Posted by Kevin on 12/11/06

More | Report Post

On september 27th 2006, I attended a hearing in reference
to confusion about the verbiage in our rental lease. On
october 6th 2006, the judge ruled in favor of the
plaintiff; our land lord. In his ruling he stated that our
rental lease was valid and ordered us to pay our rent
based on the lease at $875.00 per month, if paid on or
before the 1st of the month; and if paid subsequent to the
1st, the amount is to be $925.00. At the hearing, since
the landlord was not seeking the actual eviction; the
judge dismissed the plaintiff's original complaint for
eviction; and ordered that the rent for august 2006 which
was paid into the court registry be disbursted to the
landlord. Since the rent for september was not placed into
the court registry, we were ordered to paid the rent for
september as per the court order. The court order only
addresed the actual back rent that was owed, and not any
late charges or attorney's fees; in which we complied.On
october 7th the landlord came to our house and asked us
when we were going to pay the back rent for september, and
we informed him that other household expenses were paid;
and that on october 20th we would send him $350.00; and on
the 27th of october the balance of $575.00; for a total of
$925.00 as per the court order; and we did exactly what we
said we would do, and have the reciepts to prove it. The
landlord verbally agreed to the above. However on october
18th we recieved a Motion To Show Cause letter from the
plaintiff's attorney the letter stated that we were to
appear in court on octber 31st, to show why we should not
be held in contempt. I spoke to the landlord and asked him
why he moved forward in that manner; because we could not
get that day off from work; and he could not give me a
staright anwser; and we could not appear in court on that
day However we did still do what we said we would do in
reference to the figures above; and the landlord accepted
the money over a 7 day period; ending on october 27th
2006. Subsequently the landlord's attorney re-drafted the
paperwork re-introducing the originally dissmissed
complaint for eviction. This new paperwork was filed on
november 2nd 2006; and was based on the premise that the
rent for september was not paid. At the hearing I asked
the judge to let me go home and get my reciepts; and if he
could re-schedule the hearing. The judge did not allow me
to do what I requested and ruled in favor of the landlord.
Also prior to going into the hearing we issued to the
landlord a cashiers check for $1,150.00, thereby bringing
all back rent current. But the landlord pretended to have
not recieved any money from us subsequent to the court
order being issued and the december 1st court date. My
question is: how could the originally dismissed complaint
for eviction be re-introduced into the mix without my
right to due process being violated. My wife and I believe
that what happend to us was against the law. Please advise
if we are correct; by the way this case is in duval county
florida; and we feel that this is a unlawfully obtained
eviction.

Sincerely,
Kevin

EVICTION, 12/11/06, by Kevin .

Landlord-Tenant Law Chatboard

LATEST POSTS | BY TOPICS | SUBMIT A POST