If the rental contract expires and the tenant has not cleared out the belongings, can the landlord continue to ask for rent?
2024-08-12
한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina
In the process of renting a house, if the lease is not renewed after the contract expires, it is inevitable to terminate the lease. After the tenant terminates the lease, if the tenant's belongings are not emptied out, can the landlord ask for rent? Recently, in a housing lease contract dispute case heard by the Dongcheng District People's Court of Beijing, after the house expired and the tenant moved out, the tenant did not empty out some of his belongings. The court ruled that the tenant should pay the occupation and use fee within a reasonable period of time. At the same time, because the landlord did not fulfill the obligation to recover the house in time and avoid the expansion of losses, the landlord's request for the remaining rent was not supported.
The tenant's belongings have not been cleared out when the house expires
Landlord sues for rent
Hong and Li signed a house rental contract on May 24, 2017, stipulating that Li would rent a house rented by Hong, with a lease term from June 1, 2017 to May 31, 2022, and a monthly rent of 6,000 yuan. After each lease year, the rent would increase by 200 yuan per month in the new lease year, and so on until the expiration of the contract. At the same time, the contract stipulated that the deposit would be 6,000 yuan for the first month's rent, and that the deposit could be returned in full after the contract expired or was terminated, after deducting the rent, liquidated damages and other expenses that should be borne by Li. After the expiration of the contract, the two parties communicated through WeChat to renew the lease for one year, with a rent standard of 6,600 yuan, and then renewed the lease for another month, with the lease term until June 30, 2023.
At the end of June 2023, Li proposed to Hong to terminate the contract and return the deposit, and Hong agreed to terminate the contract. On June 25, Li moved out of the leased house, but when Hong took over the house, he found that some of Li's belongings were still left in the house, so Hong did not agree to return the deposit. In this case, Li refused to return the house key. On June 30, Hong changed the locks of the house and installed surveillance. Later, Hong contacted Li to clear the items in the house, but Li did not respond.
Hong believed that Li left items in the house after the expiration of the lease and did not clear out the items in time, causing the house to be unable to be used normally and causing losses to himself. He sued Li in court, requiring Li to pay a rent of 34,000 yuan from July 1, 2023 to November 7, 2023 (calculated at a monthly rate of 8,000 yuan based on market prices), and at the same time requiring Li to return the remaining keys and clean up the items left in the house.
The defendant Li said that he had moved out of the leased house on June 25, 2023, and verbally informed Hong that the house had been vacated, and also returned some of the keys to the intermediary, so the lease relationship between the two parties was terminated on June 25, 2023. Regarding the return of the house keys, Li said that he handed over the commonly used wooden door key to the intermediary on June 25, 2023, and the anti-theft door was not used at ordinary times, so he forgot to return it, and the bedroom door was not locked, so the remaining keys were not returned. In addition, Li said that because the relationship between the two parties was good at the time, he knew that Hong needed to rent the house again, so when he moved out, he told Hong that the items left in the house would be handled by Hong. Li believed that since Hong replaced the house key and installed surveillance on June 25, he had never entered the house, let alone used the house, so he did not agree to pay Hong the usage fee for that period.
During the litigation, Hong submitted several photos of the house involved in the case, which proved that there was a bunk bed and several cabinets of Li in the house involved in the case. The two parties went to the house involved in the case on November 7, 2023, and Li returned the remaining keys of the house involved to Hong and cleared out the items in the house.
Failure to reclaim the property within a reasonable period of time
Should bear the adverse consequences arising therefrom
The Dongcheng District People's Court held thatRegarding the time of contract termination, Li moved out of the house in question on June 25, 2023, and handed over the key to the wooden door of the house in question to the real estate agency at the request of Hong. Therefore, Hong had actual control of the house in question on June 25, 2023, and the lease contract in question was terminated on that day.
Regarding the rent claimed by Hong from June 26, 2023 to November 7, 2023. The court held that when the lease expires, the lessee should return the leased property. The returned leased property should be in the state after use according to the agreement or the nature of the leased property. Considering that there are some items in the house involved that Li has not emptied, Hong once asked Li to empty the items and Li did not submit evidence to prove that he had informed Hong to abandon the items in the house, Li should pay the house occupation fee. At the same time, as the lessor, Hong has the obligation to collect the house in time and avoid the expansion of losses. He cannot claim the house occupation fee indefinitely on the grounds that there are the lessee's items in the house. Therefore, the court ruled at its discretion that Li should pay Hong 1,100 yuan in occupation fees from June 26, 2023 to June 30, 2023, and at the same time, rejected Hong's other claims. In view of the fact that Hong did not return Li's previous deposit, Hong should return the remaining deposit after deducting the 1,100 yuan occupation fee to Li.
After the first instance verdict was announced, Hong was dissatisfied with the verdict and filed an appeal, but the second instance verdict upheld the original verdict. The case is now effective.
(Image source: Internet, please delete if infringed)
Judge Tips
Clear agreement on leftovers
If there is no agreement, it should be handled promptly and properly
The judge who heard the case analyzed that according to Article 591 of the Civil Code, after one party breaches the contract, the other party shall take appropriate measures to prevent the expansion of losses; if the other party fails to take appropriate measures and the losses are expanded, it shall not request compensation for the expanded losses. The reasonable expenses incurred by the party to prevent the expansion of losses shall be borne by the breaching party. In this case, after the lessee Li actually moved out of the house and the contract was terminated, although Li still left some items behind, the lessor Hong did not take back the house in time to avoid the expansion of losses, and should also bear the adverse consequences arising from this.
The judge hearing the case suggested that lessors and lessees should try to consider the terms of house delivery and handling of leftover items when signing the lease contract, and clearly stipulate in the contract in advance that leftover items in the house can be handled by the lessor on his own, etc., to avoid disputes.
The judge hearing this case reminded the landlord that if the two parties did not have a clear agreement, according to the above legal provisions, if the breaching party's behavior caused damage, the landlord should take measures to mitigate the damage. When disposing of the tenant's property, the landlord can promptly notify the tenant and give the tenant a reasonable period to clear out the items.
The judge hearing the case also reminded that as the lessee, the tenant should fulfill relevant obligations in a timely manner when the lease term expires, such as vacating the house, clearing out items, etc., to ensure that it does not affect the normal use of the house or re-rental, and to avoid causing losses to the lessor due to improper performance of obligations.
Author: Zhang Huirong and Yang Chenhui
Comprehensive: Beijing Law Network, China Legal Education
Source: Shandong High Court
