Landlord trying to evict.

Originally Posted by Unregistered Does your son, in whose name the leases are written, also reside at the property? If so, this shouldn't matter. If, however, he does not live there, you may have a problem. You would not be considered a tenant since the tenant would be your son, who would not live there. You would be an occupant under your son's lease.

To be considered a tenant he has to LIVE there, not stay there sporadically. If the son does not live at that unit, does not use that unit for his home address, or has another unit for himself elsewhere, he may not qualify for the benefits that would be granted to him if he was licensed as a tenant. You need to check on the requirements of the licensure. I know that registering the lease agreement and being named as the tenant grants you certain benefits and rights to stay in the property. However, if he doesn't live there and has in essence sub-let the unit to you, you may have problems. You are not on the lease (a 3rd party) and cannot be considered a tenant. You are only an occupant. No written agreement gives you any rights to that unit. Your son may or may not have rights to the unit based on the licensing requirements. You need to see if the requirements state that the tenant must live at the unit or must have lived there for a period of time. Then be prepared to prove that he (not you) actually lived there to be considered the tenant with the rights of such. Run this argument by your attorney there and see if you should either amend your claim to the unit to your son's name or if you need to file a new one.

If there are witness signatures, even if later, it should be alright. The LL accepted the lease without them. He continued to rent to him without them. They may not be required.

Another problem you may encounter has to do with the new POA. The new POA may not know what the old POA has done. This one will not know or privy to any conversations you had with the last one. You may need to summon the previous one to court to testify.

Phone calls or personal conversations are difficult to prove without a witness to what was said. You need written proof.

The double rent for hold over is a whole other issue. That is either a local law or a lease clause. Read through the lease carefully and see what it says about the expiration. Does it say that it will become a month to month agreement after it expires? Does it have any provision for double rent upon hold over? Is there a government or local law that says this? (Your attorney should know.) If not, they have no claim for double rent. They had not previously notified you of that amount of a rent increase, correct?

Thanks for the advice. Actually, as per the lease , when the period of eleven months is over , it does not carry on month to month , and a new agreement has to be entered into.
Basically , this would have been valid and applicable ,and also in favour of the LL ,if he would have registered the leave and license agreement as per the laid down procedure , and with the appropriate authorities. But he never did it during the period of not less than six years !
At the end of the last agreement ,two years ago , he started playing games , and wanted possesion by ousting me , under the pretext of his plans to sell the flat.
When we offered to buy it ,he showed his willingness initially ,only to go back on his words. That's why i decided to legally fight this case , and let him know, that he can not be unfair to us , when we transformed his neglected flat , infested with pests , and mostly in a worn out condition , by maintenance and upkeep.
i have a next date to appear in the court , towards the end of this month.

i have been paying the rent regularly in his bank account.
Will post again , after the date.
Thanks.