Verbal contract

Suzanned22

Hi all could urgently do with your help. Basically I am starting up my own business. I found a premises and told the estate agent I would take it at the beginning of February. To cut a long story short another business owner on the street was using the unit for storage which meant I couldn't sign my lease until the first of march, that was ok... In the meantime I received a copy of the lease from the landlord to review and sign so I looked it over and was happy with it so proceeded to hire staff order equipment stock contractors needless to say I have outlaid thousands of euro. I was due to sign the Lease tomorrow, when at 6pm this evening the estate agent called and said the landlord has decided to continue to rent to the current tenant that is using it for storage.

My question is this do I have a leg to stand on legally like I said I have spent thousands on supplies and services that are being delivered Friday! And have 2 staff members that have left their current positions! And now I have no premises :-( please help

Totally disheartened entrepreneur :-((

NoQuarter

Absolutely, there is a legal argument there for sure. You have experience reliance loss from the way you set out your OP.

The charter forbids legal advice here but I can tell you, if you have lost thousands, you need to go speak to a solicitor to get proper advice. I can see a case though.

coylemj

Hang on - if the OP pulled out of the deal because he found a better premises around the corner, could the landlord have sued him for breach of contract/loss of rent/something else?

Cuts both ways surely?

My answer to his question: no contract, no deal, no comeback.

NoQuarter

coylemj wrote: »

Hang on - if the OP pulled out of the deal because he found a better premises around the corner, could the landlord have sued him for breach of contract/loss of rent/something else?

Cuts both ways surely?

My answer to his question: no contract, no deal, no comeback.

I'd say the answer is if the OP pulled out and the landlord had already kicked the tenant that was in there out, then there might be a comaback.

You'll see I chose my original words very carefully. I expressly said I can see a case and there is an argument there to be had. Nobody here can tell the OP if that argument would be sucessful or not.

coylemj

NoQuarter wrote: »

I'd say the answer is if the OP pulled out and the landlord had already kicked the tenant that was in there out, then there might be a comaback.

The question of whether the landlord had a case (for specific performance) or not doesn't rest on the commercial consideration of whether he had a continuous rental stream or not.

seb65

NoQuarter wrote: »

I'd say the answer is if the OP pulled out and the landlord had already kicked the tenant that was in there out, then there might be a comaback.

You'll see I chose my original words very carefully. I expressly said I can see a case and there is an argument there to be had. Nobody here can tell the OP if that argument would be sucessful or not.

A case? Perhaps. Though does this not speak to an agreement to contract rather than a contract and the grey area of good faith bargaining?

I find it suspect that the landlord could not sign the lease until the first of March. Even if there was a tenant in there, nothing stopped the signing of a lease to take effect on a later date.

Even if the OP does have a case, the only remedy is damages and that remedy will be a long time coming.

As a matter of general opinion OP, if I was in your situation I would look for another space to lease. Not least of all because you haven't even signed an agreement and the landlord is already sc$%@ing you over. I'm sorry for your distress.

NoQuarter

coylemj wrote:

The question of whether the landlord had a case (for specific performance) or not doesn't rest on the commercial consideration of whether he had a continuous rental stream or not.

Ok, but there might be damages leaving aside any equity.

Either way, you cant just say there is no comeback here, OP says there is a contract, the landlord will say there isnt. Thousands of euro rest on it. It's a classic example of the tens of cases that are ran every week in the Courts.

The OP should see a solicitor, 100%

seb65

coylemj wrote: »

The question of whether the landlord had a case (for specific performance) or not doesn't rest on the commercial consideration of whether he had a continuous rental stream or not.

I would not think the courts would issue an order for specific performance in such a case though as it would force a continuous relationship between the parties. Is specific performance not more geared towards a once off handing over of goods?

NoQuarter

seb65 wrote: »

A case? Perhaps. Though does this not speak to an agreement to contract rather than a contract and the grey area of good faith bargaining?

I find it suspect that the landlord could not sign the lease until the first of March. Even if there was a tenant in there, nothing stopped the signing of a lease to take effect on a later date.

It might be an agreement to agree. Would need to see the correspondence if any.

In relation to signing a lease to take future effect, I was thinking the very same thing when I read it. But still...

seb65

NoQuarter wrote: »

Ok, but there might be damages leaving aside any equity.

Either way, you cant just say there is no comeback here, OP says there is a contract, the landlord will say there isnt. Thousands of euro rest on it. It's a classic example of the tens of cases that are ran every week in the Courts.

The OP should see a solicitor, 100%

I agree. Though, in the meantime I'd find a new space.

coylemj

seb65 wrote: »

I would not think the courts would issue an order for specific performance in such a case though as it would force a continuous relationship between the parties. Is specific performance not more geared towards a once off handing over of goods?

Conceded.

What I guess I meant to question was whether the courts would regard the 'agreement' as forming an enforceable contract or not.

NoQuarter

seb65 wrote: »

I agree. Though, in the meantime I'd find a new space.

Sure, but thats simply a business consideration. Mitigation shouldnt be an issue as I cant see any ongoing damage.

Suzanned22

Thanks for your help guys as I said I got this news 24 hours before I was due to sign and get keys I have goods being delivered and contractors due to go in first thing tomorrow morning. Also two people going on my payroll that have left current positions.

Unfortunately because I have spent thousands specifically tailored to this space I don't think I am going to be in a position to proceed with another property. I just feel should somebody's word not count for something? Maybe I have too much faith in humanity :-(

im invisible

Verbal contracts, not worth the paper they're written on

Koops80

Check your estate agent correspondence. It's common for them to include a disclaimer such as:/


In accordance with our standard practice we are obliged to state that no contract will exist or deemed to exist until such time as all legal documentation has been agreed, signed and exchanged by both parties and all relevant deposit payments are made.

jd80

im invisible wrote: »

Verbal contracts, not worth the paper they're written on

Not so.

Just more difficult to prove. :rolleyes:

valleyoftheunos

OP see a solicitor, sounds like you might have a case relating to your reliance.

I would say (on an almost hypothetical level) that the fact that he sent you a draft lease would suggest that no contract was formed.

Like I said, speak to a Solicitor.