Tags

, , , , ,

In Diaz v. Torres,  [County Court, 9th Judicial Circuit in and for Orange County, Civil Division. Case No. 2012-CC-010491-O, Division 72. September 24, 2012. Wilfredo Martinez, Judge,  19 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1075a],  the landlord used a 7 day notice to demand payment of rent instead of a 3 day notice.

Landlord’s notice stated, in part, “You are hereby notified that you are not complying with your lease in that [sic] NOT COMPLYING WITH OWNER’S REQUEST TO MOVE” (emphasis in original).

The notice also states “payment of $1,500.00 is due immediately, noncompliance within three days of receipt of this notice of your lease shall be terminated . . .”

The court ruled that notices that do not contain language in substantial compliance with § 83.56(3), Fla. Stat. are fatally defective. Gonsalves v. Williams, 18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1180a (Fla. Orange Cty. Ct. 2011); Bakke v. Davis, 18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1179a (Fla. Orange Cty. Ct. 2011); Prashad v. Graham, 18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 205c (Fla. Orange Cty. Ct. 2011); LaGree v. McNair, 18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 697c (Fla. Orange Cty. Ct. 2011).

The court  also ruled that “Notices that contain confusing and conflicting demands demands are fatally defective.” Citing  Gosuwn v. Hernandez, 18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 603b (Fla. Orange Cty. Ct. 2011).

The Court found that  a 7-day notice of non-compliance does not contain language in substantial compliance with § ,, Fla. Stat. and, therefore, may not be used to evict a tenant for non-payment of rent.

Note:  the case links to Florida Law Weekly Supplement above require a subscription to the service to access the cases.

Advertisements