Tenant vs. Tenant Dispute on California Rental Property and Verbal Agreement

Status
Not open for further replies.

xSaturNx

New Member
My jurisdiction is: California, USA

Hello all,

I jointly signed a lease with two other tenants on a house rental in California. Over the course of the year, there were some verbal conflicts with the tenants and ultimately the other two tenants informed me they were going to leave. After documented attempts to work this out and notifying the Landlord and explaining to them what would happen if they did and he didn't receive rent, a verbal agreement was made. I informed them that I was in no capacity to leave and would have no choice but to stay on and pay rent for everyone. Because I was willing to work this out, I made a verbal agreement with the two tenants stating such:

1. They come back to gather their belongings still in the house. (Furniture)

2. They come back to clean the house should I also try and break lease. (I was in the process of looking to buy a home.)

3. They help me evenly split rent for the time frame the house is vacant while the Landlord fills the house, once I do find a place.

While I did not get them to sign an agreement stating such (this was my first time renting with other tenants and learned the lesson there), it was understood to me that such a verbal agreement was binding in California, and given the volatile situation regarding their leaving, was complacent with that.

A few months passed and I bought my first home. Prior to closing escrow, I notified them that I will be moving out and will vacate the house before the next month when rent is due. Now the other two tenants appear to have no recollection of any agreement I made to them. After repeated documented attempts to contact them and work out a resolution to this, they have refused to help in anyway and claim that they do not need to pay for rent since they have it documented in a text message that I would. Unfortunately my verbal offer with them was not documented but only verbally agreed when this initially happened.

I contacted the Landlord and he confirmed what I already knew that they are still liable for the contract. While I made it clear to the other two tenants that I never absolved them of their obligation to the contract, I did say (verbally) that I would cover their rent if they would come back to cover the terms I mentioned should I attempt to break lease as well. So now I'm left with no choice but to take them to small claims court for the full unpaid amount due to their inability to honor their verbal agreement.

My questions are this:

1. Does their text they have of me stating (out of context) "I am paying for your rent as it is." and "This covers your financial obligation." form a binding agreement in California small claims court? Will a judge honor that text as proof that I am solely responsible for the contract when I have the contract stating all 3 of us are responsible financially?

2. Does my verbal agreement with them hold any weight in small claims if the other two members of the agreement no longer choose to remember it?

3. Am I in my right to sue them for the entire unpaid amount of rent I've had to cover since they left, after breaking their verbal agreement with me?

I never sought out new co-tenants as the Landlord stated that he would have to terminate the contract, add the new tenants to it, and basically relinquish the leaving tenants of further obligation. Plus with the verbal agreement I was under the impression that they would assist me as soon as I was ready to move out myself.

As they are unwilling to work with me on this stating the contract is now my sole responsibility, I have no choice but to move forward with legal action. Any insight you could provide on this to help my case would be most appreciated. Thanks!
 
1. Possibly.

2. Probably not as well as your text to them stating "this covers your financial obligation".

3. Likely not. Your own agreement with them was that they would only be required to owe rent on any remaining months once you vacated the rental.

On the other hand, it's relatively inexpensive to file in Small Claims court so what have you got to lose by filing a lawsuit against your former roommates except a few bucks? The idea that you will seek legal help in this matter may "help" them to rethink their obligation to you.

This case, like so many others, will boil down to a "he said, she said" type of argument and the judge will decide who he/she believes.

Gail
 
Hey Gail,

Thanks for the reply.

The words they are quoting in the text are part of a bigger text conversation that they are failing to acknowledge. That message was also hinged upon the verbal agreement they refuse to acknowledge. Again I'm sure this one is open to interpretation, but could I quite as easily have this refuted stating that the context of those words simply illustrate I had no choice but to pay the rent to prevent eviction and in doing so covers their obligation based off of our agreement? As for the lesser amount of rent owed, that was a condition to a verbal agreement that we had, which they state never happened. If that's the case, then I would simply need to refute the out of context statement they are quoting me on and would doing so, would you consider that enough to place reasonable doubt on the intended meaning behind text message? I mean, I don't dispute that I wrote it, simply that there were alot of other elements and pretenses behind that message.

Thanks again!
 
Frankly, a judge can decide pretty much what he or she wants to in a case like this. It wasn't very bright of you to have your roommates agree to something verbally when it sounds like all three of you weren't getting along very well in the first place.

Of course they're going to "forget" what they verbally agreed to. They're betting that 1. you won't take this to court or 2. the judge won't believe you.

If you do consider filing, try to keep your presentation as short and clear as possible. Bring all documentation with you (and practice beforehand how you would present this) but don't be surprised if you find that you'll simply end up answering "yes" or "no" to questions asked of the judge and very little else. Most of the judges I've come across that handle these civil cases actually have little patience for long winded explanations and they certainly don't like to be second guessed.

Simply present the facts...

1. You and your roommates all signed a lease on such and such a date.

2. Your roommates decided to leave on such and such a date.

3. Your landlord informed all of you what would happen if they chose to break the lease.

4. The verbal agreement you came up with them was such and such.

5. The roommates are now saying they have no recollection of this verbal agreement.

6. You are suing them for the amount of funds necessary to meet this verbal agreement.

7. Here is any documentation of such.

Gail
 
Gail,

Thanks again for your help in this matter!

I have a stronger case against one of the tenants than I do the other. California Small Claims court says I can sue twice a year up the amount I'm seeking. Can I sue each tenant on the contract separately on a breach of contract case? Neither of the two tenants are blood related although they were dating at the time. Both their names are on the same contract.

Thank you!
 
Certainly; if you wish you can sue them together or individually.

I recently sued two tenants together (in my state of Georgia); they were a mother and her adult daughter; different last names but they lived together. While the cost of filing against two individuals is typically higher than filing against one it was still less expensive to file against both at the same time than to file against one and, later, file against the other.

Frankly, if it were me, I'd file against both at the same time and see where the chips would fall when you got into court.

Gail
 
Thanks Gail,

Given the amount of money at stake (several thousand each), and the fact that the so called 'text message' they have only came from one party and not the other, I may find it easier to win against breach of contract on one who made no contact to me on this matter, and thereby makes that text message inadmissable as it never pertained to the other individual, unless you think otherwise. I feel its a safer manuever as what I said to only one in that text message doesn't carry over to the other. I never used words like "you both" or "together". One tenant just piggy-backed off the negotiations of the other. And I told them both they were responsible regardless of whatever they think or misinterpret my words to say.

Thanks!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top