Personally I wouldn't give her the satisfaction, she is obviously renting properties to expatriates, knowing full well that they may be replaced at any time of day or year. You signed the contract in good faith and had you not been posted out, would remain in the property.mek wrote:Thank you...I will try this...she is very emotional and its hard to reason with her.Fingers crossed. Thnx
februus wrote:if your company are relocating you, surely they have mechanisms in place to help you handle this kind of thing? Shouldn't the issue of breaking leases etc come under your relocation package?
I say for the examples given above you should be always paid in full as the subject of the agreement is to manufacture/create a thing/good (sorry, don't know the proper term). Renting something is more a service type of contract so like aircon maintenance or any other over agreed period of time, so here you pay for the services delivered in time and if they are terminated early there is nothing you should pay for.sundaymorningstaple wrote:I am curious guys........
Let's say you were to bid for and contract a job to do a piece of software or to build a bridge. In the contract it stipulated that you had 12 months to complete this project and it was a lump sum contract that you were to receive progress payments for every month.
Now, let's assume that because we are in the tropics, the contract has taken into consideration the things that slow down stuff like weather and other acts beyond their control. Now, you have a uninterupted string of good weather, when everything happening correctly and you finished the project in 3 months.
Yes, this should be reasonable. 20k I mentioned earlier was based on a prorated commission fee, plus 2-3 months of time often necessary to find a new tenant plus some compensation due to the fact that she has to waste her time to go through the process once again.sundaymorningstaple wrote:That's one of the reasons a Diplomatic Clause was invented and the Tenant should always insist on one in the contract or not enter into a lease agreement without it. In theory, (s)he can demand the full amount of the lease but as ksl mentions, normally in arbitration the amount can be reduced.
Again it would be what is reasonable the 12 month contract stands until such time there is complaint. If the paying party found unreasonable, cause to complain, an appeal would be allowed if the courts found the claim unreasonable, the pursuant would be hit with losing the case and paying the court costs. A double whammy because of greed, it happens in Singapore quite a lot. The court would look for test cases for their argumentation to prove who is right.sundaymorningstaple wrote:I am curious guys........
Let's say you were to bid for and contract a job to do a piece of software or to build a bridge. In the contract it stipulated that you had 12 months to complete this project and it was a lump sum contract that you were to receive progress payments for every month.
Now, let's assume that because we are in the tropics, the contract has taken into consideration the things that slow down stuff like weather and other acts beyond their control. Now, you have a uninterrupted string of good weather, when everything happening correctly and you finished the project in 3 months.
Well, should you be only paid for the 3 months of claims at that point? You and the contract provider both agreed to the terms (lump sum for completion of a contract with a fixed term of no more than 12 months? Should the person who let the contract only pay you for 3/12's of the contract?
Or, are we looking at the rental thing from the wrong angle, the angle of "I wanna get out of something that I contractually agree on."
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests