apt. q's: are agencies the safest? how long do they take? USDs?

[citygirl]

With all due respect, my legal contracts with providers are vetted by Ernst and Young, our corporate in house counsel as well as the in house counsels of Fortune 100 companies, I will trust that they are completely aware of what our legal obligations are and what is enforceable.

As far as real estate - frankly, it's pissing into the wind to argue about this. The laws are ambiguous but the real world scenario is that what the landlord wants, he or she will get.

And with that, I will bow out again and leave the rest of you to argue.

 

[darmanad]

With all due respect, my legal contracts with providers are vetted by Ernst and Young, our corporate in house counsel as well as the in house counsels of Fortune 100 companies, I will trust that they are completely aware of what our legal obligations are and what is enforceable.

As far as real estate - frankly, it's pissing into the wind to argue about this. The laws are ambiguous but the real world scenario is that what the landlord wants, he or she will get.

And with that, I will bow out again and leave the rest of you to argue.

It would be curious if E&Y had a legal opinion on this subject, but I'd sincerely like to know what they would have to say if expressly asked. Why not ask next time?
It's pissing into the wind once you seem to be shown to be wrong. Tell me, are BA taxis still expensive compared to those in other cities?

 

[citygirl]

If you want to pay the hourly consulting rates to EY, I'm sure they would be happy to provide you with guidance. They have vetted the contracts (not provided legal guidance) with regards to paying business providers, asking them to clarify rental law would be a bit outside of their scope of services .

As for the rest, I haven't been "shown to be wrong" but way to be confrontational It's pissing into the wind b/c no matter how much you pontificate, landlords within reason can do whatever they want. And the laws are ambiguous. So why argue about it?

PS - Yes, taxis are still expensive. And still not taking them but thanks for checking.

 

[sesamosinsal]

Well.. I will always go with the real world scenario above either. Even if, in the end, you can force the landlord to take the pesos - 99.9% of tenants are not going to take their landlord to court.

I have rented apts (short-term) where they mandated the rent be paid in dollars upon arrival. No dollars , no apt. Like it or not, that's how it works with a lot of apts. Arguing about the ambiguous law doesn't change what happens in the real world.

If you're here as a tourist for the short-term, you're going to have to pay for all of it up-front so just bring the dollars. If you're renting for long-term, talk to your landlord and don't be an ass about it and I'm sure it will all work out.

(And FWIW - I sign contracts every day with suppliers here (and around the globe) and the contracts requires payments in X currency and we are required to pay them in X currency. I also require my clients to pay me in X currency and those contracts are legally binding despite the fact that X currency may not be the local currency).

The contracts you sign with suppliers and others in your line of work are not rental contracts. According to the civil code, which I'm sure is designed to be general in cases like yours, that would be OK.

However, in the Ley de Alquileres, it specifically says that requiring rent to be paid in any other currency than the ARS -- en todos los supuestos -- is not legal. I'm not a lawyer, but I would say that the specificity of the Ley de Alquileres supersedes the generality of the civil code. I could be wrong.

I do see your realistic perspective, however. I wouldn't put up too much of a fuss myself, I suppose.