If a potential guarantor has no job, no money or assets, it will be extremely difficult for her to cover their tenant`s unpaid costs, so they actually become useless. Personally, I ask Guarantors to be a British owner, because it makes it easier for the owner to recover the funds. I`m the guarantor of my stepson who has fallen behind in his rent. I received a letter from the real estate agent asking for 1750 $US and telling me that I would be liable for court costs if that were the case. Many guarantee agreements are permanent and relate to liability « in the context of this lease/contract. » This means that liability could go beyond the deadline, an extension and some changes, such as rent increases. If the guarantee authorizes exemptions, including rent increases or a contractual periodic rent, the court may exempt the surety from additional liability if it significantly exceeds the amount originally agreed.  However, many homeowners are not willing to limit the liability of a surety. So you can`t agree. But it`s probably worth asking. Can someone help me? I have to rent my house for myself and my five children, I have a friend who acted as guarantor, I have since been released for rent arrears, I paid these arrears, but now I am told that I owe 705 dollars in legal fees, I offered to make refunds for it, but now they say they must receive an offer from my bail as well, are they in their right to do so? I thought a guarantor would only be responsible if the tenant did not pay.
I`d appreciate any help. Thanks x I need advice – I helped a friend last year and I was guarantor for 6 months, which ended in June 2011 – she recently had an eviction announcement that ignored her – the owner did not want to spend 1000 dollars to bring her to justice. I am no longer talking to her and I am currently trying to get out of the contract, but the lessor says that the guarantee agreement stipulates that she is responsible for all the time she is in the property, unless she leaves in the case of an extended, extended or extended lease. Assuming you were a shorthold tenant, it is quite clear that the landlord is violating Section 213 of the Housing Act and, as such, you are entitled to the return of your deposit, plus a sum equal to 1-3x of the value of that deposit. Whether you get the full 3x if that were the case would depend on the facts of the case and the enormity of the violation. Did the owner only protect your deposit late or not at all? What happened to the bail bond when you left? Was it a one-time mistake or did the landlord generally fail to protect tenants` deposits? If you`re still in contact with one of your former roommates, it might be worth asking them.