Quote:
Originally Posted by STT Resident
Definitely a viable point but I rather doubt that the clause would hold up in court once the lease goes month to month. The bottom line on lease agreements is that a LL can only legally uphold lease clauses which withstand scrutiny under state laws.
Both parties can sign a lease agreement which includes a clause saying that in the event of a tenant falling in arrears on rent he agrees to offer his first-born son as guarantee and surety but such a clause isn't going to be enforceable. Common sense prevails.
|
But what law would be violated by a clause that says this? It basically just says that some months of the year, more notice is required. (In other words, if you give notice in November, it is a minimum of a 120 day notice, December notice is a minimum of a 90 day notice and January is a minimum of a 60 day notice) How is that different than leases that say when you are month to month, a 60 day notice is required, even though most states laws say only 30 days is required?