Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > San Jose
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-02-2018, 11:37 AM
 
5 posts, read 3,635 times
Reputation: 10

Advertisements

A lease was signed in April, but before it was a signed, the landlord's agent emailed the following:

"If you need to depart early before the expiration of the lease please just give me 80 day notice so I can find a new tenant. If you do stay after April 2019 (which is the expiration of the new lease that needs your signature) it will convert to month to month term - which means a notice from either party (tenant or landlord can give 30 day notice to vacate)."

In August, the tenants gave an 80-day notice and received this response:

"Here is the following strategy we will put in place for the re-rental of the property:
1. We will start advertising property today for move in availability of new possible tenant on 10/13
2. R will work with J for showings
3. If for any reason there is a gap between when the D's move out and the new tenant, per contract, the D's will be mandated to pay the difference in rent until November 11, 2018."

Is this an enforceable Early Termination Clause?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-02-2018, 11:40 AM
 
Location: SoCal
20,160 posts, read 12,652,476 times
Reputation: 16993
You gave a notice right. Are you changing your mind.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2018, 11:46 AM
 
5 posts, read 3,635 times
Reputation: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewbieHere View Post
You gave a notice right. Are you changing your mind.
The tenants had a change in citizenship which changed how they are being compensated through work. They can no longer afford the rent and thought they had the option to terminate the lease early based on the communication with the agent.

They signed the lease in April (this is their second year) and the citizenship status change occurred in July. They gave notice in August and moved out in October. The agent is demanding they continue to pay rent past Nov 11, I'm just wondering if what the agent has said in these two emails would not be considered a valid Early Termination Clause.

Thanks for your help!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2018, 09:20 AM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
42,710 posts, read 25,874,592 times
Reputation: 33793
It would appear that the response you got stating that you would not be liable for rent after Nov 11th would be enforceable but to get a real answer instead of a guess, ask it here:

Ask a Tenant-Landlord Question : Project Sentinel

That's a non-profit organization in Santa Clara County that addresses these kinds of issues free of charge
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2018, 04:08 PM
 
Location: Planet Earth
1,963 posts, read 3,020,358 times
Reputation: 2428
Quote:
Originally Posted by TurtleSpeed View Post
A lease was signed in April, but before it was a signed, the landlord's agent emailed the following:

"If you need to depart early before the expiration of the lease please just give me 80 day notice so I can find a new tenant. If you do stay after April 2019 (which is the expiration of the new lease that needs your signature) it will convert to month to month term - which means a notice from either party (tenant or landlord can give 30 day notice to vacate)."
There is nothing in the above that says "if you tell us 80 days early, you don't have to pay anymore. It *could* be interpreted as "tell us 80 days early, so that we have the time to find new tenants (implied : so that you won't be on the hook for the rest of the contract term)".

It doesn't matter WHY they are leaving - they signed a one-year lease. Unless in the written form of the lease there is an opt-out clause receiving them of the responsibility of paying, they have to pay. With a written contract, the WRITING is enforceable, and overrides any oral (or email) offer or change. You need something written (and signed) to change the contract.

Now, where they live MAY have additional tenant protection (or landlord a-fluck) laws (it depends on your point of view ).

But once they knew they were leaving early, they SHOULD have gotten a written, signed "understanding" from the leasor instead of just "assuming" and just waiting for the clock to time out. THEY could have tried to find (or help to find) replacement tenants. Lesson learned - for them and anybody reading this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2018, 04:14 PM
 
Location: Planet Earth
1,963 posts, read 3,020,358 times
Reputation: 2428
Wait, I just re-read the OP. They ARE pretty much getting out of their lease. MAYBE it's 90 or 100 day "period", but they aren't having to pay anything between Nov 11, 2018 and April 2019 (which was the end of their lease).

What are they b*tching about- it seems to me that they are getting off easy. They *could* be mandated to pay until April 2019, yet the landlord is letting them off the hook for any and all rent after Nov 11th. What's the beef?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2018, 02:24 PM
 
Location: Tijuana Exurbs
4,525 posts, read 12,334,726 times
Reputation: 6268
The agent is being very fair.

He/She is informing the occupants of his strategy for re-renting the apartment and indicating that he actually intends to actively market the apartment rather than sitting on his behind. In return, the agent is asking for the occupant's co-operation in showing the apartment. If successful, it gets the occupants out of their obligation to pay rent until April 2019, but if unsuccessful, the occupants are still on the hook until April because of the terms of the original lease.

My advice to the occupants is to keep the apartment looking shiny and new so that prospective tenants will fall in love with it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2018, 02:05 PM
 
5 posts, read 3,635 times
Reputation: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcopolo666 View Post
Wait, I just re-read the OP. They ARE pretty much getting out of their lease. MAYBE it's 90 or 100 day "period", but they aren't having to pay anything between Nov 11, 2018 and April 2019 (which was the end of their lease).

What are they b*tching about- it seems to me that they are getting off easy. They *could* be mandated to pay until April 2019, yet the landlord is letting them off the hook for any and all rent after Nov 11th. What's the beef?
The landlord is not letting them out of the lease until July 2019. I know, confusing. The agent is not recognizing her statement that they pay until Nov 11 as an early termination agreement. She said she only wrote that because she assumed it'd be easy to find replacement tenants. The tenants are wondering if they'd have a case for an early termination clause should they contact a lawyer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2018, 03:41 PM
 
Location: SoCal
20,160 posts, read 12,652,476 times
Reputation: 16993
Something is not right. How can they not find a tenant in San Jose. Blatant lie.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2018, 02:14 PM
 
5 posts, read 3,635 times
Reputation: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewbieHere View Post
Something is not right. How can they not find a tenant in San Jose. Blatant lie.
I think this goes to the tenants lack of due diligence when searching for a rental. They have been in the US for the past year on a visa. The company compensation package included an $8000 per month housing allowance. That said, I'm not sure the tenants did a great job looking at the market value of rent in the area they have been living. The market price appears to be about $5000, however they are paying $7500. When the agent relisted the rental (after they gave notice), she advertised the rental at $8500.

If the agent gets a tenant in at any price under $7500, she wants the current tenants to cover the difference (which makes sense according to a normal lease). However, I'm still trying to ascertain if the email exchanges between the agent and tenants could act as an enforceable early termination agreement.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > San Jose

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top