This is concerning a piece of property that was rented to me by Leia Lulu.
CandelWood Estates (59, 52, 21); 6/1/09
I had been searching for a parcel with more prims than where I am at. I located a parcel at CandelWood Estates where I purchased (for 1L$) a parcel owned by Leia Lulu on a weekly tier lease. After she left, I went paid for four weeks of tiers (based on weekly rate). My girlfriend and I had difficulty getting back and it was laggy to both of us. Once there, we could not get out, though everytime we we finally did make it out ( by having to continuously click on many other LM's) we could not get back without the same ordeal. We spent 3 hours trying to get in and out of there before my girlfriend and I could not handle the frustration. I contacted Leia about returning the land cause we cant live where we cant get in or out of. She tells me to abandon the land, which terminates the agreement, and I did. She tells me that she will not refund the other 3 weeks unless she re-leases the land. I am not responsible for 3 weeks past the termination of the lease term. The property is sold and based on a weekly term. I was only there for 3 hours (sort of) before returning the land. And at 3900 a week and she has the land is still a win situation for her, but to hold me accountable for OVERpayment past the termination of the lease agreement is not legal.
I paid 15,600L$ for 4 weeks on a weekly agreement (NOT monthly), and left after 3 hours (actual time on the property is probably less than half). The monies for the first weekly lease is 3,900L$, (which if I do not pay terminates the lease and the land is returned to its original owner ) and I agree that the rest of that payment for the first week is not refundable unless she re-rents the land, in which case she will have to rerfund the difference. The overpayment of 11,700L$ does not apply to anything past the termination of the lease term. This is to be refunded (and cannot be kept till she re-rents the land) since I no longer have any control of the property.
Argument 1: If the lease term was a period of one month and the tennant paid for the month, then the whole amount paid for a month would be part of the lease agreement terms. Hence, leaving prior to the end of the month would would forfeit the monies for the remainder of the lease term unless said land is re-leased, then, monies from that period shall be refunded to the term lease holder for the remainder of the paid term.
Since the length of the lease agreement is on weekly terms, the monies paid past the term of the lease is deemed as overpayment and shall be refunded immediately. If said land is re-leased within the term of the original agreement, a refund for the unoccupied but already paid for property shall be paid on a prorated amount. (all the above is within the terms of the lease agreement of the above mentioned landlord)
**if in real life someone signs a lease for one year, then the total amount is due for the term of the lease but is prorated over the term of 12 months. If someone pays the landlord past the 12 month period and is not renewing the lease then the lanlord cannot keep these monies incase they cannot re-lease the property since the term of the lease has been terminated.
Argument 2: If an Estate is sold by Linden Labs and the owner does not pay tiers, the Estate is then confiscated back by Linden Labs. The previous owner of such property is no longer fiscally responsible for that property past the point of it being reclaimed and cannot be held responsible for tier payments till property is resold since it has become vacant. If said Estate is sub-divided as such, and a parcel is sold under a term lease agreement that recurs weekly, then termination of that agreement would terminate fiscaly responsibility past that term. Thus, pre-payment of following terms are not deemed to be the fiscal responsibility of the previous leasee and shall be deemed as overpayment.
Argument 3: If someone buys an item and is debited for 4 times the amount but only recieves one item.* The overage is deemed as overpayment and is subject to refund of the amount over the price of one item if only one item is recieved. Thus, in this case, only one week has been recieved and the parcel has been reclaimed, so the three subsequent weeks are not part of the original agreement which deem them as overpayment and subject to a refund.
Resoulution: The overpayment in the amount of 11,700L$ is due back to the leasee and the remainder of the 3900$L goes to the landlord for the remainder of the weekly payment.
****On a further note, she says she only gives refunds if she rents it again (even though he feels that he has a right to charge past a lease when she has her property back), that all her other properties are for sale for 1L$ but this is special so she feels the right to charge 3900L$.................hmmmmmm. sure sounds like Fraud to me. In light to this development. Leia Lulu rightfully owes me the Whole amount.