Like Tree7Likes

small claim tribunal case against hotel

Reply
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    415
    Quote Originally Posted by shri:
    I have posted a case on here where a rental agreement was deemed as a "verbal contract" due to what was said on Whatsapp. Cannot be relied upon, but might provide some relief.
    In lieu of a written contract, a verbal contract is admitted. However, will the court allow whatsapp messages as evidence, that's another question? The court probably does not want to set a precedence and allow whatsapp as the primary evidence or even to rely on it.

    Contract = Offer & Acceptance (Payment of Deposit)

    It's the old adage "buyer beware" or in this case "tenant beware" and shows the importance of using an agent and having all terms and conditions stated on a written contract.

    Even though it's an online rental, the tenant can conduct their own due diligence e.g. only transfer deposit after contracts have been signed, checking online reviews, look at google maps for location, does the rental seem reasonable in comparison to what is on the market? If it's in line withe the surrounding areasm then the Judge could rule against you. At the end of the day, you get what you pay for...

    Walk up apartments or "Tong Lau" are quite comonn in HK. Did the property listing state there were lifts?

    If it were me, I'd look at something temporary like this. Different budgets to suit different needs:-

    https://www.horizonhotels.com.hk/en/...BoC9oUQAvD_BwE

    https://www.signaturehomes.com.hk/se...hoCA4wQAvD_BwE

    https://www.hongkongparkview.com/ser...BoCcRAQAvD_BwE

    https://www.metroresidences.com/hk-e...s/olympic/2861

    Nothing that you can do apart from go to court and pray the judge is on your side.
    Last edited by ArrynField; 13-07-2020 at 05:20 PM.
    gigglinggal likes this.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    ???
    Posts
    32,752

    Here the case involving Whatsapp messages... In the lands tribunal.


    Having reviewed the submission by Ms Chan and the WhatsApp conversation as produced by the Respondents, I ruled that Ms Chan had the ostensible authority[2] to bind the Applicants and the contract for renewal was made between the Applicants and the Respondents on 1 February 2018 at $12,300 per month from 20 March 2018 to 19 March 2019 when the 2nd Respondent replied “OK” in the WhatsApp; the Applicants could not exercise the break clause under the T/A any more.
    https://legalref.judiciary.hk/lrs/co...636&currpage=T
    dengxi likes this.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    357

    Hows that place licenced in Hong Kong? If they don’t have the right one, you have a much better argument to win.

    Jillypots likes this.

Reply
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2