The case involved a dispute over a lease contract that a tenant had encountered in the process of renting a house. The tenant (hereinafter referred to as the "plaintiff") and the landlord (hereinafter referred to as the "defendant") entered into a one-year lease contract for the premises. Shortly after moving in, the plaintiff found that there were serious safety hazards in the house, such as aging wires, water leakage and other problems, and repeatedly asked the defendant to repair them, but they were not properly resolved. The plaintiff then commissioned our law firm to file a lawsuit, demanding to terminate the contract and refund the rent.
Consultation and evidence collection:
Our team of lawyers understood the plaintiff's demands and the background of the case in detail, and collected relevant evidence such as the lease contract, house photos, maintenance request records, and communication records with the defendant. We provided the plaintiff with professional legal advice and analyzed the legal basis of the case and possible litigation strategies.
Background Check and Platform tracking:
We conducted a detailed investigation of the defendant's property management and rental records, including his past rental dispute records and the evaluation of the property company. Through the investigation, we found that the defendant had been complained about several times for housing maintenance issues, which provided strong support for our claim to terminate the contract.
Preparation for the lawsuit:
We assisted the plaintiff in sorting out all the evidentiary materials, including the lease contract, photos of the house, records of repair requests, records of communication with the defendant, calculation of damages, etc., and drafted the complaint. During the proceedings, we actively communicated with the court to ensure that the case went smoothly.
Legal procedure and litigation execution:
During the trial, we elaborated the plaintiff's demands and legal basis, and provided sufficient evidence to support them. The defense argued that the housing problem was normal wear and tear, but we strongly refuted this claim through the property company's certification and expert appraisal report. After many rounds of debate, the court finally concluded that the defendant's failure to fulfill the obligations of house maintenance constituted a breach of contract and should terminate the contract and refund the rent.
The plaintiff successfully terminated the contract and received a partial rental refund, avoiding greater financial loss. The successful handling of the case not only safeguarded the plaintiff's legitimate rights and interests, but also provided a useful reference for the handling of similar housing rental dispute cases.