Failure to pay rent: Case for unlawful detainer

Failure to pay rent: Case for unlawful detainer "I am the owner of an apartment in Tondo, Manila. In 2016, I had a lease agreement with Belen regarding my apartment. In fact, we executed a written contract on details of the agreement. We agreed that she will pay me P10,000.00 every month. She, however, has failed to pay her monthly rent for five months now. When I asked her to pay, she refused, saying she had no money. I want to file an ejectment suit against Belen. I don’t have any legal background about this issue. What can I do to file a case against my tenant? Thank you,Lucing Dear Lucing,Before you file your case of unlawful detainer, you should first notify Belen of your demand to pay the arrears of the rents on the leased premises and vacate the property through a demand letter. This is in accordance with the Supreme Court decision in the case of Cesar Z. Lanuza and Asteria Lanuza vs. Ma. Consuelo Muñoz (G.R. No. 147372, May 27, 2004), penned by former Associate Justice Leonardo Quisumbing, that a demand is a prerequisite to an action for unlawful detainer, when the action is based on failure to pay rent due or comply with the conditions of [the] lease. Second, after notifying your tenant of your letter to pay the arrears and vacate the leased premises, the law, particularly Section 412(a) of Republic Act (RA) 7160 or the Local Government Code of 1991 enunciates that a conciliation between the parties before the chairman of the Barangay Lupon be conducted prior to the filing of a complaint in court.“Section 412. Conciliation. - Pre-condition to Filing of Complaint in Court. - No complaint, petition, action or proceeding involving any matter within the authority of the lupon shall be filed or instituted directly in court or any other government office for adjudication, unless there has been a confrontation between the parties before the lupon chairman or the pangkat, and that no conciliation or settlement has been reached as certified by the lupon secretary or pangkat secretary as attested to by the lupon or pangkat chairman or unless the settlement has been repudiated by the parties thereto.” (Emphasis supplied)If, however, there is no settlement between you and Belen after the holding of barangay conciliation proceedings, you may ask the Barangay Lupon for issuance of a Certificate to File Action. Upon issuance of the certificate, you may now proceed with the filing of the unlawful detainer case before the court pursuant to rules set under the 1991 Revised Rule on Summary Procedure. It may be noted that the Supreme Court in the case of Fiorello R. Jose vs. Roberto Alfuerto, et al. (G.R. No. 169380, November 26, 2012), penned by former Associate Justice Arturo Brion emphasized the following:“Unlawful detainer is a summary action for the recovery of possession of real property. This action may be filed by a lessor, vendor, vendee or other persons against whom the possession of any land or building is unlawfully withheld after the expiration or termination of the right to hold possession by virtue of any contract, express or implied. In unlawful detainer, the possession of the defendant was originally legal, as his possession was permitted by the plaintiff on account of an express or implied contract between them. The defendant’s possession becomes illegal, however, when the plaintiff demands that the defendant vacate the subject property because of expiration or termination of the right to possess under the contract, and the defendant refuses to heed such demand. A case for unlawful detainer must be instituted one year from the unlawful withholding of possession.”Applying the foregoing to your case, the possession by Belen of your property was legal considering that you have a written contract with her. Belen’s possession, however, became illegal when you demanded that the latter vacate the leased premises considering that she failed to pay you the monthly rent for five (5) months and she refused to leave the apartment. We find it necessary to mention that this opinion is solely based on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. The opinion may vary when the facts are changed or elaborated.We hope that we were able to enlighten you on the matter.Editor’s note: Dear PAO is a daily column of the Public Attorney’s Office. Questions for Chief Acosta may be sent to ." - https://www.affordablecebu.com/