news

한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina

recently, ms. wang, who lives in beijing, reported to red star news that because the landlord discovered that she and her husband had advanced cancer after they rented the house, she and her husband were faced with the situation of the landlord unilaterally terminating the contract and forcing them to move out within 7 days.

the landlord, mr. zhang, said that the tenant concealed his illness when signing the contract. if a cancer patient died in the house he rented, the house would be considered a "haunted house", which would lead to a depreciation in market value. he could unilaterally terminate the contract because the tenant said he had the "right to refuse all house viewings", triggering the breach of contract clause in the contract.

▲"termination notice" posted outside the tenant's door

landlord discovers tenant has cancer when showing house

worried about rental housing becoming a haunted house

ms. wang is a cancer patient. on august 12 this year, in order to facilitate treatment, her husband, mr. yang, signed a lease contract and short-term rented a two-bedroom house near laoshan in shijingshan district, beijing, a few kilometers away from the hospital. the lease period lasts until november 11 this year.

since the house was listed for sale, the landlord rented it out at 5,500 yuan/month, which was lower than the market price, on the condition that the tenants cooperated in viewing the house. when renting the house, the two parties agreed that "party a rents the house at a low price on the premise that party b cooperates with party a in selling the house. if party b violates this agreement," it can be used as one of the circumstances for terminating the contract and was written into the lease contract.

after signing the contract, ms. wang and her husband moved into the house. during that time, agents had been bringing buyers to view the house. it was not until the end of august that the landlord, mr. zhang, brought people to view the house and discovered some "problems."

mr. zhang told red star news that when the tenant mr. yang signed the contract with him, he said that they lived together as a couple, but he did not see his wife. later, when he was inspecting the house, he accidentally discovered that his wife's hair was gone.

"because my family members have also experienced this situation." mr. zhang said that his relatives had also been hospitalized for cancer, and seeing this situation aroused his vigilance. so he called mr. yang out alone and asked about his wife's condition.

mr. zhang said that mr. yang was also very sincere at the time and told him the fact that his wife had cancer.

after learning about ms. wang's illness, mr. zhang expressed his concern that ms. wang might die in the house, making it a "haunted house" and thus affecting its sale, and he hoped that the tenant would move out as soon as possible.

mr. zhang told red star news: "the agent told me that even if the house is not a 'haunted house' in the legal sense, buyers generally avoid this type of property, so the house price may fall by 500,000 to 1 million yuan." in addition, he is also worried that if a cancer patient's condition progresses to an uncontrollable stage, extreme behavior may occur, further exacerbating the risk of the property.

the chat records show that mr. zhang also suggested that the tenants do not have to move out early, but the prerequisite is that mr. and mrs. yang and wang need to sign a supplementary agreement. the main agreement is that if the house they rent out becomes a "haunted house" in the eyes of the public due to the tenant's reasons, the lessee should compensate for the loss caused by the sharp drop in the value of the property.

the reporter noticed that in the "rental supplementary agreement" drafted by the landlord, it was written that party b deliberately concealed the fact that his co-resident was suffering from terminal cancer when signing the original contract.

in this regard, ms. wang said that when she rented the house, her husband did not mention her physical condition, but this was not an agreement in the lease contract, and the tenant did not need to actively inform her.

the above-mentioned supplementary agreement also mentioned that party b promised that during the lease period, if the value of the house in the trading market drops significantly due to personal reasons of party b and its co-residents (including but not limited to sudden death caused by worsening cancer or personal unnatural death caused by other extreme methods adopted by party b and its co-residents), party b and party b's immediate family members, or the immediate family members of its co-residents, shall bear the economic losses caused to party a.

on the evening of september 2, the landlord, mr. zhang, sent the supplementary agreement to mr. yang. during the communication that night, mr. zhang also told mr. yang that the client should remind his wife to wear a hat when visiting the house. "a discerning person can understand the general idea at a glance, but it is still a taboo for the buyer, please understand."

on the morning of september 3, mr. yang replied, "my wife and i have reconsidered your opinion yesterday. since our living here has caused trouble to you and you also want us to move out as soon as possible, then we will find a house and move out now. it should be within ten days. the supplementary agreement can be signed normally as agreed yesterday."

afterwards, mr. zhang replied, "if you can move out within 10 days, you don't have to sign this agreement. i believe nothing extreme will happen within 10 days. then we can reach a gentleman's agreement with september 13 as the deadline. thank you for considering me..."

mr. yang told the landlord that he would definitely move out before the 13th, and before that, please do not mention words like haunted house, accident, death, deterioration, and cancer because they had already caused harm to his wife.

ms. wang told the red star news reporter that she and her husband had not violated any law or breached any contract, nor had they caused any losses to the landlord, and therefore refused to sign the supplementary agreement.

disagreement on liquidated damages and property viewing

the landlord announced unilateral termination of the contract

ms. wang said that in the face of the landlord's attitude, she and her husband could move out early, but the landlord had to pay liquidated damages according to the contract. however, the landlord only agreed to refund the remaining rent and deposit, and refused to pay the liquidated damages.

the landlord, mr. zhang, refused. he told the reporter that ms. wang and her husband had not lived in the house for a full month. if the remaining rent and deposit were returned, and they were compensated with one month's rent as liquidated damages, it would mean that they had lived in the house for free.

at the same time, mr. zhang said that due to the tenant's slow response to messages and other behaviors of not cooperating with the house viewing, especially mr. yang's statement to him during the communication that "he has the right to refuse all house viewings", the breach of contract clause stipulated in the contract has been triggered.

mr. zhang also pointed out that the other party had agreed to move out before september 13, but later went back on his word. he found the change in attitude puzzling.

▲screenshot of chat records between landlord and tenant

the chat records between the two parties show that on the afternoon of september 3, mr. yang said, "my attitude has changed because your behavior has caused lasting harm to my wife... if you don't want to talk things out, then before we move out, we have the right to refuse all visits to view the house."

mr. zhang replied, "if you are playing tricks, i will formally notify you and i will go to collect the room tomorrow."

on september 4, the landlord, mr. zhang, sent a "termination notice" to ms. wang and her husband via wechat, announcing the unilateral termination of the contract and unconditional repossession of the house. the tenant was given a seven-day moving buffer period, with a deadline of september 11 to move out.

in this regard, ms. wang told reporters that the landlord initially accused them of concealing their illness, claiming that this was a breach of contract. however, after she clearly informed the landlord that not informing the tenant of the illness when renting the house did not constitute a breach of contract, the landlord no longer used "concealing the illness" as an excuse, but instead accused the tenant of breach of contract on the grounds of "not cooperating with the house viewing."

ms. wang also said that the couple had been actively cooperating in the house viewing, and sometimes even agreed to come to the house viewing at noon. the reporter noted that ms. wang sent the landlord the wechat chat records between the couple and the agent, as well as photos and videos, to prove that as a tenant, she had been cooperating in the house viewing.

the chat records between the two parties also show that mr. yang also complained that the frequent house viewings affected their daily lives. ms. wang wrote in her communication with the landlord, "from the start date of the lease, august 9 to september 4, we cooperated in house viewings more than 13 times, and did not cooperate in house viewings 0 times."

the landlord, mr. zhang, responded that the prerequisite for signing the contract is to cooperate with the house viewing, and any disagreement cannot be used as a reason to refuse the house viewing. "you have clearly stated that you refuse all house viewings, and this has nothing to do with your cooperation in the house viewing before."

did the tenant actually refuse to view the house? mr. zhang did not give a direct answer to this question, but said that when the other party expressed the words "refuse to view the house", it had triggered the breach of contract clause stipulated in the contract.

according to the pictures provided by ms. wang, the above-mentioned "termination notice" was posted outside the door of the house she rented at around 11:00 on september 4. it reads: party b is requested to move out of party a's house before september 11, 2024 after receiving this notice, and restore the house to the state when party a delivered it to party b. party a will return the two months' rent for the house that party b has not lived in. if party b moves out before september 11, party a can understand and the house deposit will not be deducted. if party b refuses to cooperate with the move and forces party a to use coercive means to evict, party a will deduct the house deposit according to the breach of contract clause.

mr. zhang said that his action to take back the house was reasonable and legal, and he would communicate with the relevant parties to avoid physical conflict.

ms. wang said that she and her husband rented the house legally, and if the landlord unilaterally breached the contract, he would be liable for breach of contract.

lawyer’s interpretation:

just saying "you have the right to refuse to view the house" cannot be considered a breach of contract

regarding this incident, wei junling, a partner at beijing xinnuo law firm, believes that the law does not stipulate that people with illnesses need to inform the risk of death due to illness when renting a house, and bear compensation liability for the risk of death. unless otherwise agreed, concealing the illness is not a circumstance that leads to the termination of the contract.

wei junling pointed out that the tenant in this incident expressed that he "has the right to refuse", which does not mean a direct refusal. if the tenant has not actually refused the buyer's visit to view the house, the contract has not yet reached the point of termination.

xu yongxing, a lawyer at beijing jingshi law firm, believes that whether there is a breach of contract in a housing rental relationship depends mainly on the terms of the contract. in this case, the two parties agreed that the premise for party a to rent the house at a low price is that party b cooperates with party a to sell the house. the landlord believes that the tenant has expressed "refusal to view the house" and terminates the contract. it needs to provide specific evidence, such as refusing to open the door when the tenant comes to view the house. if the tenant only said "the right to refuse to view the house" but actually still accepts viewings, the landlord cannot determine that he has breached the contract based on this.

xu yongxing pointed out that if there is no special agreement on the physical condition of the tenant in the rental contract, the landlord shall bear the liability for breach of contract if he proposes to terminate the contract on the grounds of "concealing the illness". however, from the actual situation, if someone in the house dies abnormally, it will indeed affect the rental or sale price of the house, which is an objective market phenomenon. if the tenant truthfully tells the landlord that the co-resident is a terminal cancer patient when signing the contract, the landlord will most likely not rent the house to the tenant. therefore, if this incident enters the litigation stage, the extreme situation that the tenant deliberately concealed his illness is also a certain fault, and the judge may reduce the landlord's breach of contract liability at his discretion based on the fault of both parties.

wei junling pointed out that "haunted house" is not a legal concept. in the folk, it usually refers to a house where an abnormal death has occurred. in specific judicial cases, whether a contract can be terminated due to a "haunted house" also depends on the specific circumstances.