|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 220 responses total. |
devnull
|
|
response 178 of 220:
| 
Feb 18 02:16 UTC 1999 |
There's a book (_The Jungle_, perhaps?) written I believe by a socialist
about all the interesting illegal (and legal but disgusting) things
that were happening in chicago (maybe around the 1920s?). In one of the
scenes, the main character has gotten ripped off buying a house, and he
pays a large sum of money to have a lawyer glance at it and tell him it's
a completely standard contract...
I'm not entirely sure what we would hope to accomplish by having a lawyer
look at it; fundamentally, if there are things we don't like, we either
grin and bear it, get things renegotiated (which is likely difficult), or
find someplace else. There may be specific things that the landlord might
agree to change, and if we want to come up with new wording, it might be
useful to pay a lawyer to write it, but that seems a bit unlikely.
|
steve
|
|
response 179 of 220:
|
Feb 18 04:43 UTC 1999 |
Written by Upton Sinclair and it was indeed _The Jungle_.
The payoff in having a real legal person read something like
this is that there is the chance that they might find some
hidieous thing in it, against the greater chance that they won't.
We're already going to spend another $300 on special insurance
becuase of this. I'm not sure we need to spend more.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 180 of 220:
|
Feb 18 05:57 UTC 1999 |
It terminable by either party with notice, isn't it? It fixes the rent,
right? All that's left to consider is the damage clause - does it
protect us from normal wear the tear? Any other damage is our responsibility
to cover with our insurance. Don't bother having a lawyer look at it (unless
free....).
|
steve
|
|
response 181 of 220:
|
Feb 18 17:33 UTC 1999 |
Yes, there was someting in there about that.
|
keesan
|
|
response 182 of 220:
|
Feb 18 19:43 UTC 1999 |
Aaron?
|
richard
|
|
response 183 of 220:
|
Feb 18 23:13 UTC 1999 |
The indemnity insurance clause in the lease states that if tenant does not
provide landlord with the insurance papers, landlord may at any time
unilaterally buy the insurance on behalf of the client and add the cost as
"additional rent" This could be a problem if the insurance isnt effect
before the lease is signed, or if the insurance ever, at any time, lapses
during the life of the lease.
Also, lease requires tenant to indemnify the landlord of any liability for
any damage to tenant property-- so if the building is badly wired and
there is a fire or something, and grex's computers are destroyed, grexis
out of luck. The landlord's insurance company would not have to buy grex
new equipment. Or if the lock breaks and grex is robbed-- ditto.
There are the usual clauses about the landlord agreeing to maintain the
property, but they want to be completely indemnified so there are no
consequences for them if they do not. a double standard if you ask me.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 184 of 220:
|
Feb 19 06:07 UTC 1999 |
You'd have to look at the fine print to see whose insurance company would
pay for property damage if the fire was caused by faulty wiring. The
landlord has an insurance policy too. Probably, the insurance companies
would reach a deal - maybe split the difference.
|
scg
|
|
response 185 of 220:
|
Feb 19 07:14 UTC 1999 |
re 183:
All of those things should be covered by our insurace. We should
make sure that the insurance doesn't lapse, but if it did, the landlord would
have to ask us for proof of insurance to determine that it had lapsed, so we
would see it coming.
|
dpc
|
|
response 186 of 220:
|
Feb 19 21:42 UTC 1999 |
There are a variety of illegal/unenforceable landlord-oriented clauses
in the lease. These are typical of what you find in a landlord-
drafted lease and don't bother me a bit because local courts won't
enforce them.
What *does* bother me is this part of paragraph 2:
OPTION: Providing Tenant has not been in default of this lease,
Tenant shall have the option of five 1yr. Lease extensions at
a 5% increase in rent per year. Said option may be cancelled with
a written ninety (90) day notice at the discretion of either
Landlord or Tenant.
The second sentence says that our option can be cancelled by the
*Landlord* alone. This means that the option doesn't exist.
Ergo, next spring Flying Dutchman can give us a notice cancelling
our first option to renew the lease, and we'll be out of there
at the end of the first year.
I think this sentence should be rewritten to say: "Said option
may be cancelled with a written ninety (90) day notice at the
discretion of the Tenant."
|
steve
|
|
response 187 of 220:
|
Feb 19 22:21 UTC 1999 |
Dave, doesn't the last sentence say just that? That the option
me be cancelled with a written notice at the discretion of either
landlord of tennant.
That seems pretty clear to me.
|
richard
|
|
response 188 of 220:
|
Feb 19 22:33 UTC 1999 |
Also, there is a clause in there saying the rent is considered late if due
date is missed by three (3) days and would be subject to a ten percent
late fee. Three days isnt enough time to take into account possible
unforseen circumstances. Isnt it more normal to have a one-week or two
week grace period before one's rent is considered late? Also, the wording
seems to (or might) imply that ten percent will be added on for every
three days that the rent is late.
I also agree with dpc's concerns...grex may as well just sign a one year
lease, because it probably isnt going to get automatically renewed anyway.
|
dang
|
|
response 189 of 220:
|
Feb 19 22:50 UTC 1999 |
It is just a 1 year lease. If we want to renew, presumably we sign
another lease, that says we have 4 optional extensions.
|
mary
|
|
response 190 of 220:
|
Feb 19 23:33 UTC 1999 |
Not quite. The extensions are automatic *unless* either party
decides to terminate the contract by giving written notice.
The dates and rates are clearly spelled out for each of the
six years this contact could remain in effect.
An extension clause is to make it less of a hassle to renew
a lease when the year is up. It doesn't guarantee either party
will (want to) continue the arrangement.
|
steve
|
|
response 191 of 220:
|
Feb 20 04:35 UTC 1999 |
Richard.... $60 some dollars is not that much money. If there
were unforseen circumstances I think any number of people could
act quickly enough to pay it. I've seen several business leases
that had *no* grace period at all. The most lax allowed 7 working
days. In general businesses get a lot less leeway than private
folks do, in grace periods for bills.
Why do you say that the lease won't be automatically renewed?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 192 of 220:
|
Feb 20 05:03 UTC 1999 |
Set up automatic electronic payment of the lease.
|
aruba
|
|
response 193 of 220:
|
Feb 21 00:26 UTC 1999 |
Hmmm - that's a thought. I wonder how much it would cost us. How much did
it cost you, Rane, to have your Grex dues paid electronically? I know you
told us, but I forgot.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 194 of 220:
|
Feb 21 04:52 UTC 1999 |
$2.95/month. I still have to pay most of my bills by entering the amount
each month, because they change, but my cable, gas and health bills are
set up automatically, since they are fixed amounts.
|
devnull
|
|
response 195 of 220:
|
Feb 21 06:39 UTC 1999 |
I haven't had any trouble getting my electric and gas payments to happen
automatically every month, even though they have non-fixed amounts; if you
call up your utility company and ask them about direct payment, they can
usually send you the appropriate paperwork, and they aren't charging me
anything for it. My insurance company bills me this way, too (though that's
mostly a fixed payment). They send me a bill a few weeks before they charge
my account, and so I just have to open the mail, sanity-check it, and record
the amount in my checkbook.
(My phone company does not support automated payments via ACH, although they
will bill to a credit card if I want. But I don't trust my phone company
to bill me correctly, so I don't want automated payments.)
|
rcurl
|
|
response 196 of 220:
|
Feb 21 19:59 UTC 1999 |
I don't like the idea of the vendor be permitted to bill me for "anything they
want", though I'd agree mistakes are pretty rare. The bank also makes
mistakes in paying bills. But, I'd still rather control the bill payment
process.
|
richard
|
|
response 197 of 220:
|
Feb 22 23:07 UTC 1999 |
yeah grex could get direct deposit for just about everything
I'd bet-- maybe even the rent.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 198 of 220:
|
Feb 23 04:55 UTC 1999 |
I pay my phone bills online. Of course, I have to put in that month's
amount. You save postage and the cost of checks and seemingly some
time and can schedule the payments for any date. Of course, it is most
economical if you have lots of bills.
|
keesan
|
|
response 199 of 220:
|
Feb 23 23:07 UTC 1999 |
Rane, are you paying $2.95 month to pay grex $6/month? Have you thought of
paying one check a year for $60 instead of 12 x $9? Or did I misunderstand?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 200 of 220:
|
Feb 24 00:19 UTC 1999 |
I'm paying $2.95 a month in order to pay about 20 bills per month. That
saves $6.60 in postage plus the cost of checks plus my time writing
checks. The monetary savings aren't huge, but the convenience is great.
|
mary
|
|
response 201 of 220:
|
Feb 24 19:39 UTC 1999 |
Update, or summary, on the lease saga:
I went over to Aprill Agency this morning and spoke with our agent, Mr.
Johnston. He is very aware of the legal problems regarding the ownership
of our building and he took some time figuring out how to phrase the
"Additionally Insured - Lessor" title. He made a copy of our lease and
again read the clause pertaining to liability insurance.
Like the rest of the lease it included words and phrases not typically
found in a legal document (like casualty) but he felt pretty confident
that the standard policy calling for the stated limits would be fine and
match the intended coverage.
I gave him the check, he gave me a certificate of insurance, and I was off
to Flying Dutchman. The insurance coverage is due to start with the new
lease, June 1, 1999. The final policy will be mailed to us in about 6
weeks.
Ms. Watrous seemed happy to see the signed lease. I mentioned there was
some question about the phrasing of the lease's liability clause and
showed her the certificate. She said the policy, as written, was fine and
met the terms of the lease. She signed and initialed both copies of the
lease, giving me back one for our records.
Before leaving I wanted to make sure I had it perfectly clear how the
option to renew went. And there was a difference from my recollection of
our first conversation. She would like us to notify her 120 days before
the end of each lease term either way, whether we intend to stay or leave.
Notice to stay could be a phone call but I'd suggest a written notice
would be best. This should probably sent each year, in early January, and
signed by one of our officers. I'd also volunteer to hand deliver this
notice for a couple of reasons, one being it's kind of nice to check in,
face to face, and make sure everything is going okay. Catch little
problems?
One more thing, kind of good news. While talking with Mr. Johnston I
again got into what Grex is about, the shoestring budget, generous
volunteers, and all. He had already notice how low our rent is compared
to most commercial rentals. He said, "Hold on a sec, let me call Hastings
and ask about something." He came back and said for the same $300 premium
they added on $10,000 property coverage. Our property coverage. Nice.
So that's it. We're done (knock wood) for at least
one more year.
|
dpc
|
|
response 202 of 220:
|
Feb 24 20:04 UTC 1999 |
Good! As long as everyone realizes that we don't have a *right* to
renew for another year if Flying Dutchman doesn't want us.
|