unwanted guest

[m Ransley]

Your Best bet is your worst cause you know nothing Cathy ....

[Phisherman]

[m Ransley]

The Kathy troll ,,, 8 out of 10

[meirman]

In alt.home.repair on Wed, 26 Jan 2005 08:34:32 -0600 "effi" posted:

It would be based on the contract. Failure to perform does not vitiate a contract. It leaves the non-performing side liable for damages, but it doesn't mean the other side can do anything it wants.

It doesn't matter whether he paid any money or not in most or all states. He may not be a renter if he doesn't pay rent, but he's still a tenant, and the law refers to "tenants" and not to "renters".

Meirman

-- If emailing, please let me know whether or not you are posting the same letter. Change domain to erols.com, if necessary.

[meirman]

In alt.home.repair on Wed, 26 Jan 2005 11:33:44 -0500 Mark posted:

No it doesn't. It's obvious that he was living there with her permission, or she would have called the police the first night.

And if they belive him she will be in a lot of trouble, financial trouble at least**. There is no way the police, a judge, or a jury will believe the story you want Kathy to tell.

**Plus people get angry when you lie about them and what happened between you and them. Lying by Kathy will escalate hostilities.

Meirman

-- If emailing, please let me know whether or not you are posting the same letter. Change domain to erols.com, if necessary.

[JerryMouse]

Agreed. Landlords are spawn of the Devil and will use all means, unethical, illegal, and life-threatening preferred, to accomplish their evil whims.

[JerryMouse]

Five in the middle of a sentence, three at the end.

[meirman]

In alt.home.repair on Wed, 26 Jan 2005 11:19:55 -0600 [e-mail] (m Ransley) posted:

I have agreed with what else you said in this thread, but here I wish to point out: He'll still get out on bail, and even if he didn't, she would still be responsible to show some level of care for his possessions.

Directed to the group as a whole: People reading this thread should imagine how they would feel if say, they were having a bout of depression or unemployment and couldn't afford to pay the rent or do the chores they'd agreed to do, and one's landlord threw their stuff away.

Kathy, why do you distinguish between an apartment and an in-law suite? Do you think the relevant laws refer to "in-law suites"? I doubt it.

Do his premises have their own entrance, without going through your living area? If so, I would give you five-to-one odds that the premises in question are within the legal definition of "apartment".

Meirman

-- If emailing, please let me know whether or not you are posting the same letter. Change domain to erols.com, if necessary.

[Sam O'Nella]

Sorry, there was an obvious error in my statement. It should have read:

"There shall be only 3 periods in a hockey game".

[meirman]

In alt.home.repair on Wed, 26 Jan 2005 13:18:53 -0600 [e-mail] (m Ransley) posted:

Absolutely. Even if he tells only the truth, his side will sound quite different. If he decides to lie, like some people are advising Kathy to lie, his side will sound even more different from hers.

The police and judges know this as well, better, than you or I do.

Meirman

-- If emailing, please let me know whether or not you are posting the same letter. Change domain to erols.com, if necessary.

[meirman]

In alt.home.repair on Wed, 26 Jan 2005 09:58:11 -0500 Mark posted:

Posted and mailed to OP. Please reply on the list, unless you really prefer to email.

Where did you learn language like that? It won't do your case any good, no matter whom you are talking to.

That would make you a thief.

And if the OP is worried about vandalism by the kid now, she'll have

20 times as much reason to worry were she to throw his stuff away.

Not to mention being liable to pay for it all when the kid takes her to court.

They had an oral contract. Do you want her to deny the agreement they had, to perjure herself in court, to be a thief and a perjurer?

He is a monthly tenant, and he is entitled to 30 days notice before he can be forced to leave. She is also entitled to 30 notice before he can stop paying rent. But since iiuc there is no rent, that really has no effect.

No he's not. He moved in with her permission.

He has rights in every state in the Union.

Kathy maybe you should contact a lawyer, but what you should do tomorrow is give him his 30 day notice, in writing, saying that he must leave within 30 days. It would be a very good idea to first tell him that you need the space. Make up a story if you have to -- lying to him about why is not against the law. Tell him your son wants to come home. If he knows your son owns a house, tell him that he can't meet the mortgage payments. or better yet, tell him that your nephew from out of town plans to go to college, or high-school, or take a job in your town, and his parents want him to stay with you, or he can't afford anything more, etc. There are lots of other stories, but make it sound important, and something that can't be delayed. Tell him you'd appreciate it if he'd move earlier, but he must leave in 30 days.

If your written notice to him is inadequate, you can improve it later, and start the 30 day period from that later date, but it will probably be correct.

When the 30 days are up, wait until he is out and change the locks. Make an appointment with him to get his stuff, and have him come with the police. They like to do this sort of thing, seriously. They would rather prevent problems than arrest someone later.

Don't throw his stuff away, and don't leave it outside where it can be rained on or stolen. And where you won't be able to prove that he got it and not thieves. Furthermore, most people go through a stage in their lives when they are jerks. They shouldn't lose their stuff because of that. Check in your jurisdiction how long he has to get all his stuff before it is considered abandoned. It is often "a reasonable time". That I think is at least 30 days from the day you change the locks. It's not like keeping his stuff will prevent you from renting the room, since you don't plan to rent it. When the time comes and you are entitled to get rid of his stuff, I would still only get rid of the bulky things, furniture etc. His personal things, letters, photos, trophies, insurance policies, diplomas, will all fit in one or two or 3 liquor boxes and it won't hurt you to save that for a couple years. Don't tell him he has a couple years. Tell him he has

30 days, but when he grows up and realizes what he has done wrong, or when he doesn't and he sues you, you will still be able to give him back this personal stuff.

You can, of course, sue him for the unpaid utilities.

It will be hard to prove that he didn't do "son things" or the monetary value of the things he didn't do.

You were trying to do him a favor. Don't let his bad behaviour reduce you to reverse bad behaviour.

However, under certain circumstances, I might change the locks in less than 30 days. He can sue you for damages, such as motel rent for a few days, maybe even a week or two, but even if he wins, that's only money, which is much less important than what he might take (or destroy?) if notice really angers him. But if you've treated his possessions well, the court will respect you, and will more likely believe you when you say there was reason to fear his vandalism.

However, I'm not sure how changing the locks would prevent his vandalism. It seems to me it would make it more likely. Are you always home? Does he have a car to come over when you are not? That's why you should be nice while you are giving him legal notice, or during the days you change the locks, and thereafter. In a year or two you can tell him all the insults you feel like saying now. In a year or two, he won't feel like retaliating, (and you probably won't care enough by then to say them anyhow.)

On one occasion, when I had roommates ( He was my only roommate at the the time.), I did change the locks on my apartment without giving any notice. And I would do it again. But that situation was a little different. I think he had already stolen money from my dresser (not

100% positive, because a neighbor kid was there while I went to the grocery. He used to come over after school, and I always said he could stay when I went to the grocery, and he always chose to leave when I did. By sad coincidence, this was the only time he stayed. And the only time I left money in my dresser. Usually I carried it all in my wallet.)

The deciding factor was that I was going away for a long weekend, and I was afraid he would steal everything I owned while I was gone, even though I knew his name and where he went to school and could have found him, had him arrested and deported if he had done that. Still, I didn't want to leave him in the house.

This case was also different because he was just starting grad school about 4 blocks from my apartment and I knew he could get student housing if he got there before 5. All of the previous days, maybe 6 of them, he had gone to school and come back in less than 3 hours, before noon. Sadly, this day he was gone all day, and I couldn't leave because I was afraid he would set fire to my apartment door if he came back and the lock was changed, or do something. Because I lived in an apartment, there was little he could do except set fire to the door (or damage my car, if he remembered which one it was.) I

*should* have changed the locks when he was sleeping and then gotten up early and walked him out when he left, locked the door behind me, and once outside, I should have given him the letter I wrote. Maybe I should have given him the letter and immediately left.

Instead, when he returned and couldn't get his key to work, and was about to leave, I opened the door with the chain on, when he was standing at the elevator, and put the letter on the floor for him, outside the door. Then I locked the door again.

He was a foreign student and he went straight to the police and showed them the letter. After they read the letter, they called me, and I told them he was welcome to get his stuff, but I needed an appointment because I wanted a friend to be here when he came. They said the police would come with him, and I said fine, and in 5 or 10 minutes they were there. He annoyed the police by taking forever to pick out what he wanted to take. he wanted his deposit back and I gave him a check for some, but told him and the police I needed to hold back some for the phone bill. This is 25 years ago, and it just occurs to me that I don't think he ever asked for the money I held back.

The police that evening didn't challenge my right to kick him out, even if I had no right, because that is what courts are for. The police are basically there to keep the peace and arrest criminals, not to get involved in civil matters.

Meirman

-- If emailing, please let me know whether or not you are posting the same letter. Change domain to erols.com, if necessary.

[meirman]

In alt.home.repair on Wed, 26 Jan 2005 18:24:55 GMT "Dee" posted:

Well put. I wish I'd said that. :)

Meirman

-- If emailing, please let me know whether or not you are posting the same letter. Change domain to erols.com, if necessary.

[meirman]

In alt.home.repair on Wed, 26 Jan 2005 16:47:06 GMT "bumtracks" posted:

A lot of police know the law in general, but most don't know all the details, and some don't even know the basics. One might "usually" get good advice, but the problem is knowing whether this is one of the times they give good advice, or one they give bad advice.

Meirman

-- If emailing, please let me know whether or not you are posting the same letter. Change domain to erols.com, if necessary.

[effi]

good information, and in your other posts in this thread as well

you were silent on the issues raised by the owner of possible (or actual? owner didn't clarify) undergae drinking and pot use by the tenant on the owner's property (i.e. from owner, from below quoted text: " I'm afraid he's going to trash the place or worse yet, get raided for having under-aged friends in there drinking and smoking pot.") are those issues best left alone by the owner in the situation cited, whether possible or actual?

[meirman]

In alt.home.repair on Wed, 26 Jan 2005 14:07:32 -0500 "Sam O'Nella" posted:

Ellipsis.

Meirman

-- If emailing, please let me know whether or not you are posting the same letter. Change domain to erols.com, if necessary.

[meirman]

In alt.home.repair on Wed, 26 Jan 2005 14:07:32 -0500 "Sam O'Nella" posted:

Ellipsis. Greek, not Latin.

Meirman

-- If emailing, please let me know whether or not you are posting the same letter. Change domain to erols.com, if necessary.

[meirman]

In alt.home.repair on Thu, 27 Jan 2005 02:44:16 GMT Phisherman posted:

Cops have some level of immunity from false arrest suits, but other people don't. If you manage to get someone arrested by lying to the cops, I'm pretty sure you'll be liable for damages. If, in these circumstances, you don't lie to the police, I'm pretty sure no cop will arrest anyone.

A story. I knew two guys who were in law school and they sublet from someone, who I think was subletting from someone else. They'd been living there for more than a year, or at least more than 6 months when the last guy I mentioned came back to the city. He used his key to get in and changed the locks. When my two guys got back, their keys didn't fit, so they broke in through a window and changed the locks again. The primary tenant called the police, and of course they came. My two guys pointed out that this was a civil matter and the cop needn't get involved. The cop agreed and he left. I think eventually, my two guys agreed to leave at the end of the school year, which was only a month away or so, and they did, and the guy agreed to move back in then.

Meirman

-- If emailing, please let me know whether or not you are posting the same letter. Change domain to erols.com, if necessary.

[meirman]

In alt.home.repair on Wed, 26 Jan 2005 19:24:39 -0500 "Colbyt" posted:

I'm pretty sure that is becaus there have been a lot of rotten landlords who have ruined it for the good landlords, who are the overwhelming majority of them.

I think everywhere in the country if you write a check knowing it is a closed acount or there isn't enough money in the account to cover it, it is a crime.

Maybe you're saying in practice they don't prosecute it.

It is not a crime anywhere if the check is dated tomorrow or later. (Because I think, one could have planned to put in the money to cover it and then not been able to. Maybe for other reasons too. But that is a reason a person might want to refuse a check which is not dated today. I"m not sure about checks that are dated yesterday or earlier.)

Meirman

-- If emailing, please let me know whether or not you are posting the same letter. Change domain to erols.com, if necessary.

[meirman]

In alt.home.repair on Wed, 26 Jan 2005 18:56:16 -0600 [e-mail] (m Ransley) posted:

You're misusing the word fraud.

And there is no need to report contributinos to one's utility costs unless one is deducting his gas, electricity or phone from his gross income, for the sake of calculating taxes. I doubt Kathy is.

Meirman

-- If emailing, please let me know whether or not you are posting the same letter. Change domain to erols.com, if necessary.

[meirman]

In alt.home.repair on Wed, 26 Jan 2005 17:17:29 GMT "Art" posted:

That's the Parole Evidence rule, if you want to hunt for it on the web, and that's for the purchase of real estate, not the rental.

There are millions of leases in America that are only verbal, and they are still enforceable.

Yes, he has. You are mixed up about what is consideration. Some contracts are a promise for an act**, but most are a promise for a promise. Kathy promised to let him stay there (implied: until 30 days after she told him he can't.) and this guy promised to pay a share of the utilities and to do chores, iirc. That's mutual consideration and there is a contract.

The fact that he hasn't fulfilled his promises doesn't mean there was no contract, or that this is now no contract.

**An example of a unilateral contract, a promise for an act, is a Reward poster. "200 dollar reward for the return of lost dog, Skipper. Brown and white cocker spaniel." When a person performs the specified act, returns the dog, the person putting up the reward poster has to fulfill his promise, and give him the 200 dollars. (I'm sure there's an exception in the law if you can prove he was the one who stole the dog.)

You have some recollection of the law, but not enough . Please don't give legal advice.

Meirman

-- If emailing, please let me know whether or not you are posting the same letter. Change domain to erols.com, if necessary.