(e) that the tenant will not do or permit significant damage to
the premises, the common areas or the property of which
they form a part;
I saw that but "or permit" sounds very weak in relation to responsibility. In my case, tenant is going to argue that she gave her car keys to a guest and said guest then used the attached house keys to let himself in. In the course of being inside he caused significant damage. I can see how a lawyer would argue that the tenant did not "permit" the guest to use the suite, only her car. I will argue that he had indeed been allowed in many times before, most often by leaving the door unlocked, and that she is responsible for his damages as it would have been normal for him to feel that he could be there.
Last edited:
Rarely is anything a slam dunk in court. Damage resulted directly from the tenants decision to transfer keys (including house key) to person X. They were not forced. A conscious choice was made. Allegedly many times over the course of their tenancy.
I would say you've got a strong argument for accountability.
I would say you've got a strong argument for accountability.
