eviction with the court, if the landlord deposits their checks does that mean they accept the payment in full? Their checks do not include the late fees, let alone the court fees (which are clearly listed in the lease). Landlord wants to go through with the eviction but does not want to risk stopping the
eviction with the court, if the landlord deposits their checks does that mean they accept the payment in full? Their checks do not include the late fees, let alone the court fees (which are clearly listed in the lease). Landlord wants to go through with the eviction but does not want to risk stopping the eviction, if they deposit the check. At the same time, they don't want the risk of the tenant cancelling the checks, and losing all that money. What should the landlord do, legally? Thank you. Please state your source or your expertise. Situation in Atlanta Georgia.
If the LL accepts the payment, the whole process starts over. It just means they accepted what was paid. The tenant is still short and still owes, and the LL can turn around and issue a new pay or quit notice immediately. If LL wants to through with eviction, they should not cash the check or accept any payment that is not in full.
doesn't seem fair to the landlord……
Not after the eviction case has been filed. After filing the tenant would still be liable for the late fees, filing fees, possible lawyer fees and any other expense involved in the eviction, and the option to allow the tenant to pay these fees to avoid eviction is solely up to the landlord. The payment of rent is owed regardless and still does not absolve the breach of contract.
Had the tenants paid the rent, without the late fees before the landlord filed for eviction, they would have caught the landlord making a mistake, because doing so absolves the late fees.
Proceed with the eviction.
The judge cannot overrule the landlord's desire to get rid of a tenant who doesn't pay rent on time.
As for the unpaid rent, you owe rent for every day that you occupied the rental. The landlord can sue you in small claims court and win.
You have to decide whether you want to accept payment or remove them.
If you want to evict them, you should not cash the check. Refuse all payment until you go to court. Yes, their account is not considered paid in full until all legitimate late fees have been paid. But, a judge is not likely to go through with evictions if all they owe is the late fee. Displacing someone from their house, especially in winter, is not something that a judge (or you) should take lightly.
Any payment you accept will lessen the severity of their overdue account, and it will lessen your chances of being granted an eviction. If they bring their rental payments current and only owe late fees, a judge is likely to reset the evictions process and tell you to come back next time they miss rent.
So, either accept the payment and give them another chance, or refuse payment and proceed with evictions.
I am a LL. If it were me, I'd refuse payment, and continue with evictions. In my personal experience, evictions are exceptionally rare and only a last resort for an exceptionally bad tenant. So, if you have come to the point of filing with the court, I can assume that you have a major bad egg. If this is the case, the cheapest option in the long run is to just move them out.
Go through with the eviction. If everything you say is true, the judge will award you a judgement for unpaid rent, the late fees, and court costs. Yes, it is true that winning a judgement is different from you actually collecting the money. But, this is why you collect a deposit. The deposit will offset some of your losses. And, really, you should have been moving forward with the evictions so that they weren't very late. If you stay on top of non-paying tenants and don't let it stretch out for months, you will not lose as much rent.
In the future, this is a lesson on properly screening tenants and not letting accounts get severly delinquent.
In my state, you are prohibited from from charging a late fee or filing for evictions until the rent is 14 days overdue. I explain the process and timeline for evictions to each tenant unpon lease signing. This way, they know the timeline and consequences for nonpayment. This is my process:
1. Three days after rent is due, I send out a "friendly" rent reminder.
2. 7 days after its due, I issue a letter that demands payment in 7 days. Otherwise, I assess a 4% late fee (max allowed by state) and issue a "7 day cure or quit" notice on the 14th day.
3. After the 21st day that rent is late, I go to court and file for evictions.
So, the time elapsed between missing payment and filing for evictions is less than a month. In my town, it takes almost a month to get a court date, so I'll be out 2-3 months rent due to each evictions. This is just the reality and cost of an eviction. It is far cheaper to avoid them by placing good tenants, and being flexible on a case by case basis. I'm not saying be permissive, but there is a balance. "Is this a good tenant who had a hard month or is this a chronic non payer?"
The money is back pay owed to the landlord, not extra money. It legally belongs to the landlord. Fees put onto the amount need to be paid as well.
It's the same issue as you paying for a car, the fact the car will be repossessed due to non payment doesn't stop the fact that any payment sent to catch up (though not fully) with the back payments will stop the repossession – the bank who has the loan is still OWED the payments on the car.