Commercial Lease Advice Wanted

Forums › Off topic › Commercial Lease Advice Wanted - Insurance

1 | 2

sampler

441 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#748961 22-Jan-2013 16:19

nate:
sampler: Sounds like its time to move, At the
moment there are loads of commercial buildings around that require good
tenants.

You've never signed a commercial lease have you? It's not that simple.

Rather the opposite. I have been involved in a number of commercial
property actives over the years on all sides. Currently as a customer of
the Goodman property trust (http://www.goodman.com).

My comment had nothing to do with the contract length, ease of exit or
my own knowledge of such situations. More to do with the fact that the
landlord seems (from comments relayed) to be rather unprofessional. If I
was being told to "get off my a$$", I would most certainly be re
evaluating my ongoing business relationship with them.

When was the last time you told a customer to "get of their a$$" ??, I know I've been tempted.

Cheers
Lee

NordVPN

Protect your online activity with NordVPN (affiliate link).

loathe

58 posts

Master Geek

#749099 22-Jan-2013 19:56

Your lease agreement is moot.

The Property Law Act 2007 addresses this issue quite clearly:

Application of sections 269 and 270

(1)Sections 269 and 270 apply if, on or after 1 January 2008, leased premises, or the whole or any part of the land on which the leased premises are situated, are destroyed or damaged by 1 or more of the following events:
- (a)fire, flood, explosion, lightning, storm, earthquake, or volcanic activity:
- (b)the occurrence of any other peril against the risk of which the lessor is insured or has covenanted with the lessee to be insured.
(2)Section 269 applies even though an event that gives rise to the destruction or damage is caused or contributed to by the negligence of the lessee or the lessee’s agent.
(3)In this section and sections 269 and 270, lessee’s agent means a person for whose acts or omissions the lessee is responsible.

269Exoneration of lessee if lessor is insured

(1)If this section applies, the lessor must not require the lessee—
- (a)to meet the cost of making good the destruction or damage; or
- (b)to indemnify the lessor against the cost of making good the destruction or damage; or
- (c)to pay damages in respect of the destruction or damage.
(2)If this section applies, the lessor must indemnify the lessee against the cost of carrying out any works to make good the destruction or damage if the lessee is obliged by the terms of any agreement to carry out those works.
(3)Subsection (1) does not excuse the lessee from any liability to which the lessee would otherwise be subject, and the lessor does not have to indemnify the lessee under subsection (2), if, and to the extent that,—
- (a)the destruction or damage was intentionally done or caused by the lessee or the lessee’s agent; or
- (b)the destruction or damage was the result of an act or omission by the lessee or the lessee’s agent that—
  - (i)occurred on or about the leased premises or on or about the whole or any part of the land on which the premises are situated; and
  - (ii)constitutes an indictable offence within the meaning of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957; or
- (c)any insurance moneys that would otherwise have been payable to the lessor for the destruction or damage are irrecoverable because of an act or omission of the lessee or the lessee’s agent.

270Rights of lessor if insurance for leased premises or land is affected by negligence of lessee or lessee’s agent

(1)If this section applies and the destruction or damage is caused or contributed to by the negligence of the lessee or the lessee’s agent, the lessor may—
- (a)terminate the lease, on reasonable notice to the lessee, if the lessor’s ability to obtain or retain insurancecover on reasonable terms for the leased premises or the land on which the premises are situated has been prejudiced by the destruction or damage; or
- (b)recover from the lessee any increased insurance costs incurred by the lessor in relation to the leased premises or the land on which the premises are situated as a result of the destruction or damage (including, without limitation, any increases in the insurance premium that are, or become, payable by the lessor or, as the case may be, any insurance excess that the lessor may be required to pay in relation to any future claims for destruction or damage of that kind).
(2)This section overrides section 269.

Have the contractor make the invoice out to the landlord and let the BC take care of it.

networkn

Networkn
30209 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#749106 22-Jan-2013 20:03

loathe: Your lease agreement is moot.

The Property Law Act 2007 addresses this issue quite clearly:

Application of sections 269 and 270
(1)Sections 269 and 270 apply if, on or after 1 January 2008, leased premises, or the whole or any part of the land on which the leased premises are situated, are destroyed or damaged by 1 or more of the following events:
(a)fire, flood, explosion, lightning, storm, earthquake, or volcanic activity:
(b)the occurrence of any other peril against the risk of which the lessor is insured or has covenanted with the lessee to be insured.
(2)Section 269 applies even though an event that gives rise to the destruction or damage is caused or contributed to by the negligence of the lessee or the lessee’s agent.
(3)In this section and sections 269 and 270, lessee’s agent means a person for whose acts or omissions the lessee is responsible.
269Exoneration of lessee if lessor is insured
(1)If this section applies, the lessor must not require the lessee—
(a)to meet the cost of making good the destruction or damage; or
(b)to indemnify the lessor against the cost of making good the destruction or damage; or
(c)to pay damages in respect of the destruction or damage.
(2)If this section applies, the lessor must indemnify the lessee against the cost of carrying out any works to make good the destruction or damage if the lessee is obliged by the terms of any agreement to carry out those works.
(3)Subsection (1) does not excuse the lessee from any liability to which the lessee would otherwise be subject, and the lessor does not have to indemnify the lessee under subsection (2), if, and to the extent that,—
(a)the destruction or damage was intentionally done or caused by the lessee or the lessee’s agent; or
(b)the destruction or damage was the result of an act or omission by the lessee or the lessee’s agent that—
(i)occurred on or about the leased premises or on or about the whole or any part of the land on which the premises are situated; and
(ii)constitutes an indictable offence within the meaning of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957; or
(c)any insurance moneys that would otherwise have been payable to the lessor for the destruction or damage are irrecoverable because of an act or omission of the lessee or the lessee’s agent.
270Rights of lessor if insurance for leased premises or land is affected by negligence of lessee or lessee’s agent
(1)If this section applies and the destruction or damage is caused or contributed to by the negligence of the lessee or the lessee’s agent, the lessor may—
(a)terminate the lease, on reasonable notice to the lessee, if the lessor’s ability to obtain or retain insurancecover on reasonable terms for the leased premises or the land on which the premises are situated has been prejudiced by the destruction or damage; or
(b)recover from the lessee any increased insurance costs incurred by the lessor in relation to the leased premises or the land on which the premises are situated as a result of the destruction or damage (including, without limitation, any increases in the insurance premium that are, or become, payable by the lessor or, as the case may be, any insurance excess that the lessor may be required to pay in relation to any future claims for destruction or damage of that kind).
(2)This section overrides section 269.

Have the contractor make the invoice out to the landlord and let the BC take care of it.

Thanks for this, though I feel like I am reading German! :-)

Did you post this in response to the original Window (Caused by burglar) or leak ?(Which requires a cleaning company)

loathe

58 posts

Master Geek

#749117 22-Jan-2013 20:22

This was in response to the window. Basically your landlord is responsible for their own building assuming the damage has not been caused by the tenant's negligence.

Nate, you may wish to look further into section 269 (2).

networkn

Networkn
30209 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#749123 22-Jan-2013 20:35

loathe: This was in response to the window. Basically your landlord is responsible for their own building assuming the damage has not been caused by the tenant's negligence.

Nate, you may wish to look further into section 269 (2).

Thank you very much, I think you just saved Nate and I about $3000 between us.

I'll owe you a beer.

Any advice on the leak?

loathe

58 posts

Master Geek

#749130 22-Jan-2013 20:46

networkn:
loathe: This was in response to the window. Basically your landlord is responsible for their own building assuming the damage has not been caused by the tenant's negligence.

Nate, you may wish to look further into section 269 (2).

Thank you very much, I think you just saved Nate and I about $3000 between us.

I'll owe you a beer.

Any advice on the leak?

Run for the hills.

Handle9

9640 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#749154 22-Jan-2013 21:35

You can of course stop paying the lease, or a proportion of it, until it is resolved. It may be in breach of your lease but the reality of these sort of disputes is money talks. For him to recover the money will cost him more than the repair so he'll probably do something about it.

If you want to send him an email or letter stating that you believe him to be in breach of the lease and you are deducting reasonable costs in lieu of him resolving it. Whether or not you are legally right is semi irrelevant, you have the ren money which gives you a certain amount of leverage.

networkn

Networkn
30209 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#749155 22-Jan-2013 21:41

Handle9: You can of course stop paying the lease, or a proportion of it, until it is resolved. It may be in breach of your lease but the reality of these sort of disputes is money talks. For him to recover the money will cost him more than the repair so he'll probably do something about it.

If you want to send him an email or letter stating that you believe him to be in breach of the lease and you are deducting reasonable costs in lieu of him resolving it. Whether or not you are legally right is semi irrelevant, you have the ren money which gives you a certain amount of leverage.

There are some scary clauses in the lease about what happens if I do this. things like him being able to evict us within 14 days of non payment of any outstanding amount and taking property, and hum being able to enter the property after 7 days of non payment, not exact wording, but something along those lines.

I wouldn't do it that way by choice anyways. I like this place, and whilst I think he is being unreasonable, over $600 in total, it's not quite there yet.

loathe

58 posts

Master Geek

#749174 22-Jan-2013 22:01

For the purpose of your relationship with the landlord and the monetary sums involved, I would clean the carpets myself and cover the costs. However, I would follow this up with a formal letter to the landlord indicating this is the third occurrence and should this happen again you will look to seek recovery for the damages caused. It would be imprudent to ignore this as a landlord.

networkn

Networkn
30209 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#749178 22-Jan-2013 22:08

loathe: For the purpose of your relationship with the landlord and the monetary sums involved, I would clean the carpets myself and cover the costs. However, I would follow this up with a formal letter to the landlord indicating this is the third occurrence and should this happen again you will look to seek recovery for the damages caused. It would be imprudent to ignore this as a landlord.

I guess the issue at this point for me, other than the fact I'd rather have the $700 than have it in his pocket, is that every single issue that is raised, he just pushes it back to me, and this is about the 8th or ninth one where we have ended up wearing the cost because "it's not worth it"

Handle9

9640 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#749259 23-Jan-2013 07:33

Honestly, it sounds like your landlord has figured out he can roll over you and will continue to do so. I know you are worried about what the lease says, however how practical would it be for him to enforce it for $700? The lease is only used if it can't be worked out between the two of you.

In most other business transactions it is normal for the customer to withhold part payment if they feel that they want something addressed, it generally gets things moving. Remember a relationship is a two way thing, at the moment it sounds one sided.

nate

6469 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#749491 23-Jan-2013 12:41

networkn:
loathe: This was in response to the window. Basically your landlord is responsible for their own building assuming the damage has not been caused by the tenant's negligence.

Nate, you may wish to look further into section 269 (2).

Thank you very much, I think you just saved Nate and I about $3000 between us.

I'll owe you a beer.

Any advice on the leak?

Awesome!

networkn

Networkn
30209 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#749539 23-Jan-2013 13:36

loathe: Your lease agreement is moot.

The Property Law Act 2007 addresses this issue quite clearly:

Application of sections 269 and 270
(1)Sections 269 and 270 apply if, on or after 1 January 2008, leased premises, or the whole or any part of the land on which the leased premises are situated, are destroyed or damaged by 1 or more of the following events:
(a)fire, flood, explosion, lightning, storm, earthquake, or volcanic activity:
(b)the occurrence of any other peril against the risk of which the lessor is insured or has covenanted with the lessee to be insured.
(2)Section 269 applies even though an event that gives rise to the destruction or damage is caused or contributed to by the negligence of the lessee or the lessee’s agent.
(3)In this section and sections 269 and 270, lessee’s agent means a person for whose acts or omissions the lessee is responsible.
269Exoneration of lessee if lessor is insured
(1)If this section applies, the lessor must not require the lessee—
(a)to meet the cost of making good the destruction or damage; or
(b)to indemnify the lessor against the cost of making good the destruction or damage; or
(c)to pay damages in respect of the destruction or damage.
(2)If this section applies, the lessor must indemnify the lessee against the cost of carrying out any works to make good the destruction or damage if the lessee is obliged by the terms of any agreement to carry out those works.
(3)Subsection (1) does not excuse the lessee from any liability to which the lessee would otherwise be subject, and the lessor does not have to indemnify the lessee under subsection (2), if, and to the extent that,—
(a)the destruction or damage was intentionally done or caused by the lessee or the lessee’s agent; or
(b)the destruction or damage was the result of an act or omission by the lessee or the lessee’s agent that—
(i)occurred on or about the leased premises or on or about the whole or any part of the land on which the premises are situated; and
(ii)constitutes an indictable offence within the meaning of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957; or
(c)any insurance moneys that would otherwise have been payable to the lessor for the destruction or damage are irrecoverable because of an act or omission of the lessee or the lessee’s agent.
270Rights of lessor if insurance for leased premises or land is affected by negligence of lessee or lessee’s agent
(1)If this section applies and the destruction or damage is caused or contributed to by the negligence of the lessee or the lessee’s agent, the lessor may—
(a)terminate the lease, on reasonable notice to the lessee, if the lessor’s ability to obtain or retain insurancecover on reasonable terms for the leased premises or the land on which the premises are situated has been prejudiced by the destruction or damage; or
(b)recover from the lessee any increased insurance costs incurred by the lessor in relation to the leased premises or the land on which the premises are situated as a result of the destruction or damage (including, without limitation, any increases in the insurance premium that are, or become, payable by the lessor or, as the case may be, any insurance excess that the lessor may be required to pay in relation to any future claims for destruction or damage of that kind).
(2)This section overrides section 269.

Have the contractor make the invoice out to the landlord and let the BC take care of it.

Trying to read this again, perhaps I have things mixed up, but the part related to the window is :

269Exoneration of lessee if lessor is insured

Surely that implies that in order for this to be applicable to us, the landlord must be insured (Which i presume he is, but could he deny it?)

1 | 2