Dubious Eviction from business Premises

[Old Post Pub]

I am a 52 year old unemployed South African male. I rented a business premises approximately 10 months ago to operate a country tourist bar in order to supplement my income. To keep it brief I have been continuously requesting a lease document since day one but the landlord has not furnished me with one. I have conducted extensive improvements to the bar and have embarked on a intense marketing strategy to change the pub (bar) from a local dive into a Tourist leisure facility at considerable cost. I have never been approached or presented with any grievances from the landlord pertaining to the occupation of the premises and in the 10 months which I have rented it have never defaulted on rental payments. However on the 10 October I was served with a 30 day notice to vacate the premises. I have attempted to contact the landlord to attempt a negotiated remedy of any grievances which he might have but he has refused to respond to all attempts at communication. Under common law do I have any legal recourse
against this dubious eviction action. I only post here because I noted on your home page that you are actively practicing law internationally.

Any suggestions on solving this malady.

Thanks David

[able1]

You could always threaten to sue arguing it is unjust for him to take all the benefit of your improvements. Even more so when you did nothing wrong. Courts don't favor unjust enrichment so you may prevail, or at least collect some amounts back.

[OHlandlord]

able1 has an idea of what you could do. Did you ever sign a lease with the LL, and then just not get a copy? If you signed a lease, how long was it for? If the lease was not up and you did nothing wrong, violated no lease clause, and paid rent on time each month, able1's advice may work well.

Or was no lease ever signed? If no lease was ever signed, you were a month to month tenant (or a tenant at will) and the LL could give you notice at anytime to vacate within 30 days. This is why most business sign leases of several years. These leases usually have provisions for improvements to the property, who pays for them, how the premises are to be returned and in what condition, etc. Please let us know if you had signed a lease and under what terms.

[Old Post Pub]

Good day,
Thanks for your response. The landlord avoided signing a lease even thogh I requestedthat we sign one on numerous occasions. So there is no lease agreement.

Have a great day

David

[OHlandlord]

Having no lease agreement is not good, especially in a commercial establishment and business. First, let me say you should check the laws of your country and region to be sure the answers we give on this site are in line with what your country, region, and even local statutes say are your rights. In the US, without a lease you are a month to month tenant, or a tenant at will. Your agreement could be terminated for no reason by the LL giving you the required amount of written notice to vacate per the region of the country. This would range from about 20 days notice to 60 days notice depending on the area and how long you had been in the property. Without a lease, the LL does not need a violation of the agreement to ask you to leave. He only has to give you notice. Please check your local laws to see if you have more rights there.

able1 does have a point about the LL not being able to benefit by your improvements. For this reason, most commercial tenants remove all their improvements at the end of their tenancy, and return the property back to its original move-in condition. Is it possible to remove some of your improvements and restore the unit to its original condition? If you cannot restore it, you may be forced to leave some of the improvements in place. US law states that any fixture (something that is permanently attached to the premises) cannot be removed by the tenant if the property cannot be restored to move-in condition. The tenant is responsible for any damages done to the unit by removing the fixture. Check your law and see what it states about fixtures and improvements.

Interference of lease by LL and our right to Quiet Enjoyment has forced us to defend ourselves by hiring an attorney, for 2 1/2 yrs. from our LL that in an attempt to acquire our restuarant has waged a living H--- of a war against us, breached our lease and filed no less than 5 eviction notices, made false accusations and numerous other tactics too lengthy to mention. Our case, when & if it comes to trial, is so unique in that we own a restuarant within a bowling alley facility, that at present-day is owned by our LL, who also owns the building with other tenants in it. The LL wants to sell the bowling alley, which again, present-day, isn't doing well financially. We on the other-hand, in spite of our over-market rent, are doing very well and he needs the restuarant to make his sale doable. The short of it, LL didn't want to deal with us fairly so he waged this "war" against us in an attempt to get us to get out. Well, had we known it would go on this long and cost us upwards of $75,000, more if we to to trial, to defend our investment we might have done differently. It's morally wrong that a LL should use such tactics, like a bully in a school yard, he needs to have consequences for his actions. For some comic relief I assigned mascots to each of us; LL is a Black Cobra and we are a Mongoose. The only thing that can take out a Black Cobra is the Mongoose. We shall see. Regards

Interference of lease by LL and our right to Quiet Enjoyment has forced us to defend ourselves by hiring an attorney, for 2 1/2 yrs. from our LL that in an attempt to acquire our restuarant has waged a living H--- of a war against us, breached our lease and filed no less than 5 eviction notices, made false accusations and numerous other tactics too lengthy to mention. Our case, when & if it comes to trial, is so unique in that we own a restuarant within a bowling alley facility, that at present-day is owned by our LL, who also owns the building with other tenants in it. The LL wants to sell the bowling alley, which again, present-day, isn't doing well financially. We on the other-hand, in spite of our over-market rent, are doing very well and he needs the restuarant to make his sale doable. The short of it, LL didn't want to deal with us fairly so he waged this "war" against us in an attempt to get us to get out. Well, had we known it would go on this long and cost us upwards of $75,000, more if we to to trial, to defend our investment we might have done differently. It's morally wrong that a LL should use such tactics, like a bully in a school yard, he needs to have consequences for his actions. For some comic relief I assigned mascots to each of us; LL is a Black Cobra and we are a Mongoose. The only thing that can take out a Black Cobra is the Mongoose. We shall see. Regards