AŞIKOĞLU LAW OFFİCE | How Many Rental Fees Can The Host Receive a Deposit?
Aşıkoğlu started his position as the Alanya Public Prosecutor in 2009 and continued until 2013 when he quit his position to initiate his career as an attorney at law.
alanya,hukuk,bürosu,avukat,dava,danışma,mehmet,aşıkoğlu,mehmet aşıkoğlu,savcı,eski,ceza,ticaret,haciz,alacak,borçlar,Mehemet,Aşıkoğlu,alanya,avukat,hukuk,bürosu,alanya avukat, mehmet aşıkoğlu, alanya hukuk bürosu,Kerim Uysal,Kerem Yağdır,ahmet sezer, mustafa demir, hüsnü sert, jale karakaya, murat aydemir, ayşegül yanmaz
16346
post-template-default,single,single-post,postid-16346,single-format-standard,ajax_fade,page_not_loaded,,side_area_uncovered_from_content,qode-theme-ver-14.2,qode-theme-bridge,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-5.4.7,vc_responsive
 

How Many Rental Fees Can The Host Receive a Deposit?

How Many Rental Fees Can The Host Receive a Deposit?

According to the Code of Obligations, the landlord may receive a maximum deposit of 3 rent.

The article titled desi the assurance of the tenant. By the Code of Obligations is as follows.

ARTICLE 342- If the housing and roofed office rents are paid by the contractor for the assurance of the tenant, this assurance shall not exceed the rent amount of three months.

If it is decided to issue money or negotiable documents as a guarantee, the tenant shall deposit the money into a savings account in order to not withdraw without the consent of the lessor, and store the negotiable document in a bank. The Bank may only reassure the assurances on the basis of the consent of the two parties or by the finalization of the enforcement proceedings or by a final court decision.

If the lessee did not notify the bank in writing about the tenancy of the tenant against the tenant within the three months following the end of the lease agreement, or if the bank failed to notify the bank in writing of proceedings, the bank is obliged to return the guarantee upon the tenant’s request.

The decision of the Supreme Court

The plaintiff’s tenant attorney in the original case petition; the tenant in accordance with the tenants of the tenant in accordance with the tenants of the contract amount of 3.800,00 TL assurance to the landlord to deliver to the landlord, mutual understanding of the immovable has been evacuated before the lease term, the defendant in September, the land will be returned to the security of the assurance to be returned, but the negotiation has been concluded that the results of the cannot be deducted from the lease receivable, kira. 12. The payment order sent by the Executive Directorate file No. 2014/25562 has been notified to the defendant and the defendant has objected to the debt and has stopped the follow-up.
The lawyer of the defendant, the deputy lessor in the petition of the respondent, and the written notice of the contract before the expiry of the contract on 15.08.2014 in accordance with the immovable immunity of the immovable contract, in case of failure to comply with the written notification of Article 6 of the contract for the payment of three months’ rent as compensation is decided that the whether the rejection is decided to be decided, in the merged case petition; the defendant-tenant due to early termination of the lease until the date of 10.11.2014 rent and agreed with the contract will be responsible for the price of the penal clause, therefore, against the defendant against the 3,800-TL assurance amount of the remaining 1900 TL with the re-lease of the immovable 10/11 / He requested that the cancellation of the unfair objection made by the defendant by stating that the defendant-tenant objected to the debt and stopped following the proceedings for the collection of the rent receivable until 2014 with interest.
Court; The decision was made to accept the original and merged case, and the case was appealed separately by the defendants.
There is no dispute between the parties regarding the lease agreement dated 20/01/2014, which is based on the case and which has been decided for one year from 01.02.2014. Monthly rental price is determined as 1,900 TL in the lease contract and the contract may be terminated by the tenant by giving information in writing to the lessor one month before the expiry date of Article 5 of the special conditions of the contract. It has been arranged that the three-month rental fee will be paid separately as of compensation date, and that the damages will be delivered to the landlord by the tenant for the purpose of preventing and compensating the damages and deficiencies that would cause the rental to be worse than the condition of the tenant in the Article 10 of the contract.
In accordance with the principle of loyalty to the contract, the parties must act in accordance with the terms and conditions of the contract. Unless the right cause and duly terminated, the tenant is bound by the term of the contract and in the event of unfair termination of the contract before the termination of the renter is responsible for the loss.
It has been decided that the contract may be terminated by the tenant by giving information to the lessor one month before the expiry of the contract period. Article 325 of the TBK. Eder If the tenant gives back to the lessor without complying with the term of the contract or termination period, the debts arising from the lease shall continue for a reasonable period in which the lessor may be leased under similar conditions. If the tenant has a new tenant who has the power to pay and is ready to take over the lease relationship, the tenant’s debts arising from the lease shall be terminated ver. In the expert report taken by the court, the reasonable period for the re-leasing of the immovable has been determined as two months and it is necessary to accept that the tenant will be responsible for the reasonable two-month compensation period.

In this context, it is understood that the two-month lease receivable by the lessor has been collected from the deposit price; In the original case, it is not correct to make a decision in writing if the claimant-lessee is not right about the request for a deposit and the case should be decided on the grounds that the claimant will be charged for the deposit.
The provision must therefore be broken.

CONCLUSION: According to the article 428 of the HUMK for the reasons explained above, the appeal of the appeal of the appeal of the cash grants of the appeal to the requestor, the No. 6100 HMK’nin provisional article 3 according to the number 1086 of HUMK No. 440 of the decision of the correction path closed, On 15.03.2017 it was decided unanimously.

No Comments

Post A Comment

FinlandGermanRussiaTurkeyIran