has anyone had the following situation occur or know what to do? We rented a place in Missouri. The environment was attrocious (cockroaches/loud neighbors). We left 1 month before our lease was us (in May 1996). We did not pay the final month rent and they withheld our security deposit. They turned the balance over to a collection agency who only contacted us one time. We responded to the agency with a letter regarding our complaint and never heard back. We bought a home last year. Now we want to refinance. They agency has now listed this was the CRA as an open collection, since we purchased our home. Anyone know what the Statue is in Missouri or have advice.
It really don't make much difference. Just make the collection agency prove the debt and if they don't do it prpoerly make them take it off. They got little choice in the matter if they don't do things right and you demand your rights, you can win.
Was the security deposit security for rent or was it a damage deposit? This is important because a damage deposit cannot be held for rent that is claimed to be owed. I would certaintly follow Bill's advice. He is doing a fantastic job getting rid of my tough collection accounts. He knows his stuff. Good luck to you.
Breeze: I doubt that a rental agreement is treated as a written contract in a court of law. Landlord-tenant relationships almost always fall under a totally different set of laws than do contracts. In most states, the landlords have such a tight grip on the legal system that they get special preferential treatment in that the laws are written specifically for them and there is not a lot a tenant can do against a landlord that I know of. I'm quite sure that there has to be some ways to get around them. I had a case in Colorado years and years ago in which I rented a house and the old boy had a tenant in his house he could not get evicted and who was not paying the rent. He told me I could rent the house if I got the other fellow evicted. So I told him that about the only way I could get that done was if he wrote me a note saying that I had bought the house from him and that I was now the sole owner. We went down to a notary public and he signed the note and I paid him a dollar and I paid the notary public too. Then I went and evicted the family and then I went to the Denver County Court house and filed the note he signed as a deed on the property. Then I went ahead and moved on in and paid him his rent faithfully. Lived there for several years, paying the rent. Kept my receipts. Then one day he came to the house and told me he had sold the house and wanted me to move out. That's when he found out he had a real problem. I told him I didn't mind looking for another house and moving out but that it was going to take me a while to do that. He got all mad and told me I had to be out in week because the new owner wanted in. I told him he couldn't get me out at all if I didn't want to move. He blew up and stomped out of the house muttering something about "we'll see about that". He did. He found out he didn't own the house and had defrauded the other person he sold the house to and could go to jail for having sold the same house to two diffenent people. We settled rather amicably in the end. I really didn't want to cheat the old boy although I could have done so easily. I agreed to get out as soon as I possibly could if he would pay my moving expenses. He thought that would be a pretty good deal under the circumstances. I found another house in about 2 or 3 weeks and told him he would have to pay me $250 moving expenses and I was gone forever and would not bother him again. We actually parted on a sort of friendly basis after that. Then the poor old man died a couple of years later. But short of having some kind of actual contract other than a lease, I doubt that it would be anything that could be dealt with under the law of contracts. Maybe I'm wrong. I don't know. I'm just guessing. If I'm wrong, please tell me so in order that I might learn something I don't know now.
A properly drawn lease contains all of the elements required for a legal contract. I understand them to be considered contracts.
Thanks Jeff. I'm sure no expert on rent and lease agreements. It's very little I know about them at all. I'm more than reasonably sure that you do know about them.
No, that's not the case at all. It was not that I did not believe you at all. I asked you to clarify my thinking for me but he got his answer in before you were able to do so. That meant I had two very good people whose opinions I respect a lot saying essentially the same thing. I can't argue I'm right when the preponderance of the evidence is against me AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT IN THE FIRST PLACE, now can I? It was only that he happened to answer before you did. Luck of the draw sort of thing, I guess.
