Ok, I got in a pickle for trying to do a good thing for a workmate. While working at the same place, she needed a co-signer on an apartment. I thought I would help out. We both had decent jobs and I knew where she worked.
I signed the guarantor section and thought my responsibility would end when that particular lease is up. She signed a new lease on the same apartment; the complex is stating that it was a renewal and that I was still the guarantor. She was coming up on the completion of that lease when she moved into another apartment in the same complex. She still lives in the same complex and pays the rent every month.
The complex is suing me for $1700 for unpaid rent and "damages beyond normal wear and tear".
http://www.taa.org/assets/PDF/renter...%20website.pdf is a copy of the Texas Apartment Association "Lease Contract Guaranty" document that I signed.
When I signed, I knew I was responsible through the end of that lease which went from Sept 3, 2005 to March 31, 2006. The "renewal" lease good from April 1 2006 to October 31 2006. She terminated that lease early to move into the 2nd apartment on started paying on the new apartment on Oct 21, 2006 and still currently resides there.
So, am I screwed and have to pay $1700 or is there some way to fight it? The suit is filed in Denton County and I live in Dallas County. Please help. Court date is set for May 23, 2006.

That's the name of my cat 'Pickle' because growing up she was always 'in a pickle', a former barn cat turned sophisticate (not). Anyway, next time learn to read the small print.

Time to hire an attorney to look at it and see if there is some loophole, but it sounds like you promised to guarantor this even when it renews. You never gave them notice to remove you from this status.
So on the surface it looks like you are stuck.

MORE FOR CLARIFICATION
Well, the loophole is what I am looking for. When she signed, we were both under the impression that it was only for 6 months. The office person said after that she would not need a co-signer because she would have a history with them. How convenient that the person no longer works there or that in the small print of the contract that it does not honor "verbal agreements".
Also, the complex has not made due diligence to try to collect from the person that is still a renter of theirs. They have not attempted to collect from her at all, even when she went to the office to try to clear it up.
So, how does the little guy win for just trying to do a good deed?

Is the second lease on an Apartment Lease Contract just like the first one, or is the second lease on a Renewal form? I am assuming all forms used were produced by the Texas Apartment Association.

I am in the same pickle! I am not in court over it yet, but it is heading that way. I hope your resolution can lend some guidance to the situation for me.

Although the guaranty says that "renewals" are covered, I am arguing that this is not a renewal, but is instead a whole new lease - since, in my case, the renewal form was not used but the same type of form lease was used with no reference to the earilier lease being supposedly "renewed."

Let me know what you find out.

The Fort Worth Court of Appeals has held that unless the renewal lease explicitly says it is a renewal, then you are probably off the hook. (Centerpoint Apartments v. Webb). But, it's a badly written, unpublished opinion and not binding on other Courts of Appeals, so if you're in Dallas, don't bank on it. Another word of caution: the Webb case didn't use the TAA guaranty form. The TAA form plainly says that the obligations will continue and not be affected by renewals or subsequent lease agreements. I don't know if the Centerpoint Apartments guaranty said that but they didn't use the TAA form which might be a big difference in your case.

Best advice: Don't sign a guaranty, even for your children. It's a guarantee you'll get sued.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UnknownLawyer

The Fort Worth Court of Appeals has held that unless the renewal lease explicitly says it is a renewal, then you are probably off the hook. (Centerpoint Apartments v. Webb). But, it's a badly written, unpublished opinion and not binding on other Courts of Appeals, so if you're in Dallas, don't bank on it. Another word of caution: the Webb case didn't use the TAA guaranty form. The TAA form plainly says that the obligations will continue and not be affected by renewals or subsequent lease agreements. I don't know if the Centerpoint Apartments guaranty said that but they didn't use the TAA form which might be a big difference in your case.

Best advice: Don't sign a guaranty, even for your children. It's a guarantee you'll get sued.

---

Hi unknown, you had better check the date of the threads you reply to. This one is long gone from 2007.

Tick

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tickle

Hi unknown, you had better check the date of the threads you reply to. This one is long gone from 2007.

tick

---

Don't you wonder why people set up an account and then answer one question from 2007 and disappear?