Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4
Results 31 to 38 of 38
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    3,167

    Default Re: Late Fees

    Quote Quoting llworking
    View Post
    I get what you are saying, but what landlord keeps a tenant for 4 years, when there are 4 months back rent owed? I could maybe see a landlord being lackadaisical about unpaid late fees but actual rent? It just doesn't make sense to me.
    I agree. The only person that could get away with allowing a tenant to not pay rent would be the owner of the property. Everyone else has to account for what is and is not received. Maybe the OP/tenant and landlord had a personal relationship. Is the OP/tenant male or female ? Perhaps sexual favors were involved when the rent was not paid and paid on time. I know it is illegal. Unfortunately, it does happen. That might explain why the OP/tenant was not responsible about paying their rent on time.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    16

    Default Re: Late Fees

    What an imagination?. Landlord is a she/owner, disabled with a stroke and something. I paid a small fee to consult an attorney today through a hotline, the attorney did not give encouraging advice, basically told that I can negotiate for installments and pay all the backdated fees and rent and be done with or I'll be liable to later pay a lot more than what I would owe now. But reading through here, it seems I have options to not pay.

    Quote Quoting Mercy&Grace
    View Post
    I agree. The only person that could get away with allowing a tenant to not pay rent would be the owner of the property. Everyone else has to account for what is and is not received. Maybe the OP/tenant and landlord had a personal relationship. Is the OP/tenant male or female ? Perhaps sexual favors were involved when the rent was not paid and paid on time. I know it is illegal. Unfortunately, it does happen. That might explain why the OP/tenant was not responsible about paying their rent on time.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    384

    Default Re: Late Fees

    Quote Quoting alexnc22
    View Post
    What an imagination?. Landlord is a she/owner, disabled with a stroke and something. I paid a small fee to consult an attorney today through a hotline, the attorney did not give encouraging advice, basically told that I can negotiate for installments and pay all the backdated fees and rent and be done with or I'll be liable to later pay a lot more than what I would owe now. But reading through here, it seems I have options to not pay.
    The supposed lawyer you spoke with was likely incompetent if he/she did not mention the three year statute of limitations. Also, how would a landlord prove that a rent payment was late if you were not notified in writing at the time it occurred? The date of a deposit would be meaningless. Cash transferred by hand would have no traceability or dates associated with it. Also, how would the amount owed go up over time?

    If there is no paper trail, no written requests to pay the rent, no request to pay late fees, then the landlord would have a hard time proving his case at trial.

    You could test the landlords resolve by sending him a check for a few hundred bucks or more with the stipulation that "The cashing or depositing of this check #xxx for the amount of $xxx satisfies all debts between xxxx and xxxx." ...And see what happens.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Posts
    1

    Default Re: Late Fees

    What appears to be lost in this thread is that the OP is trying to get his security deposit back. If the landlord deducts more from the security deposit than the op thinks is right, he must sue the landlord in small claims court, where the landlord could counter claim for any deductions he did not take.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    7,920

    Default Re: Late Fees

    Quote Quoting Harold99
    View Post
    Also, how would a landlord prove that a rent payment was late if you were not notified in writing at the time it occurred? The date of a deposit would be meaningless.
    The date of deposit of a check is not "meaningless". It would be a fact that helps to establish when the payment was made. At the very least you can say that the payment was made no later than that date. And coupled with evidence of what the landlord's practice was in depositing rent checks it could very well establish that the check was late. The date the tenant put on the check would be useful too. If the date on the check itself is past the date the rent is due then the landlord has pretty good evidence of the late payment. Even without all that the landlord's own testimony as to when the rent was received is evidence that the court may consider. If the landlord's testimony is believed over that of the tenant that alone could carry the day. Naturally the better the evidence the landlord has the better his case for the late payment is, and prompt written notices of a late payment would certainly help. But a landlord could still prove it without having sent those notices. As always, the totality of the evidence on each side and how persuasive that evidence is matters.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    384

    Default Re: Late Fees

    Quote Quoting Taxing Matters
    View Post
    The date of deposit of a check is not "meaningless". It would be a fact that helps to establish when the payment was made. At the very least you can say that the payment was made no later than that date. And coupled with evidence of what the landlord's practice was in depositing rent checks it could very well establish that the check was late. The date the tenant put on the check would be useful too. If the date on the check itself is past the date the rent is due then the landlord has pretty good evidence of the late payment. Even without all that the landlord's own testimony as to when the rent was received is evidence that the court may consider. If the landlord's testimony is believed over that of the tenant that alone could carry the day. Naturally the better the evidence the landlord has the better his case for the late payment is, and prompt written notices of a late payment would certainly help. But a landlord could still prove it without having sent those notices. As always, the totality of the evidence on each side and how persuasive that evidence is matters.
    The date of deposit proves nothing. I can sit on a $10,000 check for weeks. The handwritten date on a check means little too. Also, the OP already said the landlord made no written notice of rent due, late payments, or late penalties. So, when the landlord has nothing but his word against the OP...good luck landlord.

    Funny how in some cases you claim a plaintiff needs written proof and now you say his word is like gold...even going back 3+ years.

    You are being inconsistent to say the least. If I was the judge, I'd tell the landlord what the IRS would tell him under similar scrutiny..."KEEP BETTER RECORDS...OR ELSE! And at least act like a professional landlord and notify people when they owe you money."

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    7,920

    Default Re: Late Fees

    Quote Quoting Harold99
    View Post
    The date of deposit proves nothing. I can sit on a $10,000 check for weeks.
    As I said, the date of the deposit is not meaningless. You are correct in that the date of deposit by itself it won't prove the date the the check was received, but it is not necessarily "worthless" as you claimed. Along with other evidence, like evidence of the landlord's practice in depositing checks, it can be useful for proving the payment was late. The same with the date the tenant put on the check. If the date the tenant put on the check was after the date the payment was due it's pretty hard for the tenant to argue the payment was timely, after all.

    Quote Quoting Harold99
    View Post
    Also, the OP already said the landlord made no written notice of rent due, late payments, or late penalties. So, when the landlord has nothing but his word against the OP...good luck landlord.
    Of course that's a harder case for the landlord. But again, if the court believes him over the tenant if the landlord is more persuasive the landlord can still win that. It'd be better for the landlord to have more to back him up, but it's not automatic he'd lose.

    Quote Quoting Harold99
    View Post
    Funny how in some cases you claim a plaintiff needs written proof and now you say his word is like gold...even going back 3+ years.
    Reread what I wrote, Harold. Nowhere did I say his word was "gold". Far from it. What I am saying is that I disagree with your earlier contention that the date of deposit is "worthless". It's not worthless. A good lawyer can combine that with other evidence (if it exists) to make a good case that the payment was late. Thus, as I said before, how it goes for the landlord depends very much on the totality of the evidence presented and how convincing that evidence is. I'm not saying the landlord automatically wins. I'm saying that your statements that the date of the deposit is "worthless" and that the landlords testimony is similarly worthless is wrong. They do have value. They are evidence that can help the fact finder determine what the deal was. How much weight the fact finder puts on it is, of course, up to that fact finder (judge or jury). Each one is going to view it a bit differently. So from what we know so far the landlord isn't automatically going to win on this issue, but neither will he automatically lose as you seem to contend.

    Quote Quoting Harold99
    View Post
    If I was the judge, I'd tell the landlord what the IRS would tell him under similar scrutiny..."KEEP BETTER RECORDS...OR ELSE! And at least act like a professional landlord and notify people when they owe you money."
    Ah, but that's the thing, isn't it, Harold? You aren't going to be the judge that hears the case. Evidence that you would discount might not be discounted by the judge that actually hears it. Neither you nor I knows whether the judge/jury will find that the payment was late because neither you nor I have (1) seen all the evidence that will be presented and (2) know anything about the judge (or jury) who would decide the case.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    384

    Default Re: Late Fees

    Quote Quoting Taxing Matters
    View Post
    As I said, the date of the deposit is not meaningless. You are correct in that the date of deposit by itself it won't prove the date the the check was received, but it is not necessarily "worthless" as you claimed. Along with other evidence, like evidence of the landlord's practice in depositing checks, it can be useful for proving the payment was late. The same with the date the tenant put on the check. If the date the tenant put on the check was after the date the payment was due it's pretty hard for the tenant to argue the payment was timely, after all.

    Of course that's a harder case for the landlord. But again, if the court believes him over the tenant — if the landlord is more persuasive — the landlord can still win that. It'd be better for the landlord to have more to back him up, but it's not automatic he'd lose.

    Reread what I wrote, Harold. Nowhere did I say his word was "gold". Far from it. What I am saying is that I disagree with your earlier contention that the date of deposit is "worthless". It's not worthless. A good lawyer can combine that with other evidence (if it exists) to make a good case that the payment was late. Thus, as I said before, how it goes for the landlord depends very much on the totality of the evidence presented and how convincing that evidence is. I'm not saying the landlord automatically wins. I'm saying that your statements that the date of the deposit is "worthless" and that the landlords testimony is similarly worthless is wrong. They do have value. They are evidence that can help the fact finder determine what the deal was. How much weight the fact finder puts on it is, of course, up to that fact finder (judge or jury). Each one is going to view it a bit differently. So from what we know so far the landlord isn't automatically going to win on this issue, but neither will he automatically lose as you seem to contend.

    Ah, but that's the thing, isn't it, Harold? You aren't going to be the judge that hears the case. Evidence that you would discount might not be discounted by the judge that actually hears it. Neither you nor I knows whether the judge/jury will find that the payment was late because neither you nor I have (1) seen all the evidence that will be presented and (2) know anything about the judge (or jury) who would decide the case.
    Your responses remind me of ten years ago when I sat through my friend's murder trial. I wrote a letter to the judge during the trial and it was given to the defense attorney and prosecutor. I wrote about ten points that were just not right like: "The sister of the victim thinks you got the wrong guy," and, "The defendant is left handed yet the witness saw a man use his right hand to shoot the guy."

    The whole trial was just retarded yet I had to sit there and watch a good man get lynched by the system. But anyway, I watched that prosecutor stand up with my letter in hand and make one flimsy response after another after each point. I understand now what happened, just like at my trial. It is in a lawyer's blood and duty to just say anything to rebut any point put at them, regardless of how weak it may sound. Because, to say nothing in return is the worst for a lawyer. Even a comment like "I love my mother." A good lawyer could argue that nobody loves their mother. Or that the sky is not blue. Or the best of all lawyer comeback slogans was "if the glove don't fit..." I'd bet that every lawyer saw that as the best statement of all time, yet it was total BS.

    IOW, one must be highly critical when listening to a lawyer because they argue for sport and purpose, not from truth. Nothing personal. I am not nearly as attached to what I build as my customer is. I will do anything to get the job done, just as a lawyer will say anything to win regardless of how the truth is slanted and misrepresented.

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4

Similar Threads

  1. Rent and Utilities: Can Landlord Collect on Cumulative Late Fees for Late Rent Payment
    By Mcdz in forum Landlord-Tenant Law
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-08-2018, 08:35 PM
  2. Rent and Utilities: Can a Landlord Charge Late Fees on Your Unpaid Late Fees
    By mickey8255 in forum Landlord-Tenant Law
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-26-2016, 06:10 AM
  3. Rent and Utilities: Can a Landlord Charge Late Fees on Top of Late Fees
    By Mommyof 2 in forum Landlord-Tenant Law
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-19-2011, 08:26 AM
  4. Rent and Utilities: Late Fees for Non Late Rent, Water Bill Payment Applied to Late Fees
    By cwhite in forum Landlord-Tenant Law
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-10-2010, 08:07 AM
  5. Rent and Utilities: Excessive Late Fees, Late Fees for Other Fees
    By RochesterSnow in forum Landlord-Tenant Law
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-05-2010, 11:18 AM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources