Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I disagree and the poster is not in CA - while what you're citing from CA law relates to contractual fraud and hardly relevant to this little issue of a 6 month non-lease for a room in a house. Things really need to be kept in perspective.
1623. Where a contract, which is required by law to be in writing, is prevented from being put into writing .
This law doesn't apply to leases because they aren't required to be in writing. Leases can be verbal and then they are governed by state landlord tenant law 'defaults' most states (which is often month-to-month tenancy).
There is no written lease with both parties' signature in the OP's case. The OP never signed. Then state landlord tenant rule of 'month to month' tenancy came into play. Just like when someone has a verbal lease, tenant's are allow to move-in and default landlord-tenant laws apply to their tenancy.
From the "perspective" of the tenant, she has a 6 month written contract. This is the perspective that matters here.
The tenant's "perspective" is irrelevant in court. There is no contract and, although this little matter is highly unlikely to end up in court (to what avail or do you see punitive damages here?) the very fact that there is no signed contract is all a judge is concerned with. The question (if it were even asked) would be, "why did you not ask for a copy of the signed agreement if such existed".
Keep it simple, OP, and just give her 30 days notice if legal counsel concurs.
The tenant's "perspective" is irrelevant in court. There is no contract and, although this little matter is highly unlikely to end up in court (to what avail or do you see punitive damages here?) the very fact that there is no signed contract is all a judge is concerned with. The question (if it were even asked) would be, "why did you not ask for a copy of the signed agreement if such existed".
Keep it simple, OP, and just give her 30 days notice if legal counsel concurs.
Now here we agree.
In my opinion, the question asked by the judge would be, "Now why would you expect this tenant to think she only had a verbal month-to-month agreement?" "Did you think you could keep the option to yourself of enforcing either a 6 month lease or a month-to-month agreement at your whim? Without the tenant having the same option?"
A rental agreement for more than a month-to-month tenancy is required to be in writing.
Maybe in some states, but not all. In Idaho, a rental agreement for 12 months or more is required to be in writing. Verbal month to month leases of less than 12 months are totally valid.
I tried to find the law for Oregon, but my google skills are apparently not up to snuff today, but as far as I did find, everything seemed to indicate verbal leases are legal in Oregon.
Maybe in some states, but not all. In Idaho, a rental agreement for 12 months or more is required to be in writing. Verbal month to month leases of less than 12 months are totally valid.
I tried to find the law for Oregon, but my google skills are apparently not up to snuff today, but as far as I did find, everything seemed to indicate verbal leases are legal in Oregon.
I agree that verbal contracts are valid.
The problem comes when someone wants to enforce a verbal rental agreement that was for longer than month-to-month. If you don't have a rental agreement for longer than month-to-month in writing, you're screwed, because the court will only enforce a verbal agreement as a month-to-month agreement.
So, I guess I should have included the phrase "if you ever need to enforce a rental agreement for longer than month-to-month," it needs to be in writing.
I know this law well, because I was royally screwed a long time ago by a landlord who verbally promised me I could live in his mobile home for five years. With his encouragement, I then spent a bunch of money fixing up the place by completely painting the interior, watering and planting the landscaping, doing a bunch of improvements and repairs over about a 3 month period. I took tons of photos of me and my friends with paint and dirt all over us, fixing up my happy new digs.
Then, he put the place up for sale and gave me 30 days notice so he could show the place empty. I went to court, and the judge gave him a verbal lashing after looking at all of the photos, but then told me I had no contract other than month-to-month because it wasn't in writing, and the landlord was within his evil rights to kick me out with 30 days notice. There weren't even grounds to reimburse me for the paint, labor, etc., etc.
I promptly went back to college and learned law so this would never happen to me again.
In the OP's case, though, she presented a written 6 month lease and promptly performed as agreed. And in my educated opinion, this created an enforceable 6 month lease. Signature or no.
BTW, it's basic contract law that a contract that can't be performed within one year must be in writing. It's not just real estate contracts. This is the Statute of Frauds.
Last edited by NoMoreSnowForMe; 11-09-2014 at 03:02 PM..
In the OP's case, though, she presented a written 6 month lease and promptly performed as agreed. And in my educated opinion, this created an enforceable 6 month lease. Signature or no.
So I guess the judge who summarily dismissed a previous landlord's claim against me solely because he hadn't signed the lease (which I HAD signed) was suffering from an uneducated opinion, even though he'd been on the bench for over two decades ...
So I guess the judge who summarily dismissed a previous landlord's claim against me solely because he hadn't signed the lease (which I HAD signed) was suffering from an uneducated opinion, even though he'd been on the bench for over two decades ...
Could be. Would need all the details to give an educated opinion.
I once was in a workers comp judge's courtroom, and won my case based on a new law the judge didn't know about. He apologized after looking up the new law he hadn't bothered to read yet. I was representing myself against a huge insurance company, and their lawyer didn't know the new law either.
Could be. Would need all the details to give an educated opinion.
Words fail.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
