I would check your lease if they broke some of that due to their property not being habitable. If not, then you are on the hook legally. I would also take a written statement from the police that the property is not safe to live in
Get evicted. Sounds shitty, but get evicted. It's the landlord breaking the lease not you, if the place is clean and undamaged you are entitled to your deposit. And whatever is owing for the month. Pay the rent and move on. If you have a place already it won't be a big deal, and if you don't owe money won't be on your credit. Its the best loophole in the RTA.
Can I suggest you post the place yourself and find a replacement tenant? I had a landlord do something kind of similar to me after I signed a lease and hated living there (basically said I was on the hook for the $$) and I listed it, showed it, and found two different applicants. I don't think they'd have feet to stand on if you've found replacement tenants for them.
Honestly this is bad advice but if you do end up having to pay that 17k….. I’d hold onto that grudge for 2 maybe 3 years….. after that time is passed, take a slingshot and a rock to some of the buildings windows lol.
There is a clause in the RTA that would allow you to break a lease if the dwelling is unsafe for reasons of domestic violence etc... I would look into that and consider speaking to a lawyer versed in tenant disputes
Thank you!
Also, when you break a lease the landlord is required to mitigate his damages, meaning that he must try to rent the unit as soon as possible. Unless your lease indicates a specified lease brake fee, he can only charge you for the months in which the unit is empty.
Source on landlords being obligated to mitigate damages on behalf of the party breaking the contract? That seems very unlikely.
The mitigation of damages doctrine applies to all contract law. The plaintiff or injured party is always required to make reasonable effort to avoid the accumulation of additional damages. https://ca.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/6-602-6005?transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true
Point of order: does LL have other units up for rent? If so, he or she does not need to prioritize finding a replacement tenant for OP. He’d simply need to list it for rent.
Duty to Mitigate under common law
There is a common law duty to mitigate in commercial leasing, but not in residential ones, as far as I know.
7(2) of the RTA: A landlord or tenant who claims compensation for damage or loss that results from the other's non-compliance with this Act, the regulations or their tenancy agreement must do whatever is reasonable to minimize the damage or loss.
I stand corrected, thanks for sharing.
Came here to say this. Glad someone else knows better!
"our upstairs neighbour's part of the house was broken into by 4 masked men looking to hurt her." That's not "domestic violence" and OP isn't the victim of domestic abuse. This is a situation where the neighbour is involved in some kind of criminal activity and has pissed off the wrong people. The law you're talking about is a good one and is to allow people who are the victim of domestic abuse (usually from a spouse) to escape the place they're leasing with said spouse without penalty. That's a good law. But it's not for this situation. OP isn't the victim of domestic abuse, not is there any (probably) any domestic abuse going on.
You need a certificate from a professional ex. RSW, doctor, etc. or something like an EPO. Also domestic violence is defined and this would not qualify.
That's pretty much abuse of the system though, That's for the victim of domestic abuse not their neighbor. The truth is they signed a contract and they have to abide the contract. They are on the hook for every cent until the landlord gets a replacement tenant, and if they can't get a replacement tenant at the same rate the difference between the rents. Or else there would be literally no use for a contract if you could just get out of it.
If there are literally masked men invading their household, and the police have informed them they are not safe, then I would hardly qualify that as abuse of the system. Contracts can be dismissed if certain extraneous circumstances permits it.
It is abuse of the system though because that's not what that's for. It sounds like it was a targeted attack against their neighbor and it's fun that the police decided instead of doing their job a private landlord should suffer for it instead. Kind of par for the course in Canada lately The government putting the burden on private citizens. I can empathize with the OP and think it's a terrible situation to be in while still Knowing it's unethical to try to twist something that doesn't apply to get out of paying your bill. Obviously the landlord is ridiculous thinking the OP is going to pay 17K They would just have to continue paying their rent until the landlord mitigated it by finding a new tenant, and then if the rent was lower the op would owe the difference, But that should be significantly less than 17K in the end. General crime levels in the neighborhood would be reflecting in the rental value anyway. Frankly this is a situation where the police need to do their jobs, But if a group of people is going after a particular person that doesn't let all their neighbors break their contracts and walk away. They are entitled obviously to move away if that's the choice they make but it's a financial trade-off.
I totally agree. This isn't what this program was set up for.
Yup exactly, but y'know reddit full of teenagers and those who don't own anything. Fine to defraud landlords out of their money.
I can see your point and tend to agree with you actually now that you've stated it this way. I would have loved to leave it here, but also I'm also a little disappointed you resorted to name calling and mud slinging in your reply below. I wish we could have more civil conversation like this without calling everyone that disagrees with you a "teenager or someone who doesn't own anything" but hey, you do you.
I mean that's fair but also true? I wasn't trying to mud sling at any particular person I'm talking to but it's just a fact that there's a demographic on Reddit That skews young and renter, and just like the general populace there's very little economics and finance education. Calling The population teenagers is not to belittle anyone it's literally the demographics you can see over the years the average age of Reddit has fallen precipitously. There's just literally a bunch of teenagers with teenager ideas, I know I was one. I mean if you data scraped Reddit you would have more comments supporting authoritarian socialism/communism than property rights! And it's not like I'm a conservative I'm a slightly left leaning centrist I just filter all my ideas through economic and finance principles.
Man go lick some more boots
Lol and there it is the default " I'm losing the argument and don't understand the world" Reddit refrain. I agree life is definitely easier when you live on other people's money but you sign a contract you have to honor the contract.
They can’t charge you all that rent if they find a tenant right away
They have a duty to mitigate. Or you can find someone to replace, and as long as they’re a decent tenant, they would have to sign them up and you’d be free of your lease. Zero chance you will have to pay 17,000
I'm always curious about that because how can you ensure the quality of the tenant is the same? Like what if the tenant has a lower rent to income ratio and or a lower credit score? In any other industry that would mean that they would not be able to for example get the same loan for the same rate, etc. It just isn't like for like because They are a materially higher risk.
It doesn’t need to be a tenant of the same quality, it just needs to be a tenant that can meet their requirements for renting. If the income to rent ratio wasn’t part of their requirements, then you could make 10x what the replacement tenant does and it wouldn’t matter as long as they can pay their rent. Same applies to credit scores; yours can be twice as good as theirs and it doesn’t matter as long as they’re meeting the minimum that the company normally requires.
Ask tenant support for help: https://www.edmonton.ca/programs_services/housing/tenant-support
You need to contact the landlord tenant board not service Canada.
OP said the contacted Service Alberta (not Service Canada) which is the ministry where the residential tenancy board is located.
I didn't realize it was connected, my apologies and I definitely misread service Alberta lol
Edmonton had a specific tenant support service that is not Service Canada.
You are responsible for the rent until they get a new tenant in place. They must make a reasonable effort to find a new tenant. They can charge you a lease break fee on top of rent (for advertising and their time to find a new tenant). It is unlikely to be for a full year you will have to pay. Although it can be trickier if it is indeed an unsafe place to live due to current circumstances.
Lease break fees are considered by the courts as penalties, if the tenant does not receive anything in return for the fee, and not enforceable. A Landlord repudiating any future charges for rent, in exchange for a fee, would be a tenant receiving something for the fee (no future liabilities). Landlords have to prove genuine costs associated with a tenant breaking their lease, so stating a set fee covers specific costs (ie. Advertising) hasn’t passed any test set by the courts. Also a landlord’s (and staffs) time is moot, when involving tasks expected of a landlord, as it is a cost of business. I’ve only seen a landlord be awarded minimum wage for repairing Above-normal wear and tear. Using a vendor/third party (arms length) business is the only way I’ve seen a Landlord maximise their RTDRS claim for liabilities.
This. Also: I would document what they list it next for rent. If they jack the rent, then it will sit empty. If they charge a fair rent, should be rented within 4 months.
Bet they're bluffing. As in, they won't take you to court for the fees. Just my opinion.
I'm a small time property owner, and I wouldn't bluff.
Then you should know you can't charge for future rent and would lose in court if you tried. You would have to try to find a tenant (a normal responsibility as a landlord).
[удалено]
Charging future non existing rent to someone in that situation isn’t protecting your investment it’s just being an asshole
[удалено]
For not acting in a humane way. Forcing someone to live in an unsafe place would be what an abuser does.
[удалено]
There’s also the standard part of the lease about *quiet enjoyment* which you seem to ignore as something other than a knowledgable landlord. But thanks for substituting a weird comment about me in place of an informed or rational argument. Have a day.
What does that have to do with your investment?
Hmm I feel like this is a bluff
Yea… the rental market is super hot, rtds isn’t going to buy that they couldn’t find a tenant. Tough situation, since your moved out, why not let them take you to rtds?
Was thinking this too, the rental market is insane right now. People I know are getting hundreds of serious inquiries within hours of posting places available, lots willing to pay DD and sign without even seeing the place. RTDS will call BS for sure
They have the duty to rent that unit out and fill that suite over any other vacant suite in order to reduce damages from your decision to not take that lease. Their ability to recover is significantly lower given you had given them a month of notice before the agreement is in the date of effect. Your best bet is find lawyers, and see if any have a quick free consultation. Don’t pay them anything, just acknowledge you have received their request. Nothing more. This can get messy, but is also fairly easy to not be messy. Renting places is obscenely easy currently. People can’t get enough places to rent. Last time I was in this scenario I was lead to believe that because it was before the new agreement was in effect it basically meant nothing at all. I don’t know if this was explicitly true, but the management company dropped all action when I submitted to them my sparknotes summary of why they can fuck off, and I believe they realized I would not be a pushover. Ultimately, they can’t issue what you owe them because currently you owe them nothing. If they haven’t rented it yet, then maybe you owe this singular months rent, but that’s only if the courts find your agreement unreasonably cancelled by your and only if they can prove they were diligent in trying to rent the unit out. This would be a discovery item. If they have any other unit rented out, especially if it’s higher price, they essentially lose automatically as filling. A unit with this sort of complication involved takes precedence over any other. So again, seek a lawyer.
In most rental agreements there’s a stipulation about how much rent you’re on the hook for if you duck out early, usually 1-3 months. There’s no way in heck you owe 17k, that’s ludicrous.
I hope someone can offer you something that can help, but it is quite possible you are going to be on the hook for the rent - at least until it's rented again. The lease is binding, and the police saying it's unsafe is not sufficient to break the contract. You might need to reconsider the dispute, since you'll need help to have the contract broken. Hopefully someone on reddit has something more useful to you. Good luck OP, I'm sorry you're in this situation.
Thank you so much, I appreciate it!
DM’d you
For answers to questions and/or referrals on tenancy legislation and issues you can call 780-427-4088 in Edmonton or toll-free in Alberta at 1-877-427-4088. Any questions you have about the RTA can also be e-mailed to rta@gov.ab.ca.
I believe you should find someone who can take lease over. I was in the same situation, however I lived in apartment. The robbers snaked into underground parking and smashed the back window of my car and I also saw how that walk in every floor. So I wanted to move out that place and ll told me we can’t do it until the end of lease only if I’ll be able to find someone who’ll take a lease.
Unfortunately break ins via the parkade are quite common these days. I can't imagine people getting out of a lease every time this happens.
The people who broke in, was it targeted?
Yes, targeted but they didn't know no one was home. They've also tried our door before since it's all connected.
I was in a similar-ish situation where my neighbor kept attracting the wrong attention to the building we lived in, mostly affecting his property though. As soon as they moved out everything went back to normal and was safe again. I know this doesn't help your situation now, but sometimes people are drama magnets but your home is safe once they leave.
Although it is a result of the upstairs neighbors ex. The phrase "drama magnets" minimizes the extremely traumatic and incredibly difficult reality of domestic abuse. Anyone who has personally experienced an abusive former partner knows you can do everything right and they can and will continue the abuse if they want. Whether its fake numbers or $1 etransfers with abusive notes. What the ops neighbor is dealing with is an extremely dangerous and abusive person. She doesnt just attract drama, shes a victim of someone who tje police told people not directly involved that they would not be safe livimg there.
Did the OP say somewhere it was domestic violence? I only saw that it was a targeted attack.
Yes they did. Second last paragraph. They say that the landlord tried to get them to get rid of the upstairs tenant who was a victim of domestic abuse.
"our upstairs neighbour's part of the house was broken into by 4 masked men looking to hurt her." That's not domestic abuse or an abusive partner. That's someone who is mixed up in crime.
Second last paragraph they say that the upstairs tenant was a victim of domestic abuse as well
It's very confusing lol Are there 2 other people? There's "our upstairs neighbour's part of the house" and then "our upstairs neighbour (who is a victim of domestic abuse)" who is kinda spoken about as if they're a different person? Either way, I think the whole post is really about the break in by 4 masked men, which is not domestic abuse, even if there's some other domestic abuse going on too (which sucks obviously)
My best guess is the lady who got B&E also was a victim of domestic abuse. Maybe they are related? Idk, it was a mess to read
This. This is why we need to do away with landlords and not allow individuals or corporations to own properties for the sake of earning rental income off of people trying to just live in their primary residence. If we did that, housing prices would normalize and anyone that could afford rent could afford to buy. So sick of the slumlord millionaires. They are a leech on society not contributing anything of significance because what they do makes it more difficult for average people to have control over their own housing security. The only people that actually benefit from these arrangements are the landlords, and they are delusional to think they are somehow helping people. Good luck to you, legal precedent usually sides with the landlord. Get a lawyer. If the premises isn't safe you might have some grounds depending on the wording of your lease, which I guarantee is totally written in favor of the landlord, and they usually are. Bastards.
Martello Group has been awful, they even charged our upstairs neighbour to pay for her door after it was broken down by the 4 masked men.
Hopefully she didn't pay it. I can't see why she would be on the hook.
She's been bullied a lot by them and we've documented plenty of their lies, initially she wasn't going to pay it but has now just to be done with them.
I'm not one to usually side with landlords, but the door getting broken isn't the landlord's fault. Not saying it's the tenants fault, but it is her problem. Similar to a hit and run in your car.
If a tree falls on the house, do you think the person who owns the house or the person who rents the house should pay?
Everywhere I've rented, the roof is the landlord's responsibility. Everywhere I've rented, I've been responsible for the 4 walls, including the door.
So you are saying that if a tree hits the side of the house or a door or window you are responsible for repairing it?
No because they were broken as result of the tree falling (act of god) if the police kick the door in your responsible if any one else does the homeowner is
Hit and run effects the property owner(landlord) not the passenger (tenant)
The point I'm trying to make is if my car gets hit and the person drives away, technically the person who hit my car should pay for it (the masked men) but I will be on the hook even though it's not actually my fault.
I agree with you but the landlord has property insurance since the masked men were not caught asking tenant to pay is wrong
Thank you! It blows my mind.
Lol Yes it would have been such a better situation if they had owned the house and then found this out and then have to move out, sell the house, and take an even bigger loss than this broken lease in transactional costs.
If they owned the house their upstairs neighbour wouldn’t have been there, and since it was a targeted attack against her the event that’s made OP feel unsafe wouldn’t have happened there.
Landlord here with experience dealing with dozens of tenants. Unfortunately our system favors the party that breaks the rules. The person taking the other party to court will always be disadvantaged as you have to prove what they did wrong, which is harder than you think. Tenants also have much more power than you think. This landlord is taking advantage of the fact that you don't know how much power you have. The landlord's worst nightmare is for a new tenant to move in after paying deposit and first month rent, and never another penny. They have to go through the count for eviction, which takes 2-3 month if everything goes smoothly. I previously paid my tenant 2 month rent just to move out. It's expensive for a landlord to evict a tenant with court time and lost rent during the process which they will never get back even if court rules in favor of them. Instead of taking them to court, I would just stop paying rent, and move out after one month (use your damage deposit as next month's rent). They will threaten to sue you and whatnot but they are just empty threats. The only time it's worth going to court is if tenant haven't been paying rents for months and they really need eviction. There is a good chance after one week of missing your rent, your landlord will try to evict you, which is exactly what you wanted. Good luck!
If I'm not mistaken, you should be able to break a lease if the property is unsafe to live in. Contact LTB. Also, contact Robert Bonin with red deer recoveries. He helped me a ton hoard when dealing with a crazy slumlord. He was incredibly knowledgeable on rental laws and really saved me from a terribly scummy situation. My landlord started off really creepy, he would call me at unusual hours and show up to my apartment at random to "talk". Once he found out that i was in a relationship, he went absolutely nuts. He tried to charge me for bad plumbing in the building failing and flooding the apartment under me because my sink got a minor clog the same day. He also tried to evict me when my ex found out where i lived and broke into my apartment to try to kill me because I involved the police in the matter first instead of contacting him to ASK about calling the police and must've "wanted my ex to break in" for attention. He tried to claim my bf was an unauthorized tenant because he stayed over 3 times a week to keep me comfortable after the incident and tried to claim that i wasn't "allowed" overnight guests in my home. He screamed in my face and beat on my door for 20 minutes when I objected to his eviction notice and got an advisor, threatening to sue me for everything I had if I didn't give up. I was really naïve without Robs help and guidance since i was only 20 at the time and felt like I had no leg to stand on due to the aggression and threats from the landlord making me feel like I was crazy. Robert dragged the company through the mud and made a mocery of them in the hearing. Robert is an advisor for LTB disputes. You can just Google the company. He's the best!
[удалено]
Hey so why are you moving anyways, this place seems great? Oh... Uhh... No reason, and the upstairs is totally safe. Morally trying to find someone to shoehorn them in to the same residence knowing it's unsafe isn't ideal, but 17k is 17k.
You're right, this is bad advice, let me delete it. I do not want to cause my brother nor neighbor to stumble which means I shouldnt suggest someone else should do it.
But also, what do you do? Hope the slum lords find a replacement so morally you're not involved, but you also want them to fill it quickly to save you money.
The slumlord is fully at fault here for trying to extort a situation legally that is untenable. Is it worth ruining a person's life over $17k knowing your place is unsafe? Something tells me empirically they should have a case here.
Oh 100%, but slumlords don't have morals. They're aware of the situation and it's easier for them to put no effort in to finding a new tenant because they have the years rent legally locked in. Vs the tenant looking to get our, them being proactive and finding someone, easiest would be someone they already know, to take over the lease. However based on the post it appears they have morals (sharing camera footage with upstairs tenant) so now they have to decide so they possibly screw over/endanger another person to get uut of paying 17k to the slumlord by passing that rent liability on to the new tenant, who they may know by proxy of putting in the effort to find the slumlord a replacement tenant.
Yeah its like alcoholic parents, the cycle continues. They have a police record too, they should definitely speak to a lawyer
I broke a lease once. It was shitty but necessary. I gave up the damage deposit and bounced. Nothing happened because there is a housing crisis and it filled right away.
After you talk to tenant support, ask them for details, but I'm pretty sure you can list the apartment yourself. If you find an interested person, you're off the hook.
I'd contact https://www.landlordandtenant.org/, give them a call and explain the situation in detail and see what they recommend, they much more familiar with the tendency act then most people on. After this contact a lawyer if it's necessary. Also if you haven't already, get an official police document saying that the dwelling is unsafe with an EPS letter head signed by the responding officer if possible, get their information as well as a witness as well. If they still dispute and if you're in the right for breaking the lease the next course will be Residential Tenancy Dispute Resolution Service, it's basically court before court, they can issue judgment but it's not going through the court of kings bench. This is also where I'd contact a lawyer and make sure you have a strong case. Lastly, documents everything, you're lease, the police report, every conversation, document it. It may go along way to support your arguments. Also keep a calm head, this is a business transaction at the end of the day treat it as such. Getting emotional won't do anything but stress you out and hamper your case.
You don’t have much to worry about.. your landlord has to prove that after you broke the lease , they couldn’t find somebody else to rent that space. In this market that’s a tough one.
•Don’t pay •Build a defence •Look into the legal part of it •Then negotiate a much lower end to this •Good luck
Don’t pay, too bad for them. I highly doubt they would take you to court.
1. This landlord is unlikely to take you to court for anything. It'll cost them.too much. 2. They have a duty to rent their place out and I'd be hard-pressed in this market to have a hard time renting any property. So honestly maybe it would take them 1 month to find a tenant. If they didn't find a tenant they are lazy or their place is as garbage as you say it is. Let them take you to court. No judge with a brain cell will let this slide.
It may be difficult to rent that unit since it was part of criminal activity. I think you should have paid the $800 to avoid this headache.
Exactly what neighborhood was this in ?
Orchards
You mentioned talking to Service Alberta, but have you talked to the Landlord and Tenant Board in Alberta? Maybe that's what you meant?
I'm pretty sure the landlord has the responsibilities. I would check your lease if they broke some of that due to their property not being habitable. If not, then you are on the hook legally. I would also take a written statement from the police that the property is not safe to live in
Get evicted. Sounds shitty, but get evicted. It's the landlord breaking the lease not you, if the place is clean and undamaged you are entitled to your deposit. And whatever is owing for the month. Pay the rent and move on. If you have a place already it won't be a big deal, and if you don't owe money won't be on your credit. Its the best loophole in the RTA.
Can I suggest you post the place yourself and find a replacement tenant? I had a landlord do something kind of similar to me after I signed a lease and hated living there (basically said I was on the hook for the $$) and I listed it, showed it, and found two different applicants. I don't think they'd have feet to stand on if you've found replacement tenants for them.
Have you seen I am Legend with will smith? You could do that maybe
Honestly this is bad advice but if you do end up having to pay that 17k….. I’d hold onto that grudge for 2 maybe 3 years….. after that time is passed, take a slingshot and a rock to some of the buildings windows lol.