Is my "60 day notice to vacate" clause legal? (apartment, lease agreement)
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.
My apartment lease has a 60 day notice to vacate clause, however it's a little unique.
It states:
"Resident must deliver a 'VACATE NOTICE' at least 60 days prior to termination of this lease agreement. Otherwise, this lease will continue on a month-to-month basis under the same terms, except that rent will increase to the current market rent plus $100 month-to-month fee, until either party delivers the other party a written periodic sixty (60) day notice to terminate the lease pursuant to A.R.S. 33-1375. "
My questions are:
1.) Arizona Revised Statue 33-1375 is not relevant to this issue. Does citing a statue that is not relevant to the issue at hand make the entire clause invalid? http://www.azleg.state.az.us/ars/33/01375.htm
2.) I provided 60 day written notice in the form of an angry letter to the manager. The manager is now saying that is not satisfactory and that I needed to fill out the specific "VACATE NOTICE" form at their office. Thus, they are stating I did NOT provide written notice and now this clause applies to me and are trying to extract 2 months of "Market Rate rent" from me.
3.) Should I go to a real estate lawyer with this or will I end up spending more than the $2-3k the apartment company wants?
AZ law or local practice will rule, but...
generally enforceable notice time is equal to the payment cycle.
That is... if rent is due monthly then a month becomes notice time.
So on that basis you can ASK for more notice...
and reward such compliance with some OTHER aspect of the lease terms...
but you can't DEMAND that compliance (no matter how officiously you phrase your lease clauses)
A 60 day notice is perfectly reasonable but, unless I'm reading incorrectly, it seem the main issue is even though you've given the required notice in writing, the manager is now claiming this isn't sufficient because you didn't use management's own "required form". That to me sounds complete nonsense as the lease clause you cited makes no mention of such a form. I don't believe this would stand up legally in any way, shape or form.
How did you sent your angry letter to the manager? Mail or email? Was it certified mail? Was clear that it was your notice and mentioned you were moving out at the end of your lease? If so, don't worry and don't pay. That is considered notice. If your letter was not clear on that aspect, they might have a point.
My apartment lease has a 60 day notice to vacate clause, however it's a little unique.
I mis-read this before. I'll stand by what I wrote above but expand some.
What your describing as a "vacate notice" is really more about a "non renewal of lease" notice.
As the lease term is expiring... the LL wants to know if you intend to remain or not but they are doing it in a stupid and backward from customary way.
Most LL's **want** tenants to remain in place and don't make that option difficult (whether they want to bump the rent or not)... but these folks seem to think that having a new lease process is better or more likely they get to charge the actual property owner for doing so.
When you live in a Wonder Bread development or work for a Wonder Bread corporation... you have to accept that they'll have stupid and contrary ways of doing things.
My apartment lease has a 60 day notice to vacate clause, however it's a little unique.
It states:
"Resident must deliver a 'VACATE NOTICE' at least 60 days prior to termination of this lease agreement. Otherwise, this lease will continue on a month-to-month basis under the same terms, except that rent will increase to the current market rent plus $100 month-to-month fee, until either party delivers the other party a written periodic sixty (60) day notice to terminate the lease pursuant to A.R.S. 33-1375. "
My questions are:
1.) Arizona Revised Statue 33-1375 is not relevant to this issue. Does citing a statue that is not relevant to the issue at hand make the entire clause invalid? 33-1375 - Periodic tenancy; holdover remedies
2.) I provided 60 day written notice in the form of an angry letter to the manager. The manager is now saying that is not satisfactory and that I needed to fill out the specific "VACATE NOTICE" form at their office. Thus, they are stating I did NOT provide written notice and now this clause applies to me and are trying to extract 2 months of "Market Rate rent" from me.
3.) Should I go to a real estate lawyer with this or will I end up spending more than the $2-3k the apartment company wants?
Thanks for any help you provide!!
If the lease does not define 'VACATE NOTICE' as being the form in the manager's office, then your letter should be adequate notice if it was clear that you intended to move out.
Citing a statute that appears irrelevant does not invalidate the rest of what is written in the lease.
Read up on what your state law requires in regard to terminating a lease, check for any additional requirements in your lease and follow them carefully, even then you may have to sue in small claims court to get your deposit back. You don't need a lawyer if you do everything the law requires and document it for use in the court later. Pay careful attention also to what the law requires your landlord do in regard to the security deposit. He may not follow it and that will be to your advantage.
Read up on what your state law requires in regard to terminating a lease, check for any additional requirements in your lease and follow them carefully,
Sorry but state/city law will always supersede any thing written in a lease that is contrary. If the lease says terminating the lease requires notice to be delivered on horse back and state law says otherwise then use certified mail.
How did you sent your angry letter to the manager? Mail or email? Was it certified mail? Was clear that it was your notice and mentioned you were moving out at the end of your lease? If so, don't worry and don't pay. That is considered notice. If your letter was not clear on that aspect, they might have a point.
I hand delivered the letter and had the apartment manager sign and date a copy of the letter stating she received it.
I'm dealing with the previous lease agreement which was expired on April 12,2013. I then was placed on MTM until May 2,2013 when I turned in the keys. When I first moved in I signed a 3 month lease agreement. I have paid the additional days of my residency in the apartment. However now they are charging me a skip fee of 2500 dollars. However I didn't skip a lease. It was expired. They are charging me a "skip" fee due to the reason of failure to provide a 60 day notice. Is there anything I can do to work around that fee? I was under the impression that when a tenant pays rent on a monthly basis by law we provide the standard 30 day notice. Determining rent collection periods the same as a notice to vacate.
Secondly, my lease expired I didn't sign a renewal term. So how is that a skip? Please advice.
It's a skip because when you automatically go from an original lease to MTM the terms and conditions of the original lease remain in full effect unless otherwise agreed to in writing by both parties.
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.
