justin2003
Member
facing eviction...please tell me if the lease is valid...HELP
What is the name of your state? CA
I am currently living in a townhouse. For the last 6 months I paid rent to an individual or XYZ corp. The rent was never rejected. Upon entering into this month to month lease (in 2002), the landlord and I entered into an agreement which is titled "residential lease agreement and deposit receipt." All the adequate terms were present such as date of move in, when rent is due, obligations of the tenant/landlord, dated, amount of rent, and adequate signatures. The line for the signatures is very simple. Just has a dotted line for the parties. XYZ corp as the landlord and me as the tenant.
Subsequently, I entered into a 4 year lease with XYZ corp (later in 2002). XYZ corp then sold the property and failed to disclose the second lease to the new owner. Now the new owner is at a crossroads on what to do. Obviously, XYZ is alleging that the most recent lease is not a valid lease but merely a proposal to the lease. This lease is identical to the first lease except it does not have the signature of the agent. However, it contains the handwritten name of the corporation in the agent's name on the dotted line and my signature. There is even an addendum in the agent's handwriting. All material provisions are written in the agent's handwriting.
My question, is the second lease valid and controlling?
Addtional facts (are they helpful?):
1) the corporation was dissolved in 2000. The corporation was an entity that was composed only of one family (mother, father, sister, son)
2) the son was the agent with whom I entered into the agreement with. (I know him from school and were at one time, good friends)
3) the now dissolved corp states that the son did not have the authority to enter into such an agreement. I allege there was apparent authority as evidenced by the following:
a) son always bragged to everyone that he was an agent of the corporation.
b) he entered into the first lease with me which the family argues is controlling
c) my neighbor and I pay rent with a check to the name of the son and the family acknowledges receipt.
d) When my waterheater pipe broke, son fixed it by buying supplies with his own credit card and bragged "whew that's another write off."
e) The entire family comingles their business and personal accounts (including the son)
All these statements were made in the presence of 2 other unbiased witnesses.
He has admitted to others and even left a message on my phone that he acknowledges a 2 year lease at the most but not a 4 year lease. He still sticks to the story that this is merely a proposal.
I believe that son had the apparent authority if not the express authority to enter into such as agreement as the XYZ/family does not argue the validity of the first lease which was entered into in the same manner.
My questions are:
1) can I establish agency by these facts? If not what else would I need to prove?
2) even though it is a dissolved corp, can corp by estoppel by established as the rent was accepted as written to the corp and obviouisly cashed by the corp or a business entity with a like name?
3) does a contract with an entity require signature of an agent when there is no line for "agent"? What is the least amount required for a meeting of the minds and intent on its face?
Please help. Thanks
What is the name of your state? CA
I am currently living in a townhouse. For the last 6 months I paid rent to an individual or XYZ corp. The rent was never rejected. Upon entering into this month to month lease (in 2002), the landlord and I entered into an agreement which is titled "residential lease agreement and deposit receipt." All the adequate terms were present such as date of move in, when rent is due, obligations of the tenant/landlord, dated, amount of rent, and adequate signatures. The line for the signatures is very simple. Just has a dotted line for the parties. XYZ corp as the landlord and me as the tenant.
Subsequently, I entered into a 4 year lease with XYZ corp (later in 2002). XYZ corp then sold the property and failed to disclose the second lease to the new owner. Now the new owner is at a crossroads on what to do. Obviously, XYZ is alleging that the most recent lease is not a valid lease but merely a proposal to the lease. This lease is identical to the first lease except it does not have the signature of the agent. However, it contains the handwritten name of the corporation in the agent's name on the dotted line and my signature. There is even an addendum in the agent's handwriting. All material provisions are written in the agent's handwriting.
My question, is the second lease valid and controlling?
Addtional facts (are they helpful?):
1) the corporation was dissolved in 2000. The corporation was an entity that was composed only of one family (mother, father, sister, son)
2) the son was the agent with whom I entered into the agreement with. (I know him from school and were at one time, good friends)
3) the now dissolved corp states that the son did not have the authority to enter into such an agreement. I allege there was apparent authority as evidenced by the following:
a) son always bragged to everyone that he was an agent of the corporation.
b) he entered into the first lease with me which the family argues is controlling
c) my neighbor and I pay rent with a check to the name of the son and the family acknowledges receipt.
d) When my waterheater pipe broke, son fixed it by buying supplies with his own credit card and bragged "whew that's another write off."
e) The entire family comingles their business and personal accounts (including the son)
All these statements were made in the presence of 2 other unbiased witnesses.
He has admitted to others and even left a message on my phone that he acknowledges a 2 year lease at the most but not a 4 year lease. He still sticks to the story that this is merely a proposal.
I believe that son had the apparent authority if not the express authority to enter into such as agreement as the XYZ/family does not argue the validity of the first lease which was entered into in the same manner.
My questions are:
1) can I establish agency by these facts? If not what else would I need to prove?
2) even though it is a dissolved corp, can corp by estoppel by established as the rent was accepted as written to the corp and obviouisly cashed by the corp or a business entity with a like name?
3) does a contract with an entity require signature of an agent when there is no line for "agent"? What is the least amount required for a meeting of the minds and intent on its face?
Please help. Thanks
Last edited: