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 am a tenant living in Syracuse, New York and I am currently under a month-to-month rental agreement as my lease began last year beginning May 2015 ending May 2016. My landlord has always said that rent is due anywhere between the range of the First to the Fifth of every month. After I had paid my rent on the fifth of this month (September 5th), my landlord left a 60-day notice to vacate on my apartment door, the following day (September 6th), stating that I vacate the property no later than October 31st, 2016. I contacted my landlord via phone on Saturday (September 10th) letting him know that I would be moving out no later than September 24th, 2016. My landlord agreed that this would be okay so long as September's rent was paid, in addition to October's rent. I questioned my landlord over the phone as I am not understanding why I would be required to pay for October if I was not going to be occupying the rental. He stated that because it is "the law", I would still be required to pay October's rent and if I don't pay, he will take me to court for an eviction and I would be responsible for any court fees, plus October's rent. My question: As I am not currently under a lease and I was issued a 60-day notice by my landlord on September 6th and have made arrangements to move before the end of this month (September), will I still be required to pay rent for October as my landlord says?
I'm not a lawyer so take what I'm saying as someone who has lived in rental properties, just as you have/are.
Ultimately, as reenzz has noted - It's going to come down to what your lease says about giving notice and when you actually gave notice.
If your lease says you are to give 60 days notice, you have to give 60 days notice. By your account you notified him on September 10th that you would be vacating on September 24th. That's not 60 days notice. I would reckon that if you're landlord wanted to be a dick, they could demand September, October, and ten days of November for a strict definition of 60 days.
Where I think you may have a leg to stand on is the fact that your landlord, as I understand what you wrote, told YOU to vacate. Looking at the Tenants' Rights Guide put out by the Attorney General's Office for NY - month-to-month leases are bound by 30-days notice, not 60. So there's a maybe there.
If you wanted to push the 60/30 day issue, I would consult a lawyer. They will want to consult the lease itself and will be more attuned to NY State legal guidelines. Should you sue (lets hope not!), under NY law you can make the landlord pay your legal fees, so there's that.
State law supersedes your lease, so it doesn't even matter if your original lease says 60-days notice. As per what PP said and what's noted in the Tenants' Rights Guide:
A month-to-month tenancy outside New York City may be terminated by either party by giving at least one month’s notice before the expiration of the tenancy. For example, if the landlord wants the tenant to move out by November 1 and the rent is due on the first of each month, the landlord must give notice by September 30.
The issue you have however is that it seems you didn't give official written notice. Notice over the phone can easily "not count" because the LL can say you never told him that. In order to give notice, you need to do it IN WRITING preferably certified mail with return receipt.
My concern is that my landlord's notice should not bind me to continue renting/paying for my apartment for all of October as I am a month to month tenant, I am under no terms on a lease. As per his request, I am being asked to move, had I not received a notice to vacate I wouldn't even be moving out. September's rent is paid as I pay in advance, so as I've arranged to move elsewhere on September 24th, only after receiving my landlord's letter that I'd have to be out no later than October 31st, why should I have to pay for October? If I am not going to be occupying his property anytime after September 30th, why would I be required to pay?
My concern is that my landlord's notice should not bind me to continue renting/paying for my apartment for all of October as I am a month to month tenant, I am under no terms on a lease. As per his request, I am being asked to move, had I not received a notice to vacate I wouldn't even be moving out. September's rent is paid as I pay in advance, so as I've arranged to move elsewhere on September 24th, only after receiving my landlord's letter that I'd have to be out no later than October 31st, why should I have to pay for October? If I am not going to be occupying his property anytime after September 30th, why would I be required to pay?
You are under terms of a lease, you are considered a month to month tenant.
Honestly, I think your LL is in the right. Not for the reasons he thinks though. He was doing you a favor by giving you more than the required notice. You decided to move out before those 60 days. Had you have given official notice, you wouldn't have to pay for October. But the fact is, you didn't give proper notice. You didn't even tell him you'd be moving out until 9/10. You would've had to given him notice on or before 9/1 to be out by 9/30.
Now you could take a chance and not pay Oct rent. He may just be bluffing and won't take you to court. But you run the risk of him not bluffing and he does take you to court.
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.