On February 11, 2019, the Principal-owner of the apartment appealed to the lawyer in connection with the submission to him by the tenant of the apartment of a claim for recovery of funds for early termination of the tenancy agreement, including the security Deposit, the monthly amount of rent that he allegedly paid a month in advance, penalties for early termination of the contract in double size, losses associated with early termination, including the cost of a realtor, the cost of moving and transportation of things, the difference in the value of the terminated contract of tenancy and the cost of a new contract of tenancy for the uninhabited 4 months, compensation for moral damage separately in favor of the employer, his wife and in favor of their common daughter, reimbursement for the payment of state duties and the provision of legal services.
The principal indicated that on the day on which they agreed with the tenant to hand over the keys and return the owner of the apartment to the tenant of the security Deposit, he came to the apartment and found that the keys to the apartment lie under the Mat, the tenant of the apartment is not, and entering the apartment saw the absence of household appliances, namely, a refrigerator and a washing machine, which were transferred together with the apartment for the period of residence to the tenant.
In the SMS message the employer demanded from the owner to pay him unreasonably large sum of money for early termination of the contract, and in exchange for equipment, recognizing that he took away equipment on account of a debt. On the same day, the owner of the apartment called the police, a report on the case was drawn up. However, the district police Commissioner refused to initiate criminal proceedings on this fact.
The lawyer got acquainted with the materials of the case, came to the conclusion that the plaintiff’s claims were unfounded and unproven.
Lawyer on behalf of the principal were prepared and filed in court objections to the claim with the application of SMS-correspondence, details of incoming and outgoing calls confirming the integrity and reasonableness of the owner’s actions in advance of the employer’s warning of early termination of the contract, documents justifying the unforeseen and extraordinary circumstance of early termination of the contract of employment, and other documents relevant to the case, as well as prepared a counterclaim for the recovery of property from illegal possession of the employer, on the obligation of the employer to transfer the equipment within a certain period, on the recovery of costs for payment of state duty and the cost of legal services, prepared and filed a complaint to the Prosecutor’s office on the abolition of the decision to refuse to initiate criminal proceedings.
Summary: 20.02.2019 year Babushkinskaya Interdistrict Prosecutor’s office cancelled the resolution on refusal in excitation of criminal case as submitted prematurely.
April 16, 2019 Babushkinskiy district court of Moscow completely denied the claim of the tenant to the owner of the apartment for the recovery of funds in connection with the early termination of the tenancy agreement.
At the same time, the claims of the owner of the apartment to the tenant in a counterclaim for the recovery of property from illegal possession of the obligation of the employer to transfer the equipment within a certain period, the recovery of costs for payment of state duty and the cost of legal services, the court is fully satisfied.
The legal position is prepared and representing the interests of the Principal counsel T. A. Bogomolova