rental issues

[goldphoenix]

Hi all,

I'm not sure where to post this, so mods feel free to move it.

I'm having an issue with my landlord and I'm wondering if anyone can enlighten me as to what I can do to rectify this mess.

My original lease agreement for one year was that I was to pay on the 12th of every month, with a 5 day grace period. Since that time I have fallen behind one month each year (total of three going on four years). In the second year I fell behind and the landlord used my deposit toward my rent. In the third year (last year) I became late by two weeks, and began paying on the third of every month. Then this year, I was out of work for a month, fell behind again, and now he is threatening to evict me. My rent is $350 a month for a one-bedroom apartment.

I understand where he is coming from, and I have been trying to tell him that now that I have work again (granted it's not 40 hours and is only around $6 an hour) I can catch up no problem if he just allows me the time. He has a corvette payment to keep up with so he's been hitting me with these threats every month that I don't pay on the third. I paid rent last month on the 17th and he accepted it.

The letter I received this morning he claimed my rent was late again and that he was tired of my excuses and broken promises and that I had ten days to get out (notice to evict) and that if I wasn't he would take out eviction papers on me.

Now it seems to me that his acceptance of payment on a particular date sets terms, but I could be wrong. I fully intend on paying him the additional $525 (the amount I have fallen behind these past three plus years, counting the deposit he used in place of my rent) I owe him on top of the current rent, however he is being very impatient.

Any suggestions or discussion from which I can learn would be greatly appreciated!!

goldphoenix

[idknow]

Originally Posted by goldphoenix

Hi all,

I'm not sure where to post this, so mods feel free to move it.

I'm having an issue with my landlord and I'm wondering if anyone can enlighten me as to what I can do to rectify this mess.

My original lease agreement for one year was that I was to pay on the 12th of every month, with a 5 day grace period. Since that time I have fallen behind one month each year (total of three going on four years). In the second year I fell behind and the landlord used my deposit toward my rent. In the third year (last year) I became late by two weeks, and began paying on the third of every month. Then this year, I was out of work for a month, fell behind again, and now he is threatening to evict me. My rent is $350 a month for a one-bedroom apartment.

I understand where he is coming from, and I have been trying to tell him that now that I have work again (granted it's not 40 hours and is only around $6 an hour) I can catch up no problem if he just allows me the time. He has a corvette payment to keep up with so he's been hitting me with these threats every month that I don't pay on the third. I paid rent last month on the 17th and he accepted it.

The letter I received this morning he claimed my rent was late again and that he was tired of my excuses and broken promises and that I had ten days to get out (notice to evict) and that if I wasn't he would take out eviction papers on me.

Now it seems to me that his acceptance of payment on a particular date sets terms, but I could be wrong. I fully intend on paying him the additional $525 (the amount I have fallen behind these past three plus years, counting the deposit he used in place of my rent) I owe him on top of the current rent, however he is being very impatient.

Any suggestions or discussion from which I can learn would be greatly appreciated!!

goldphoenix

Landlord-Tenant Law is the reason I became interested in learning the Law (God used this to teach me the rest!!! woohoo)

ok, first - where are you located?
B, has your state replaced the common law with statute law?


all 50 states claim to accept common law as it came from England.

more later... i need those two first

[charlesa6]

Originally Posted by goldphoenix

Hi all,

I'm not sure where to post this, so mods feel free to move it.

I'm having an issue with my landlord and I'm wondering if anyone can enlighten me as to what I can do to rectify this mess.

My original lease agreement for one year was that I was to pay on the 12th of every month, with a 5 day grace period. Since that time I have fallen behind one month each year (total of three going on four years). In the second year I fell behind and the landlord used my deposit toward my rent. In the third year (last year) I became late by two weeks, and began paying on the third of every month. Then this year, I was out of work for a month, fell behind again, and now he is threatening to evict me. My rent is $350 a month for a one-bedroom apartment.

I understand where he is coming from, and I have been trying to tell him that now that I have work again (granted it's not 40 hours and is only around $6 an hour) I can catch up no problem if he just allows me the time. He has a corvette payment to keep up with so he's been hitting me with these threats every month that I don't pay on the third. I paid rent last month on the 17th and he accepted it.

The letter I received this morning he claimed my rent was late again and that he was tired of my excuses and broken promises and that I had ten days to get out (notice to evict) and that if I wasn't he would take out eviction papers on me.

Now it seems to me that his acceptance of payment on a particular date sets terms, but I could be wrong. I fully intend on paying him the additional $525 (the amount I have fallen behind these past three plus years, counting the deposit he used in place of my rent) I owe him on top of the current rent, however he is being very impatient.

Any suggestions or discussion from which I can learn would be greatly appreciated!!

goldphoenix

First, he get take you to court in order to evict you. Second, what state you live in?

[goldphoenix]

Hi guys,

Thank you for your replies!

Charlesa6, thank you, but I'd really rather try to remain out of court if at all possible.

I'm located within the geographical boundaries commonly known as north carolina.

That's interesting Idknow!

North Carolina attorneys use the North Carolina General Statutes among others, but I have read somewhere in the statutes that the common law still applies or cannot be abrogated or something similar. So seeing as the main body of laws they use down at the courthouse are called Statutes I'm guessing that has sort of taken over the common law, at least so far as that is what the citizens are familiar with being charged with. Here's a link to the Statutes:
http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/gascript...s/Statutes.asp

Landlord Tenant Statutes are in chapter 42. http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/EnactedL...hapter_42.html

Can you please tell me how I can tell for sure if common law has been displaced by statute in any particular state? It would seem to me that a state cannot ever really displace common law and remain a republic or commonwealth state, but my understanding of many things of law are very limited.

I've found a few things but I'm not sure if they apply. I'm more curious to see what you gentlemen have to say.

goldphoenix

[idknow]

Originally Posted by goldphoenix

Hi guys,

Thank you for your replies!

Charlesa6, thank you, but I'd really rather try to remain out of court if at all possible.

I'm located within the geographical boundaries commonly known as north carolina.

That's interesting Idknow!

North Carolina attorneys use the North Carolina General Statutes among others, but I have read somewhere in the statutes that the common law still applies or cannot be abrogated or something similar. So seeing as the main body of laws they use down at the courthouse are called Statutes I'm guessing that has sort of taken over the common law, at least so far as that is what the citizens are familiar with being charged with. Here's a link to the Statutes:
http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/gascript...s/Statutes.asp

Landlord Tenant Statutes are in chapter 42. http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/EnactedL...hapter_42.html

Can you please tell me how I can tell for sure if common law has been displaced by statute in any particular state? It would seem to me that a state cannot ever really displace common law and remain a republic or commonwealth state, but my understanding of many things of law are very limited.

I've found a few things but I'm not sure if they apply. I'm more curious to see what you gentlemen have to say.

goldphoenix

Ok, here's the rest in brief:

the supreme court of Pennsylvania made a report years ago of all the legislation of parliment and the common law
that are *still* effective today.

One of the common law opinions of court is from the 1600s and concerns and details the required
procedure for how rent is to be demanded and collected by landlords from tenants.

In the county where I sleep, I have not met ONE landlord who is aware of the procedure, nor
have I met one tenant who is aware!

I can teach to anyone who is interested in less than 5 minutes,
but no one wants to believe it or stand on it to enforce it as
an integral part of a lease.

The Proceudure is this:
The rent is due once per month,
on the exact day that it is due,
to and for the exact penny,
and
the landlord or his agent
must appear on the property,
during the hours of sunlight, after sun-rise and before sun-down,
and they must knock on the door to the property you rent,
and must announce the exact rent due to the exact penny.
even if you are not present on the land to acknowledge what the landlord or agent says
that is what they must do.

By Shepardising the Pennsylvania court opinions, I think I found that there is only one reference
per century. It's been about 8 years since I studied this particular facet of the law;

And the point is that it is still viable, and the report of the Pa. Supreme court could be used in
an action against you as foundation to proving that your landlord failed to obey the procedure for demand for rent.

In the Penns. act, the section for ``demand, notice to quit'' (etc.)
The Penns. section clearly says that "after a demand for rent" - that word "demand" contemplates and
references and includes *by reference* that four centuries old procedure.

The requirement that a landlord or his agent must appear on the land *is* the demand.

N. B. that there is no mention of mail;
also if you agree to use the mail for communication of rent, then that would be a clause of
a private contract which supercedes act of legislature and common law.

I just remembered that the procedure is even older than the 400 court opinion which details the demand;
because the demand-procedure in that decision is from an even older opinion that (if I recall) is
undated.

Any questions?

So, a demand for rent performed ON the land (not by mail) must occur before the next step is done for non-payment of rent, and if the tenant is subsequently brought to court for non-payment, the tenant must

1. enter into evidence the Note of the aforementioned demand procedure from the state library showing the procedure;

2. rebut the landlord's notice as being premature because the LL didnt follow the procedure; and,

3. show that the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction because of the LL's failure to obey the common law.

Which would cancel the proceedings.

[charlesa6]

Originally Posted by goldphoenix

Hi guys,

Thank you for your replies!

Charlesa6, thank you, but I'd really rather try to remain out of court if at all possible.

I'm located within the geographical boundaries commonly known as north carolina.

That's interesting Idknow!

North Carolina attorneys use the North Carolina General Statutes among others, but I have read somewhere in the statutes that the common law still applies or cannot be abrogated or something similar. So seeing as the main body of laws they use down at the courthouse are called Statutes I'm guessing that has sort of taken over the common law, at least so far as that is what the citizens are familiar with being charged with. Here's a link to the Statutes:
http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/gascript...s/Statutes.asp

Landlord Tenant Statutes are in chapter 42. http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/EnactedL...hapter_42.html

Can you please tell me how I can tell for sure if common law has been displaced by statute in any particular state? It would seem to me that a state cannot ever really displace common law and remain a republic or commonwealth state, but my understanding of many things of law are very limited.

I've found a few things but I'm not sure if they apply. I'm more curious to see what you gentlemen have to say.

goldphoenix

Sure, it applies by the statue of common law or statutory law in any state.Written eviction notice the landlord must serve the tenant with written notice before filling a court case: There two type exception; 1. A lease can waive the right to notice; Ill.2d.1,370 N.E 2d 504 (1977); Frocks V. Ziff, 357 Ill. 497,74 N.E. 2d 699 (1947).
2. If the lease sets a fixed time for its expiration, no written notice is required.
It the landlord givess notices anyway, it must comply with the statue or local ordinaces can also require a written notice.
If you decided that you don't want to pursue the law suit, settlement will be the best to go. Talk to this guy, about working something out. Persuasive - (Yes) intimidation - (No). Work all the time!

[goldphoenix]

Originally Posted by idknow

Ok, here's the rest in brief:

the supreme court of Pennsylvania made a report years ago of all the legislation of parliment and the common law
that are *still* effective today.

One of the common law opinions of court is from the 1600s and concerns and details the required
procedure for how rent is to be demanded and collected by landlords from tenants.

In the county where I sleep, I have not met ONE landlord who is aware of the procedure, nor
have I met one tenant who is aware!

I can teach to anyone who is interested in less than 5 minutes,
but no one wants to believe it or stand on it to enforce it as
an integral part of a lease.

The Proceudure is this:
The rent is due once per month,
on the exact day that it is due,
to and for the exact penny,
and
the landlord or his agent
must appear on the property,
during the hours of sunlight, after sun-rise and before sun-down,
and they must knock on the door to the property you rent,
and must announce the exact rent due to the exact penny.
even if you are not present on the land to acknowledge what the landlord or agent says
that is what they must do.

By Shepardising the Pennsylvania court opinions, I think I found that there is only one reference
per century. It's been about 8 years since I studied this particular facet of the law;

And the point is that it is still viable, and the report of the Pa. Supreme court could be used in
an action against you as foundation to proving that your landlord failed to obey the procedure for demand for rent.

In the Penns. act, the section for ``demand, notice to quit'' (etc.)
The Penns. section clearly says that "after a demand for rent" - that word "demand" contemplates and
references and includes *by reference* that four centuries old procedure.

The requirement that a landlord or his agent must appear on the land *is* the demand.

N. B. that there is no mention of mail;
also if you agree to use the mail for communication of rent, then that would be a clause of
a private contract which supercedes act of legislature and common law.

I just remembered that the procedure is even older than the 400 court opinion which details the demand;
because the demand-procedure in that decision is from an even older opinion that (if I recall) is
undated.

Any questions?

So, a demand for rent performed ON the land (not by mail) must occur before the next step is done for non-payment of rent, and if the tenant is subsequently brought to court for non-payment, the tenant must

1. enter into evidence the Note of the aforementioned demand procedure from the state library showing the procedure;

2. rebut the landlord's notice as being premature because the LL didnt follow the procedure; and,

3. show that the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction because of the LL's failure to obey the common law.

Which would cancel the proceedings.

I've never heard of this, Idknow. It's definitely interesting though. I am always willing to learn. Our Father knows I've listened to others who spoke Truth and in learning how they deal with situations in an honorable way have come to see the that things are not at all how government agencies (and other agencies/corps) want us to believe they are.

Up til now there has been no use of the mail regarding rent. Lately he has been leaving a note on the door in the morning on the date he wants the rent paid asking for me to contact him or asking me to move out in ten days, and if I do not, he says he's taking out eviction papers. He does not knock or state outloud that I owe him money, because if he did I would have heard him. But he has been tacking a note to the door (this month it was on the 7th, others on different dates generally before the 7th).

Now I don't typically like applying statute to myself, however, there is a statute for this State that says the following: § 42‑33. Rent and costs tendered by tenant.

If, in any action brought to recover the possession of demised premises upon a forfeiture for the nonpayment of rent, the tenant, before judgment given in such action, pays or tenders the rent due and the costs of the action, all further proceedings in such action shall cease. If the plaintiff further prosecutes his action, and the defendant pays into court for the use of the plaintiff a sum equal to that which shall be found to be due, and the costs, to the time of such payment, or to the time of a tender and refusal, if one has occurred, the defendant shall recover from the plaintiff all subsequent costs; the plaintiff shall be allowed to receive the sum paid into court for his use, and the proceedings shall be stayed. (4 Geo. II, c. 28, s. 4; 1868‑9, c. 156, s. 26; Code, s. 1773; Rev., s. 2007; C.S., s. 2372.)

Does this mean that he must take a payment offered? or does it mean that I would have to pay the court if he refuses to take my payment? or does it suggest he must drop the action if I tender the payment? It would seem to me that if this is really about the money, he would have to take my payment and drop the eviction proceeding, but I could be way off.

It's important to me to do our Father's will, and I understand it is no good to be in debt to another. Now the landlord and I agreed that before I move out I would offer to pay for any damages beyond normal wear and tear since he used my deposit for unpayed rent. He also agreed to allow me to begin paying off the other $175 (half of $350) in bits and chunks if I start paying on the 1st or 3rd of the month again. He is now changing his tune and seems to not want to allow me to catch up.

Idknow, have you used this procedure you're talking about yourself?

When you are talking about the state library, would that be in the capital? where would I find a law library?

The landlord's notice is early anyway, since the lease says i have to pay on the 12th with a 5 day grace period. Granted, I've fallen behind a month or two, but again, the deposit was taken in place of one month, and the other month was fallen behind gradually, and the landlord continued taking payments despite that. Now all of a sudden he wants to change the due date, run water lines to my apartment so that I have to set up my own water account, and the offers he made regarding recarpeting, repainting and putting tile down on the bathroom floor have gone out the window.

I have a beautiful little lamb of God to look out for (my son) and a wonderful wife to take care of as well. So needless to say I'm pretty stressed about this, and feeling like a failure. I'm hoping to collect the money together by the 12th and tender payment. If I'm able to do that, can he refuse the payment if his problem with me is truly nonpayment?

I have other questions regarding the procedure you're mentioning, idknow, but I will save those for now, if that's okay.

Thank you for sharing, and I'd love to hear what you think of the above, or anything else that comes to mind further.

goldphoenix

[goldphoenix]

Originally Posted by charlesa6

Sure, it applies by the statue of common law or statutory law in any state.Written eviction notice the landlord must serve the tenant with written notice before filling a court case: There two type exception; 1. A lease can waive the right to notice; Ill.2d.1,370 N.E 2d 504 (1977); Frocks V. Ziff, 357 Ill. 497,74 N.E. 2d 699 (1947).
2. If the lease sets a fixed time for its expiration, no written notice is required.
It the landlord givess notices anyway, it must comply with the statue or local ordinaces can also require a written notice.
If you decided that you don't want to pursue the law suit, settlement will be the best to go. Talk to this guy, about working something out. Persuasive - (Yes) intimidation - (No). Work all the time!

What do you mean, charlesa6, by "a lease can waive the right to notice". I was on a one year lease when I originally started renting from this fellow. I then moved next door to another apartment he was renting over a year after signing the original lease. I am guessing the original lease, though expired, still applies as far as terms of an agreement, or perhaps that has changed through subsequent acceptance of payment on various dates since, if you know what I mean.

I talk to him every month about this, and every month, even though I pay for the most part every month (again, he used my deposit for one month two years ago, and I have fallen behind two weeks each year since [total of one month]) lately, he's wanted to rake me over the coals. I can get caught up and pay him the full amount if he would just relax for a couple months and let me do my work without stressing himself or me. But then I guess I'm perhaps expecting way too much from him.

When you say "if you decided you didn't want to pursue the law suit" are you talking about the landlord or me? and what "law suit" are you talking about?

If a lease can waive the right to notice, then he is behaving as if there is no valid lease. While the lease did expire (1 year lease) wouldn't the lease and the payment dates be considered the accepted terms? Doesn't accepting a payment at a particular time create an unspoken term or agreement to receive payment at that time? or am I totally wrong?

goldphoenix

[goldphoenix]

An additional question for you all. Doesn't contract supersede common law? If so, there are various provisions within the year lease that contradict the common law responsibilities of the landlord. Any comments please?

Thank you,

goldphoenix

[idknow]

Ok, there's alot here that you wrote, Gold, and it took me a few hours to grok it.

Originally Posted by goldphoenix

I've never heard of this, Idknow. It's definitely interesting though. I am always willing to learn. Our Father knows I've listened to others who spoke Truth and in learning how they deal with situations in an honorable way have come to see the that things are not at all how government agencies (and other agencies/corps) want us to believe they are.

Then we are in agreement: it's my anointing to learn this stuff and how to esplain it!

Up til now there has been no use of the mail regarding rent. Lately he has been leaving a note on the door in the morning on the date he wants the rent paid asking for me to contact him or asking me to move out in ten days, and if I do not, he says he's taking out eviction papers. He does not knock or state outloud that I owe him money, because if he did I would have heard him. But he has been tacking a note to the door (this month it was on the 7th, others on different dates generally before the 7th).

Technically, according to the act i've shown and basic contract law, his act of leaving a note on any day he wishes to recieve the rent on *IS* an unwarranted and unilateral breakage of contract; it is also a violation of the common law.

Now I don't typically like applying statute to myself, however, there is a statute for this State that says the following: § 42-33. Rent and costs tendered by tenant.

I pseudo-quot scripture to remind you: where Paul writes that ``the law is not written to the righteous but to the sinner'' (something like that) My point is that the landlord-tenant act applies to landlords, not to tenants who are non-corporate, not committing commerce on the property leased. The act is a tool to you to use against the landlord for his non-compliance in obedience to the law.

If,
- in any action brought to recover the possession of demised ((accidently deleted this part)) upon a forfeiture for the nonpayment of rent,

the tenant,
- before judgment given in such action,
pays or tenders the rent due and the costs of the action,
all further proceedings in such action shall cease.

If the plaintiff further prosecutes his action,
- and the defendant pays into court for the use of the plaintiff a sum equal to that which shall be found to be due, and the costs, to the time of such payment, or to the time of a tender and refusal, if one has occurred,

the defendant shall recover from the plaintiff all subsequent costs;

the plaintiff shall be allowed to receive the sum paid into court for his use, and the proceedings shall be stayed.

(4 Geo. II, c. 28, s. 4; 1868-9, c. 156, s. 26; Code, s. 1773; Rev., s. 2007; C.S., s. 2372.)

at ", and the costs of the action" refers to court costs.
What is the source of this act?

Does this mean that he must take a payment offered?
or does it mean that I would have to pay the court if he refuses to take my payment?
or does it suggest he must drop the action if I tender the payment?

It would seem to me that if this is really about the money, he would have to take my payment and drop the eviction proceeding, but I could be way off.

I cant answer with looking at more of what you're quoting. sorry brother. `4 Geo II' is an Act of Parliment during King
George's reign.

It's important to me to do our Father's will, and I understand it is no good to be in debt to another. Now the landlord and I agreed that before I move out I would offer to pay for any damages beyond normal wear and tear since he used my deposit for unpayed rent. He also agreed to allow me to begin paying off the other $175 (half of $350) in bits and chunks if I start paying on the 1st or 3rd of the month again. He is now changing his tune and seems to not want to allow me to catch up.

Idknow, have you used this procedure you're talking about yourself?

To the 1600s demand-procedure, I have but unsucessfully because I was dealing with a "judge" who completely didnt care to learn the Real Law, and, an unknown Superior court aide (lawyer) torpedoed my appeal because the ijit didnt understand at all what I wrote in my appeal and didnt understand what Subject-matter jurisdiction was!!!

When you are talking about the state library, would that be in the capital? where would I find a law library?

by `state library' I refer to the State Repository, usually there are more local repositories but you can find the state govt's library by calling the state's main information number which should be in the blue pages of your
phone book or via Google of course.

The landlord's notice is early anyway, since the lease says i have to pay on the 12th with a 5 day grace period.

Granted, I've fallen behind a month or two, but again,
the deposit was taken in place of one month,
and the other month was fallen behind gradually,
and the landlord continued taking payments despite that.

Now all of a sudden he wants to change the due date,
run water lines to my apartment so that I have to set up my own water account,
and the offers he made regarding recarpeting,
repainting and putting tile down on the bathroom floor have gone out the window.

I azoom your lease states explicitly that the rent is due on the twelf of each month (forget the grace period for the moment)

Now, if he puts a note on the land to you BEFORE the twelf, before the rent is due, then this *IS* a unilateral
change of the contract by him, AKA contract of adhesion, which "courts" hate and you lawfully can ignore the note
because it is premature according to the written/explicit contract that you have with the landlord.

According to all understanding of contract law, which is NOT difficult to understand, one party cannot unilaterally change the contract to the other party's detriment: your landlord cannot especially change the date that the rent is due without allowing you to negotiate or refuse to agree to the change; and a court *must* uphold that you have the right to refuse to the change in terms!

I have a beautiful little lamb of God to look out for (my son) and a wonderful wife to take care of as well.

Wonderful! and "Blessed is the Man who finds a wife!"
oops, I forget the verse regarding children so, also replace wife with children.

So needless to say I'm pretty stressed about this, and feeling like a failure.

Forget and cast out the fear! I think you know better than to allow your faith to be contaminated.

I'm hoping to collect the money together by the 12th and tender payment.
If I'm able to do that, can he refuse the payment if his problem with me is truly nonpayment?

According to your posts above and the common law regarding demand and his shananigans with leaving premature notes on the property, harrassment and perhaps bait-and-switch manipulation to get you to do thing `his way,' I'd say that you can impeach his word and acts in court and show him to be a dishonorable man (gender?) unable to keep his word, vocally or contractually.

I'd begin making plans to move. (my opinion, of course, but I wont stay anywhere where the LL curses himself! and I have moved because of what a LL said to me!)

I have other questions regarding the procedure you're mentioning, idknow, but I will save those for now, if that's okay.

Thank you for sharing, and I'd love to hear what you think of the above, or anything else that comes to mind further.

goldphoenix

That's why we all are here, brother, to help by using what the good Lord has given to each of us.

I'm an elbow, funny bone and neuron!!!

how's that?

Any questions?

p.s. about the deposit being used as rent: that's illegal.