|
So just as I suspected the wife called their lawyer who says he has a date for mediation, they are thinking the 11th or 15th of August, whatever works around their schedule. Wife let him know that was simply not going to work. When she told me this all I could say was I told you so. We then informed their lawyer we would be listing the house for sale on the market, which he said we could not do that, it was "against the law". Well the contract which comes from the OREC says we can, I just looked the landlord tennent act which says this:
128. Consent of tenant for landlord to enter dwelling unit—Emergency entry—Abuse of right of entry—Notice—Abandoned premises—Refusal
of consent
A. A tenant shall not unreasonably withhold
consent to the landlord, his agents and employees,
to enter into the dwelling unit in order to
inspect the premises, make necessary or agreed repairs,
decorations, alterations or improvements, supply
necessary or agreed services or exhibit the dwell
-
ing unit to prospective or actual purchasers,
mortgagee, tenants, workmen or contractors.
B. A landlord, his agents and employees may
enter the dwelling unit without consent of the
tenant in case of emergency.
C. A landlord shall not abuse the right of
access or use it to harass the tenant. Except in case of
emergency or unless it is impracticable to do
so, the landlord shall give the tenant at least one (1)
day’s notice of his intent to enter and may
enter only at reasonable times.
D. Unless the tenant has abandoned or
surrendered the premises, a landlord has no other right
of access during a tenancy except as is provided
in this act or pursuant to a court order.
E. If the tenant refuses to allow lawful access,
the landlord may obtain injunctive relief to com
-
pel access or he may terminate the rental agreemenLawyer on our behalf being obtained now. Afterwards I have to decide if its worth renting out the old house or just getting rid of it. On 7/21/2016 3:21 PM, Kaleb C. Striplin
via Mercedes wrote:
Yes, you are right. They are going to lose as it is black and white they are in violation but for some very strange reason I still cant comprehend they decided to hire an lawyer so we are of course going to have to hire one, which they will have to pay for when they lose. It would stand to reason at first glance we would not need to even though they have one because they are in clear violation. BUT, and this is the big part, these lawyers will find ways to stall, and delay and do whatever they can to win, so we really have no choice. In fact, if you are in court by yourself and the other party has a lawyer, the judge just seems to listen to the lawyer and does not pay much attention to the person who does not have a lawyer, so the lawyer is running the show basically which we say yesterday by the fact that he got it dismissed and he is supposedly going to setup the mediation. He does not need to be in control, we need to be in control. |
_______________________________________ http://www.okiebenz.com
To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
