Broker charges reimbursement
Rahul Kumar
(Querist) 29 October 2018
This query is : Resolved
I rented a flat 4 months back through a broker. I paid half a month's rent at that time as broker charges. The rental agreement was of 11 months but 1 month notice period was there. I am now leaving the flat having informed the landlord 1 month earlier. Now the landlord is insisting me to reimburse him the broker charges which he paid at the start because I am leaving in the middle. Even the broker is pestering me. Kindly advise me.
KISHAN DUTT KALASKAR
(Expert) 29 October 2018
Dear Sir,
It is not an issue. You need not pay. Let them go to the Civil Court or if they insist lodge a police complaint.
=================================================
Bitter PIL for landlords, a boon for poor tenants
Petitioners, Dove Drive Without Borders Foundation approached the court contending that tenants in the city have absolutely no bargaining power during negotiations with the landlord for the quantum of money to be paid as security deposit.
Extortion via high deposits demanded as ‘security’ bonds by landlords in Bengalurumust stop, says a group of petitioners — newcomers to the city and good Samaritans— have teamed up to protect the interests of tenants house-hunting in the city. The activists have filed a Public Interest Litigation in the Karnataka High Court addressing the interests of people who do not own homes but must rent housing under one-on-one tenancy agreements with landlords. Such laws already exist in states such asTamil Nadu and Bihar, says Wasim Memon, founder of The Drive without Borders Foundation.
The Foundation, a citizens’ movement that started with the objective of safeguarding the rights of motorists and road users in India and crusaded for a single rate of road tax in all Indian states, is leading the charge.
Waseem Memon said tenants started contacting him on their Facebook page seeking help when faced by Bengaluru’s inequitable rental market. He, a Hyderabadi himself, decided to do something about it.
In the absence of standardised rates for security deposits, it has become customary for landlords to insist upon high security deposits equivalent to 10 months’ rent. For example, a residential property with a monthly rent of `10,000 would command a security deposit of a lakh, while a property with the monthly rent of `30,000 would mean shelling out a proportionate deposit of `3,00,000. This earns the landlord handsome returns through interest earned on the deposits.
The problem is compounded when some homeowners arbitrarily and with impunity get away with deducting amounts of their choosing, posing flippant and vague causes such as ‘damage’ or ‘repainting charges’ as reasons for the deductions.
This unfairly raises the total layout for rent, and results in income loss through the loss of interest for, often, hard-pressed youngsters and recent economic immigrants.
Priyanka Patel, a young professional who started living in a flat in Marathahalli, shelled out `1.5 lakh around two years ago as a security deposit and was faced with no choice but to give away `56,000 to her London-based landlady, though she had agreed to only pay `30,000, ostensibly for “repainting” the property.At one time, the landlady threatened to keep their deposit money if she had any male visitors, even relatives, to the house.
Though the problem extends across all income classes and communities, the unsanctioned practice harms vulnerable groups of, often, young men and women who move to live in Bengaluru to be part of its booming electronics and IT industries, the region’s largest employers.
“Young immigrants and couples in junior positions in jobs who are new to the city are also badly-affected,” says Memon who is leading the group of activists. “They lose lakhs of rupees to landlords each year in the guise of one imagined problem or another. Going to court to establish the nature of the wrongdoing by a landlord is difficult, expensive and time-consuming and not considered a viable option by busy city dwellers. So, in the absence of legal recourse, tenants have little option but to bear the financial burden.”
The practice has become rampant and reached near epidemic proportions, he says: “Keeping this in mind, the Central Government’s draft Model Tenancy Act (first in 2011 and a revised version in 2015) seeks to update the law relating to landlords and tenants across the nation. It is a model law directed for the consideration of state governments. it will provide for a cap on security deposits for tenancy agreements at three months’ rent.”
The statute, if put in place, also seeks a retrospective provision where tenants who have their cash — greater than 3 months’ rent — stuck with landlords may ask for it back, and expect it to be returned within a period of 15 days. The citizens’ group, Drive Without Borders, a Facebook group, has sought a preliminary response from the high court within 21 days of the receipt of the petition.
Dove Drive Without Borders Foundation
S2, 2nd Floor, Olive Garden No.74, Benson Cross Road,
Benson Town Bangalore Bangalore KA 46 IN
akmemon003@gmail.com
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Maharashtra: New law soon to protect tenants from rogue landlords
A new law intended to protect private sector tenants from “rogue landlords” was unveiled by the Maharashtra government Monday.
The state cabinet adopted the law that recognises the right of a tenant to reconstruct the tenanted property if the landlord is withholding the property’s redevelopment.
This, however, won’t be offered on a carte blanche. The cabinet decided that the new norm would be applicable only to buildings declared unsafe by the civic authorities. Also, it will only be applied in cases where the landlord has not started redevelopment of the property even a year after the dilapidated building has been pulled down by the civic authorities.
Following the cabinet approval, the government will now introduce the law in the state legislature, in the form of an amendment to the existing Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act.
A senior minister, who did not wish to be named, said the new law would offer protection against the threat of “unfair eviction”. Lakhs of families in Mumbai reside in tenanted properties protected under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act.
On the need to adopt the new law, the minister said, “While the reconstruction right of a tenant is protected in cases where landlord demolishes the old property and undertakes redevelopment on his own, that is not the case when the civic authorities pull down an unsafe building.”
There have been complaints that some rogue landlords, in connivance with civic authorities, misuse this “lack of protection” to drive out tenants.
In a bid to ensure that the new law does not drive some “innocent” landlords out of the market, the government has ruled that the ownership of the plot and the redeveloped tenanted structure will remain with the landlord even after the redevelopment.
According to sources, Housing Minister Prakash Mehta said at the cabinet meeting a “lopsided” law could backfire. He also reportedly said enabling provisions would also have to be made in the Development Control (DC) regulations.
Following this, Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis appointed a committed under Mehta to review the existing DC Regulations and suggest necessary amendments.
The BJP had invited flak from tenants’ associations recently over some controversial provisions of the Centre’s new model rent control Act.
Meanwhile, the Cabinet also decided to put the work for the Navi Mumbai International Airport on the fast track.
It cleared a proposal qualifying three bidders — GVK-led Mumbai International Airport Ltd, GMR Delhi, and MIA Infrastructure —
along with Tata Realty for submission of the request for proposal (RFP).
While four bidders had expressed interest in the project, a consortia of Zurich Airport with Hiranandani Developers was disqualified by the Union Ministry of Finance over “lack of financial security”.
Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis said the work orders for the new airport were expected to be awarded within six months.
Please mark “LIKE” if satisfied by my answer.
Guest
(Expert) 29 October 2018
The demand is illegal, if terms of agreement does not prescribe so. Ask them to claim through court of law.
Rahul Kumar
(Querist) 30 October 2018
Thanks a lot for your advices.
Dr J C Vashista
(Expert) 31 October 2018
Do not accept/succumb to illegal demand of landlord and issue your demand (legal) notice, as advised by expert Mr. PS Dhingra, I fully agree.
