My husband and I had a one year lease on a property. We completed the lease with on-time payments for the duration. The lease called for notification of intent to renew 60 days before the lease expired. We completed that form, then found out a friend wanted to sell us her house.

We informed the property manager that we would be moving within a month of the end of the lease. The property manager never brought a new lease to us or informed us as to whether the cosigner would still be needed. The property manager said he understood and that they would work with us in any way they could.

Our original notification that we would not be renewing the lease was made approximately 6 weeks before the end of the lease. At that time, we were under the impression that the lease would enter into the month-to-month option and our rent would increase by 10% per month. Despite the numerous phone calls between us and the property manager, he waited until three days before the lease expired to notify us that none of the phone calls counted as "notification" and that we needed to send him everything in a letter or email. We did that immediately. Two days later he emailed us back and said we would be responsible for two more months of rent because we had not given them 60 days notice to terminate and had given them 60 days notice of our intent to renew. We paid the rent for the first month after the original lease expiration date, but not the second.

Originally, we were told that we would be getting most of our security deposit back as well as most if not all of the rent we paid in April (second month after lease expired.

At this point, the house has been rented to another party. The owner is not losing any money. However, today we received a certified letter regarding our security deposit. In the letter, the property manager has tacked on a $1000 (one month's rent) fee for failure to give proper notice. Not only are we not getting the security deposit back, but they are actually billing us for an additional $745.

Can we fight this, or is this the correct application of the landlord/tenant laws? Below is the paragraph of our lease referring to termination and renewal.


TERMINATION OR RENEWAL: The TENANT understands they must provide written notice of intent to vacate at least sixty (60) days prior to the end of the lease agreement. This agreement may only be terminated at the end of a calendar month. Failure to give notice of intent to vacate in accordance with these terms will require the payment of one (1) additional month’s rent regardless of the actual date of vacancy. To renew the terms of this agreement a written request to renew must be given to the LANDLORD no less than sixty (60) days prior to the expiration of the agreement. If neither party gives the other any written notice as provided hereunder TENANT shall thereafter be deemed as occupying the premises on a month-to-month tenancy in which case either party may terminate this agreement by giving the other party fifteen (15) days written notice prior to the end of the calendar month.
TENANT shall NOT be released from the terms of this agreement on the grounds of voluntary or involuntary employment transfers, loss of employment, marriage, divorce, loss of co-tenant(s), and medical reasons, except as provided by law.

You signed an agreement (lease) you are bound by it

Well there is a caveat here. Yes, you did not give the required notice. Therefore you would normally be required to pay full rent for each month. Further, since the lease specifies it can only be terminated at the end of a month you would be responsible for full months.

But the caveat here is that they rented the property. They are not entitled to double dip. The can't collect from a new tenant AND charge you rent for the same period.

So the bottom line is you owe for TWO full months from when you gave written notice OR until they rent the property.

If they are charging you for time when they rented it, you have a case against them.

Just an additional note if the landlord has other empty dwellings they do not have to rent yours first

Thanks. That does help. The property has been rented. It was rented somewhere around April 5th. Originally he told us we would be responsible for April's rent until it was rented. Now they've changed it and are listing it as a fee for "failure to give notice of intent to vacate per the lease" instead of rent. I guess they're trying to change it from "rent" to a "fee" so they can still collect it.

Personally, we weren't expecting a refund of the security deposit, but I'm really not keen on paying them more money.

Also, I understand that we are bound by the lease, however, as we read the lease, once the expiration date passed without a new lease being signed, we entered into a month-to-month lease with a fifteen day termination clause. Even if only going by the written notice, we gave over thirty days notice before we vacated.

Just an additional note if the landlord has other empty dwellings they do not have to rent yours first

In all but a few states a landlord has to show a good faith effort to rent a vacated unit. They usually can't just sit on it. But Florida is one of the states that do not require a good faith effort to re-rent.

But the point is moot here since the OP states that the unit has already been rented.

But you gave that notice while lease was still active

Also, I understand that we are bound by the lease, however, as we read the lease, once the expiration date passed without a new lease being signed, we entered into a month-to-month lease with a fifteen day termination clause. Even if only going by the written notice, we gave over thirty days notice before we vacated.

This is one of those oddities of the law. Had you waited until the lease was renewed as month to month, you could have given 15 days notice. But not until after the first full month. Also the lease has to terminate at the end of a month,

I would refuse to pay the extra and let them take you to court.

Thanks. We'll be speaking with the property manager's supervisor on Monday to clear this up.