I just moved into a new apartment less than two weeks ago. When I left my last apartment, my landlord said I was financially obligated to still pay the rent as well as lose my deposit since I would be breaking my lease when I left.
I've lived at that place since Oct of '02. Since then, I've went to the office to re-sign the original lease next to a handwritten line stating that the lease would be extended for another year every year up until Oct of '06. Thing is, last August ('06) the original landlord sold the property to new owners. And when last October arrived, I was NEVER called in to re-sign the lease for another year.
When I left my old place I stopped in to talk to the manager, it was then she mentioned that I was obligated to pay to pay until October of this year, but since she found someone to move in in August I was off the hook from then on. She said I was stilll obligated to pay for July, though. So this weekend I dropped off a check because she said if I didn't pay, they would come after me. I didn't want my credit affected, so I payed for July.
At the time I talked to the manager, I requested a copy of my lease. She gave it to me, and it had my signatures for '02 to '03, '03 to '04, '04 to '05, and '05 to '06. Remember I said I didn't go in and sign anything for '06 to '07.
Here's the thing: on the handwritten part for '05 to '06, it was obviously altered and a 6 was written over the 5, and a 7 was written over the 6 so it appeared that I signed for '06 to '07. So if this were actually the case, it would leave a gap in the timeline for '05 to '06 where I didn't sign.
Is this a valid practice? Am I obligated to this lease even though I didn't actually sign it for '06 to '07, but someone altered it so it looks like I did? They didn't even use white-out over the old numbers so its obvious that it was altered and the old numbers can be clearly seen.
2007-07-09
03:20:47
·
6 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous