No additional keys have been provided and it is only to these that the clause refers. The obligation is to pay to replace the locks, not the keys that concern them. 2. Try to negotiate a transaction (provided that if you are unable to reach an agreement, they want the matter to be referred to the decision). I think one wonders if there is a difference between losing the keys and stealing them, but that is a questionable point – for example, one of the definitions above contains the word “theft.” But only one of them. The landlord wants to use keys that a tenant cannot copy (restricted key track, something like the Mul T Lock Interactive Plus); This requires an expensive lock and a key that can only be copied by the manufacturer of the lock. Therefore, copies of the keys are also expensive. Then there is the cost to always the new keys to ALL tenants quickly, as some of them may be on vacation etc. (the landlord does not seem to calculate for these administration costs.) If an additional key is made, the tenant will provide all the keys to the landlord at the end of the lease and in case all these keys have been lost. , the tenant agrees to pay the landlord any reasonable costs to be paid by the landlord in `replacing the castles`, including the lost keys. It is difficult to prove in all circumstances that the keys were stolen or simply lost. And we`re going to make details with them or not? It`s just someone`s testimony, but no evidence. Perhaps an answer would be to add lost key insurance to the owners` content policy if the premium was not significant.
Counting on tenants to make this insurance could be risky and their individual deposit could not cover the costs in a roommate, only where the replacement of the keys would be higher. I`m a landlord so everyone knows where I come from, and so my natural tendency would be to expect the tenant to pay for keys and locks, that`s the subjective bit. The rational bit is that the article says, just a definition explicitly says that theft is a part of the lost part of the definition of lost, but it is quite about the fact that each definition is lost to the key. It doesn`t matter if the keys were stolen, lost, wrapped in concrete and fell into a living volcano. If you read these definitions, then each definition correctly describes the condition of the key, that is, not recoverable to the owner at the end of the lease, which seems quite clear and also fully applicable to the keys in this case. I don`t think the definition of lost vs will help the tenant, but then you know where I`m placed in this scenario, so maybe my view is subjective, although I clearly think no. $821 is a large sum for the loss of two keys and this in itself could be a reason for the argument that it should be covered by the owner`s insurance. If the tenant cannot return all the keys the landlord has given them, the landlord can ask them to pay for the spare keys or locks. You can agree to share the cost of exchanging lost keys or blockages. According to the terms of the standard lease, you agree: AI-I ENCORE TO PAY FOR MY REFERENCE? No, the reference fee covers the cost of checks carried out by a landlord to assess whether a potential tenant can pay the rent throughout the lease. With regard to new rents from 1 June 2019, the costs of these controls will be covered by the landlord.
DOES THIS AFFECT MY BAIL? Yes, that`s it. For new units signed on or after June 1, 2019, sureties are limited to the equivalent of five weeks` rent (or six weeks if the annual rent exceeds $50,000).