My question involves an eviction in the state of: Florida
My parents own a condominium in Florida. Last year they rented out this condominium to a tenant. The tenant signed a written residential lease for the tenancy to last one year. The tenant paid the security deposit, and the first six months of rent up front before moving in. The tenancy was commenced in Nov. 2008, and is to end in Nov. 2009 pursuant to the written lease agreement. As of August 2009, my parents sent the tenant written notification by certified mail that they would not be renewing the lease agreement, and that the tenant needs to depart from the condominium by the end of the term of the lease.
Therefore, the months of Nov, Dec. Jan., Feb, Mar, and Apr. were paid for. Then in May 2009 the tenant failed to pay the rent by the beginning of the month. Several repeated attempts were made by phone, email, and mail to contact the tenant, and he did not respond. Then by May 20, 2009 the tenant finally responded back by phone. The tenant said that he had a heart attack, and was in the hospital. Then after he had gotten out of the hospital his wife's brother had passed away, and he had to go to Illinois to attend the funeral. At that point in time the tenant stated that he would send the rent in the mail that very day. Thereafter, the rent came in the mail 8 days later, and was $400.00 short. Keep in mind that pursuant to the lease the tenant is to send the due rent monies by the method of Federal Express. When the lease was commenced in Nov. 2008, the tenant was supplied with adequate Federal Express envelopes to send the rent monies to an address here in Pennsylvania, and the tenant signed off that he acknowledged that he had received these Federal Express envelopes. With the rent check that was $400.00 short, the tenant had a letter explaining that the rent was short, and that he would send the additional $400.00 with the rent due in June 2009.
June 2009 came around shortly thereafter, and the rent was not paid. Contact was made with the tenant, and the tenant stated that he was waiting for compensation from a work project he had completed, and that once he would get compensated he would send the due rent monies. A few days later the tenant called, and stated that his business partner had depleted all of the funds in his checking account, and that the it would take a little longer than anticipated to send the due rent monies. Then a few days later, the tenant started to complain about dust conditions from restorative concrete work completed on a flight of stairs proximate to the condominium he is renting. The tenant stated that these dust conditions were hazardous, left dust on his vehicles, and made it uninhabitable to reside at the condominium. The restorative concrete work done on the flight of stairs was initiated, and paid for by the condominium association hiring a contractor to perform the project, and only lasted 5 days. This project was commenced and finished in early March 2009.
Keep in mind the following:
1. Ample notice was issued to the residents of the community by the condominium association that this work was going to be commenced, and finished in March 2009.
2. The tenant never complained about this matter in March, April, and/or May 2009.
3. No other nearby residents complained about the work that was done.
4. There is a "Hold Harmless" provision in the written lease agreement that the tenant signed.
5. The tenant never complained to the condominium association, nor the contractor who completed the work.
6. Then tenant never filed a complaint with the County Building Code Enforcement about this matter.
The tenant then outright refused to pay the rent in mid June 2009 based upon his allegations of unhabitiality, loss of use and private peaceful enjoyment, and property damage from the alleged dust conditions. The tenant shortly thereafter sent phony pictures taken from his cell phone of landscapers blowing grass clippings, and other related debri to substantiate his allegations of uninhabitable dust conditions.
A 3 Day Notice To Pay Or Quit was served on the tenant based upon his nonpayment of rent thereafter. My parents then hired a Landlord Tenant Law attorney to handle the matter. The tenant did not pay the rent within the allotted 3 business days excluding holidays, and weekends. However, the tenant did send the rent monies on the 4th day thus being 1 day after the allotted 3 business days. As advised by the attorney my parents rejected the rent payment sent on the 4th day, and sent it back to the tenant. The attorney then filed an eviction proceeding in the county court for nonpayment of rent. The tenant then responded to the eviction proceeding within the allotted 10 days, filed an answer, and deposited the due rent monies into the court registry. In the filed tenant's answer to the eviction, the tenant continued on with his untrue allegations about dust conditions, etc. A hearing was granted for the eviction proceeding in early July 2009.
The tenant then began to send nasty emails, and letters to my parents stating that he is going to civilly sue my parents, the condominium association, and the contractor for hazardous dust conditions, and property damage alleged from the work that was done back in March 2009 if my parents don't drop the eviction proceeding. It was apparent that the tenant was just looking for a way to avoid paying the rent.
Early July 2009 came around, and the hearing was commenced. The hearing only really lasted 5 minutes or less, and the judge disregarded the tenants allegations about dust, and was just focused on the written lease agreement, and whether or not the tenant paid the rent. The tenant then made up a lie about how he was unable to send the rent to Pennsylvania because he allegedly did not have an adequate way to send the rent to Pennsylvania in a timely fashion even though it was totally contradictory to his basis of refusing to the rent based upon alleged hazardous dust conditions. The judge ruled in favor of the tenant because he attempted to pay the rent even though it was 1 day beyond the allotted 3 days of the Notice To Pay Or Quit. The motion for writ of possession or eviction was denied. However, the monies deposited into the court registry were released to my parents.
My parents then on that very same day of the hearing served the tenant with another 3 Day Notice To Pay Or Quit for July 2009 Rent. The very next day the tenant went down the attorney's office, and began a heated argument with the attorney about how he is going to sue my parents, the condominium association, the contractor, and the attorney himself if my parents don't let him reside or stay at the condominium for the remainder of the lease "Rent Free" to mitigate the alleged dust conditions, loss of private peaceful enjoyment, and property damage. The attorney then contacted my parents and stated that it could get expensive to defend a separate civil suit, and that they should settle with the tenant. My parents declined to settle with the tenant, and called his bluff. Then on the 3rd day of the allotted 3 Days of The Notice To Pay Or Quit the tenant paid the rent to the attorney.
In August 2009, the tenant then again refused to pay the rent. The tenant was served again with a 3 Day Notice To Pay Or Quit. The tenant did not pay the rent whatsoever within the allotted 3 business days. The tenant did not pay the rent anytime thereafter the 3 business days. Another eviction proceeding was filed with the county court. The tenant filed his response to eviction proceeding. However, the tenant did not deposit any monies into the court registry. The tenant instead filed a motion to determine rent arguing that the 3 Day Notice To Pay Or Quit served upon him was defective. A motion to determine rent hearing was granted in late August 2009. During the hearing the judge showed no pity to my parents about their concerns of the tenant's outright continual pattern of refusing to pay the rent. The judge then gave the tenant 2 days to deposit the due rent monies into the court registry, or he will sign and authorize the writ of possession or eviction.
The tenant did deposit the due rent monies into the court registry, and another hearing was granted for the eviction proceeding in early September 2009. My parents then delayed the hearing scheduled for early September to early November 2009 thus forcing the tenant to deposit all of the other due rent monies for September, and October 2009 into the court registry. The attorney then filed a motion to release all funds from the court registry to the landlord. The tenant then filed an answer to this motion to release all funds from the court registry continuing on with his untrue allegations about dust conditions, a defective Notice To Pay or Quit served on him, how the written lease agreement is unlawful and defective, and lies about how he served my parents with a statutory notice in April 2009 that they were not maintaining the property, and he is going to refuse to pay rent until the alleged conditions are corrected.
As of now there is $3,300.00 in the court registry, and the judge did not respond to the attorney's motion to release funds from the court registry, nor did the judge respond to the tenant's answer to the motion. As of yesterday, the tenant contacted the attorney to see if my parents would want to settle before going to the hearing in early November 2009. The attorney contacted my parents about the tenant's offer to settle, and my parents would only agree to give the tenant his security deposit back after inspecting the condo IF and ONLY if the premises are left in good and/or better condition than when the tenant moved in. The tenant declined this more than reasonable offer, and supposedly become outraged and belligerent with the attorney, and continued on with his threats to civilly sue, and cost my parents lots of money to keep defending their legal interests.
The tenant's proposed settlement was to give him $1,100.00 from the court registry, and his security deposit in full back. The attorney kept pressing my parents that it would probably be better to settle for this, rather than risk the judge (Who apparently appears to be very tenant-friendly, and shows no pity on landlords getting cheated out of rent money.) not ruling in their favor at the hearing next month, and losing all of the $3,300.00.
QUESTIONS:
1. Do you think there is a probability that this tenant will likely create a "Holdover Tenancy" even if my parents settle with him?
2. Why are judges often sympathetic with tenants? Do you think it is the element of the tenant being a full time resident of FL, and my parents only being a part time resident of FL? Do you think that the judge is just being 200% certain that he does not make a mistake or a questionably wrong ruling to evict the tenant which could reflect on him in the future?
3. Do you think the attorney is right in his suggestions to settle now rather than risk losing the hearing next month? Or do you think the attorney is just acting in his own best interest to avoid additional expended hours to attend the hearing?
4. I understand that problem tenants like this can be avoided by thoroughly screening them before offering them a tenancy, but is there anything my parents can do now to ensure that this tenant will leave in November?
5. Is there anything else my parents can do now ensure victory of this matter? Or is this all in the hands of the judge, and the attorney?
6. Do you think my parents will be better served to take their chances at the hearing rather than settle now?
7. Why do judges let individuals such as this tenant go on with their games when it is clear that these types of individuals are a detriment to the community?
8. Do you think there is a possibility that this attorney is somewhat mildly handling this case to somewhat preserve the interests of the tenant even though he was employed to represent the landlord?
9. Overall what is your opinion on this matter, and if you were the landlord in this matter what would you do, or what would have you done?
10. Do you think it is better to settle with the tenant now, rather than risk spending additional time, money, and aggravation in the future for an appeal, etc, if the judge does not rule in favor of my parents?
11. Obviously the burden lies on the tenant to prove his case, and allegations. Do you think that is apparently why the tenant is asking to settle now before the hearing?

