Going To Trial

[gofraidh34]

Hi,
I reside in California and am obtaining a dispute with my prior landlord more than a security deposit. My partner and I moved out-of our old-residence, Feb 28th 2011, and our prior landlord says because we broke our rent we won't be getting our protection depsoit back. This is exactly what the lease says,
"PHRASE. The lease period will begin on September 1st, 2010 and will finish on May 31st, 2010."
It was signed by each my husband and I, in addition to her husband and my previous landlord.
Today, the debate when I stated is she claims when we moved on Feb 28th 2011, stating we still had three months we broke our rent, and we owe her for all these three months. Nevertheless, I told her that due to the fact the termination date is May 31st 2010, the rental ended just before it even began, consequently it was on a month-to-month base since the occasions had been incorrect. She nonetheless thinks her rent is acceptable and comprehend we're going to trial simply because she says we owe her cash, and my companion and I want to get our safety deposit back.
My difficulty is, when does a lease-finish? and do I've an chance of earning my deposit back centered on my debate of the rent becoming emptiness? May possibly be the rent emptiness?
 
Thanks

[Amynedd]

Oh, come on! Clearly that was a typo. The lease cannot end before it begins. You know good and well what it meant when you signed it.
You DID break the lease and your landlord is right.

[Honani]

Without taking thathe many apparent supposed day was May 2011 the agreement is DIFFICULT TO PERFORM.  Provided that no body would deliberately write or sign a rent that couldn't be done the only real response that makes any sense whatsoever is always to think it was a clerical error andthe regulation enables such errors to be reinterpreted. Your argument isn't likely to succeed since there is no legitimate foundation for this. If you're not will ing to simply accept something that hasbeen stated below I would recommend you look for a law library and start studying on contract law, especially regarding clerical error.

[Veto]

Taxagent:
If so, the judge should then know what the particular end-of the rent was said to be. When the landlord could persuade the court that the closing day was only a typo and that the parties meant the lease to finish May 31, 2011, then your court will construe the lease prior to that intention.
 
How might the landlord have the ability to persuade the judge the supposed day was to finish on May 31st 2011?
 

[Parsefal]

given that you moved in AFTER the end date indicated on the lease, there is the presumption that the lease was to end in 2011, not 2010, despite the typo. imagine yourself making this argument in front of a judge.

[Cornal]

Obviously it will. It would go to the intention of the events. I've no idea why you'd be moving-in, in July, and the lease started in June (free month maybe?), but, it obviously suggests that the lease was meant to be started during the time you shifted in.
No-Check for your security deposit, and no bill, how can you show that you really paid a security deposit? You will have in order to record that aswell to become successful.

[eliazar]

I'm a retired LL and used to dropping  in a pro tenant court easily create a small error ---but despite a tough nosed pro tenant judge I merely observe your point in regards to a typo like a born loss--its a soft typo and the events intention to come right into a-1 year  rent appears superior in my experience....   

[Aldwine]

Onasi18:
Because there clearly was no fresh rent provided for all of us togo around and indication, does that not imply that the word finished on May 31st 2010?
Again not attempting to claim are be challenging.

You will probably drop the debate. Obviously, because the lease period as created expired before it started, which was not the right closing day for your lease. If so, the judge should then know what the particular end-of the rent was said to be. When the landlord could persuade the court that the closing day was only a typo and that the parties meant the lease to finish May 31, 2011, then your court will construe the lease prior to that intention.
It'd differ if, for instance, the lease had read May 1, 2011 whilst the closing day, you shifted out May 1, and the landlord stated there clearly was a typo and it must state May 31 and hence you broke the lease. In that situation, because the closing date is one that the events may have decided, the judge could usually not appear beyond the date mentioned in the rent. Your condition listed here is that a lease date ending prior to the lease starts is actually incorrect -- and that opens the doorway for the court to find out exactly what the actual ending date must be.

[Huntingtun]

But, the truth is its a deal and should not anything maintain order if my prior landlord will state its legitimate? After all anything I've read on rents and tenant right plainly states that the lease ends on the day that's written down on the lease. And a rent is just a agreement, if authorized by all functions. It was suppose to be always a month-to-month lease anyway since she was attempting to sell the home, however now that people are requesting our safety deposit back, sheis expressing its a good lease. In line with the regulation, aside from a typo or what've you, does a lease not finish on the day that's on the signed lease?