
Welcome!
I am looking for an apartment to rent and I have found an apartment of interest, but there seems to be a very unusual clause in the contract (I haven’t signed it yet):
9.1.1. in unforeseen cases, the Tenant may terminate the Agreement before the specified term by notifying the Lessor in writing 2 (months) in advance. If the Tenant terminates the Agreement before the deadline, the Lessor has the right to keep the security deposit received.
In this situation, even if you give 2 months’ notice before the end of the rental agreement, the entire security deposit is lost. The question is whether this is a common practice and whether it is legal at all, because the Residential Tenancies Act (https://likumi.lv/ta/id/322216-dzivojamo-telpu-ires-likums) has the following article:
(3) The residential premises rental agreement may stipulate that the lessor has the right to use the security deposit to cover delayed payments provided for in the agreement also during the term of the residential premises rental agreement, as well as provide for the tenant’s obligation to re-pay the used security deposit.
But at the end there is also the following, which perhaps makes this also legal:
(5) Other reinforcements of the tenant’s obligations may be provided for in the residential premises rental agreement.
So I wanted to find out from you – is this acceptable or what?
Thank you! 🙂
EDIT:
I also did not mention that the security deposit is 2 months in this case. It’s too much – I give 2 months’ notice and the landlord still has 2 months’ money to look for tenants (my lost security deposit). In the past, I have had the landlord already start looking for future tenants during the period that I have given notice to vacate.
Īres drošības naudas zaudēšana pēc pirmstermiņa līguma laušanas
byu/Desultore inlatvia
Posted by Desultore
6 Comments
Man liekas diezgan izplatīti šis ir.
tam jau tā drošības nauda ir domāta!
Diezgan izplatīti, ja rēķinies, ka tev ir īrnieks uz 1 gadu un pēkšņi pazūd, tad aizies laiks un nauda meklēt jaunus īrniekus. Par apkuri un apsamniekošanu jāmaksā arī, ja neviens nedzīvo. Izīrētājs ir ieinteresēts, lai dzīvoklī vienmēr būtu īrnieks.
Līgumos viss slēpjās detaļās. Drošības naudu tiešā veidā čista tam nedrīkst izmantot. Bet, ja pamaina formulējumu, tad, iespējams, ka drīkst atrunāt, ka līgumsodu var segt no drošības naudas.
ierasta prakse, BET, maini uz 30 dienām, divi mēneši ir daudz.
2 mēneši, manuprāt, nav adekvāti. Saki, lai maina uz 1. nedomāju, ka “neparedzēts gadījums” paiet zem 2 mēnešu tvēruma.