I can get the documents looked at for free at no cost if any one is
interested.

Any question or comments you can email or call me at any time.
I will get back to you as fast as I can.

Thank you and have a nice day!!

Ken DeWitt
Your Fellow Tech. Guy

Phone # : 204-998-3218
Email: kendewitt@y <[email protected]>ftg.ca



On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 6:36 PM, Courtney Lofchick <[email protected]>wrote:

> Siu just wants to get an opinion. No one has said anything about suing
> anyone. We haven't been locked out. None of us are experts in contract law.
> If she wants to pay someone to analyze the documents let her, who knows we
> might learn something. It's her money let her do it since she wants to.
> Someone should give her the documents.
> No one should be saying to not encourage the lawyer option. If we stay,
> lawyers will be required to draft up an agreement between us and AW. If we
> leave we may need them to draft up a document where all parties acknowledge
> that the old lease is no longer in effect.
>
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Justin Lacko <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Don't encourage the lawyer option...
>>
>> On 25 October 2012 17:01, Mark Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > On 10/25/12 15:10, Roswyne wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I would personally like to get a lawyer's opinion.  However, I don't
>> >> have copies of the leases, which I would need to get from the board.
>> >
>> >
>> > Could you also ask how much the lawyer thinks we would get in damages to
>> > compensate us for our losses + punative damanges and what the lawyers
>> would
>> > want to take from that? (at least 33%?)
>> >
>> > You'll be posing three hypotheticals:
>> >  * If action is taken against us (such as doors locked prematurely) are
>> we
>> > in a position to sue?
>> >  * What's our chances of winning?
>> >  * What kind of cival damanges (compensation for losses and punative)
>> would
>> > be typical to recieve after a ruling in our favour?
>> >
>> > Sui, when you get your hands on the text, I would recommend reading
>> closely
>> > any clauses that set out and limit what uses we could make use of the
>> space
>> > for -- as that's likely to be the primary line of counter attack that
>> they'd
>> > use, they'd claim we violated the lease by using the space in ways the
>> lease
>> > said we were not supposed to.
>> >
>> > And so with that we're going to have to think back about how we used the
>> > space and also how *Assent Works* used the space to be sure there
>> weren't
>> > use-related breaches -- there isn't a leg to stand on if either of us
>> broke
>> > what it said regarding use.
>> >
>> > Any lawyer is going to ask questions about that in a consult.
>> >
>> > Specifically, if Assent Works as our co-tennant did something that
>> breached
>> > the lease then we wouldn't be able to stop the landlord from saying the
>> > lease is breached for that reason -- we would only be able to go after
>> > Assent Works for breaking the partnership formed with us by signing as
>> > co-tennants with us, and we'd have to be able to show they did those
>> things
>> > without our support or consent.
>> >
>> > Any scenario involving going after Assent Works for their role in this
>> is a
>> > nuclear option that I don't even think you'll want to consider.
>> >
>> > A lawyer may also be interested in about other ways in which we may have
>> > breached the lease, so look at the text and try to imagine if particular
>> > terms were violated.
>> >
>> > If in reading the lease you find something that you think we may have
>> > breeched, report it directly to the board.
>> > -------------
>> >
>> > One of the most sad things about the large back pile of utility bills
>> being
>> > thrown at Assent Works and Skullspace is that they're only subtracting
>> the
>> > Cr8tory amounts and $1000 annual common area credit -- there's no
>> > subtraction for the electricity use they thought we were going to use
>> for
>> > our purposes. Surely they didn't imagine zero -- even storage places
>> have to
>> > have the (ineffecient) lights on sometimes.
>> >
>> > Ditto for the new lease proposed, there's no subtraction for what they
>> > thought before we were going to use for our own purposes, so the net
>> effect
>> > even in *their* own terms now is a rent increase.
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > SkullSpace Discuss Mailing List
>> > Help: http://www.skullspace.ca/wiki/index.php/Mailing_List#Discuss
>> > Archive: https://groups.google.com/group/skullspace-discuss-archive/
>> _______________________________________________
>> SkullSpace Discuss Mailing List
>> Help: http://www.skullspace.ca/wiki/index.php/Mailing_List#Discuss
>> Archive: https://groups.google.com/group/skullspace-discuss-archive/
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> SkullSpace Discuss Mailing List
> Help: http://www.skullspace.ca/wiki/index.php/Mailing_List#Discuss
> Archive: https://groups.google.com/group/skullspace-discuss-archive/
>
_______________________________________________
SkullSpace Discuss Mailing List
Help: http://www.skullspace.ca/wiki/index.php/Mailing_List#Discuss
Archive: https://groups.google.com/group/skullspace-discuss-archive/

Reply via email to