Posted on 12/01/2018 11:40:46 AM PST by Liberty7732
Harvard graduate student Leyla Pirnie was asked to move out of her apartment after her roommates discovered she possessed legally owned firearms.
The Washington Free Beacon reports that Pirnie’s roommates allegedly rummaged through her belongings while she was away from the apartment, discovered her guns, and emailed the landlord to complain. One of the roommates told the landlord: “We discussed with Leyla that all of us are uncomfortable with having firearms in the house, and that their presence causes anxiety and deprives us of the quiet enjoyment of the premise to which we are entitled.”
The landlord, Avid Management’s Dave Lewis, then emailed the apartment residents, including Pirnie, to say he had checked with local police, who verified the guns were “being safely and legally stored under lock and key.” Despite Pirnie’s compliance with the law, Lewis then cited the roommates’ discomfort with firearms as grounds for Pirnie to move out of the apartment.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
With a three party lease agreement, each party is obligated to pay their fair share. Any break in that lease agreement by any party, the remaining parties can sue for non payment..........I don't think they'd want to do that.
If they are “joint and severable” she could stuck. That lease language is common especially for inexperienced college students.
This is not correct. In the absence of a specific provision addressing the issue, which is extremely rare in residential leases, every tenant who signs a lease is jointly and severally responsible for the payment of the entire rent due. If nobody pays, the landlord can sue all of them, one of them or any combination of them for the entire amount.
I wonder what Harvard’s stance will be on this?
It’ll be a wide stance,it is Harvard after all.
There are very few "kids" that attend Harvard who have nothing. Especially if they're living in an apartment that costs $6,000 per month.......
As a side note, these are adults in post grad programs, not kids.........
This is not correct. Each party who signs a lease is responsible to the landlord for 100% of the monthly rent. If the tenants have made some agreement among themselves as to a pro-rata sharing of the rent, which is almost certainly the case here, whoever has been forced to pay more than his/her share to the landlord because one or more tenants failed to pay, he/she can try to collect that amount from the party who didn’t pay. But all this is completely detached from the obligations to the landlord and it’s going to take a very expensive law suit to collect from the non-paying co-tenant.
Her roommates burglarized her rented apartment depending on the state. Anything being done about that? At a bare minimum it is trespassing.
If nothing is done, she has a right to enter their rooms anytime and rat-F through their possessions to see what she might see.
She's not an "inexperienced" college student. She's 24 and in a post graduate program........
A lot of college area apartments have switched over to sort of a private dorm system. You will have a 4 bed 4 bath apartment with a shared living room and kitchen. Each tenant has a separate lease with the landlord and the tenants have no control over who leases a room in their apartment.
Thank you, you just substantiated my argument in post #21........
Her legal standing here is shaky at best. When you sign a lease with roommates, you may have no control over what happens if they move out on you.
Many, many assets are exempt from collection. Unless one of these snowflakes owns real estate with >$20,000 equity in it, it’s likely collection would be limited to 25% of after tax earnings. Assuming snowflake has a job.
Right as to probable co-tenant agreement. But that still doesn’t change the critical point which is this: landlord can force gun owner to pay to him 100% of the rent each month and if she doesn’t, he can evict her.
If her signature is on the lease then he can force her to pay the entire $6,000 monthly rent, though.
Overall though, she's better off not being around snowflakes.
True. But that is not what’s being described. If that were the case, gun owner wouldn’t be voicing her concerns about having to pay the entire $6,000 monthly rent if snowflakes bolt.
There are plenty of Slip & Fall attorneys in Boston who would love to represent her in court to seek damages against her snowflake room mates and the landlord.
True. Lots of lawyers would take this case for an hourly fee. Going to be much harder to find an experienced lawyer who will take a case with such a questionable recovery on a contingency. Unless they just hope to use it for publicity. Someone’s going to have to front at least 10k in court costs (mainly deposition fees) just to get it ready for trial. The only deep pocket is this case appears to be the landlord and he’s done nothing wrong.
Leftists have all kinds of organizations that do this kind of political litigation for them for free. Conservatives, not so much.
Why didn’t she have her guns secured in some kind of locked strongbox? Snowflakes aside, it’s risking theft or unauthorized use to not have the weapons in a lockable container. Chained to something if possible.
If her nosy roommates asked her “what’s in the strongbox?” she could say “none of your d@mned business & stay the hell out of my stuff!”
“Do you have guns in there?”
“If you want to know for sure, get a warrant! But you’d better be ready to have me charged with something.”
And where does it say in the lease “no firearms”?
Too many "If's" and hypotheticals on this thread to even waste time on it anymore.......You guys win.......Celebrate!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.