To make a long story short, I live in an apartment complex that is privately owned, yet uses a TAA lease. I have an apartment that comes with a small yard, and a couple months into my lease the grass had been worn down due to dogs playing on it. During the winter and wet spring season I wanted to get the yard fixed, as it had been run down to complete dirt/mud. I got the run around from management for months until I finally got it taken care of, through complaints with the BBB and TAA. (after 6 months of asking about how I can replace my grass). After all of this, the owner of the complex was obviously not happy with me making a complaint and said I'm "not welcome back to renew my lease". I pay my rent 6 days early, and feel that I haven't violated any terms of the contract.

So my question is: Can management or owner of a property not renew your lease just because of a personal grudge? :confused:

Thanks for any advice. :)

To make a long story short, I live in an apartment complex that is privately owned, yet uses a TAA lease. I have an apartment that comes with a small yard, and a couple months into my lease the grass had been worn down due to dogs playing on it. During the winter and wet spring season I wanted to get the yard fixed, as it had been run down to complete dirt/mud. I got the run around from management for months until I finally got it taken care of, through complaints with the BBB and TAA. (after 6 months of asking about how I can replace my grass). After all of this, the owner of the complex was obviously not happy with me making a complaint and said I'm "not welcome back to renew my lease". I pay my rent 6 days early, and feel that I haven't violated any terms of the contract.

So my question is: Can management or owner of a property not renew your lease just because of a personal grudge? :confused:

Thanks for any advice. :)



As I understand it you aren't being evicted. They are not renewing your lease, which is something different.

They can refuse to renew for any reason, including just plain not liking you any more.

Obviously if it's discrimination you could argue the issue but you don't have to be in violation in order to not be renewed.

Why would you want to stay when they no longer want you there?

I asked this same question, under the subject of eviction, and an answer that I got is making me "reask" under the topic of Lease Renewals.

To make a long story short, I live in an apartment complex that is privately owned, yet uses a TAA lease. I have an apartment that comes with a small yard, and a couple months into my lease the grass had been worn down to just dirt due to dogs playing on it. During the winter and wet spring season I wanted to get the yard fixed, and was going to just go buy some sod and install it myself. I got the run around from management for months and patiently and politely asked how/when I could fix my yard. The only reason I finally got it taken care of was because I made complaints with the BBB and TAA. (after 6 months of asking about how I can replace my grass). Also during this time, I wanted to get a second dog, and they tried telling JUST ME that they had changed the pet policy and was told "The owner and I have decided you can't get a second dog". Once again, I had to inform them of their lease, and told them they can't change the pet policy in the middle of my lease. After all of this, the owner of the complex was obviously not happy with me making a complaint and said I'm "not welcome back to renew my lease". I pay my rent at least 6 days early every month, bills on time, apartment and yard clean, and feel that I haven't violated any terms of the contract.

So my question is: Can management or owner of a property not renew your lease just because of a personal grudge? What basis do they have to go on?

Thanks for any advice.

Unless you could prove some real form of discrimination based on race, or age, or some protected status, I believe they have the right to refuse to renew the lease.

I don't think you can force them to keep renting to you.

If the situation there is so uncomfortable, why would you want to stay?

I've merged your two threads. Please do not start a new thread with essentially the same question.

Actually you have a point. This site may help you:
Retaliation (http://www.texashousing.org/tt/rights/retaliation/retaliation.html)

The thing is you still have to prove its relatilation. However, if your rent is always paid on time and there aren't copmplaints against you from other tenants, a court is probably going to see the obvious. I would send a copy of that site to your landlord, highlighting the remedies paragraph and including an estimate for moving expenses. I wouldn't want to continue living there, but you should be compensated for being forced out.

I've merged your two threads. Please do not start a new thread with essentially the same question.

Actually you have a point. this site may help you:
Retaliation (http://www.texashousing.org/tt/rights/retaliation/retaliation.html)

The thing is you still have to prove its relatilation. However, if your rent is always paid on time and there aren't copmplaints against you from other tenants, a court is probably going to see the obvious. I would send a copy of that site to your landlord, highlighting the remedies paragraph and including an estimate for moving expenses. I wouldn't want to continue living there, but you should be compensated for being forced out.

Sorry. I didn't know. So far, my question has been answered. Thanks.

Unless you could prove some real form of discrimination based on race, or age, or some protected status, I believe they have the right to refuse to renew the lease.

I don't think you can force them to keep renting to you.

If the situation there is so uncomfortable, why would you want to stay?

After the grass was fixed in April, I haven't had any more problems with management, and I actually like where I live. Apartments with small yards are hard to come by.

They are not required to renew your lease, they don't need a reason to not renew.

They are not required to renew your lease, they don't need a reason to not renew.

While this is generally true, many states have rules about refusing to renew as retaliation. If a tenant can show that the refusal is due to them making a stink about repairs or other conditions, the tenant may be able to get some compensation. But its unlikely they can reverse the lease termination.

While this is generally true, many states have rules about refusing to renew as retaliation. If a tenant can show that the refusal is due to them making a stink about repairs or other conditions, the tenant may be able to get some compensation. But its unlikely they can reverse the lease termination.

Couldn't they use the fact that the tenant allowed his dogs to destroy the yard to the point of having to completely redo as a sufficient reason to not renew the lease? They may not want to pay that cost every year.

With all due respect to ScottGem... I read the site you posted and it only pertains to terminating an existing lease agreement. This is not the case here. Landlord is only exercising his right not to renew to lease. As far as I know... no state can force a landlord to renew a lease (except for NJ.. in certain circumstances).

Couldn't they use the fact that the tenant allowed his dogs to destroy the yard to the point of having to completely redo as a sufficient reason to not renew the lease? They may not want to pay that cost every year.


Sorry, some more info. I paid them in full the price of the yard, and now keep the dogs off it, so they weren't out of pocket. Forgot to add that in. =)

Sorry, some more info. I paid them in full the price of the yard, and now keep the dogs off of it, so they weren't out of pocket. Forgot to add that in. =)



As I said - they can refuse to renew if they don't like the color of your eyes or the kind of car you drive or the color of the collar your dog wears.

For whatever reason the landlord doesn't think you are a good match for his property and that is pretty much that - unless you can prove discrimination.

And I go back to - why would you want to be where you aren't wanted, where you know (if somehow the landlord is forced to renew) the landlord will be looking to evict you on some grounds or other.

With all due respect to ScottGem...I read the site you posted and it only pertains to terminating an existing lease agreement. This is not the case here. Landlord is only exercising his right not to renew to lease. As far as I know...no state can force a landlord to renew a lease (except for NJ..in certain circumstances).

I agree that no state can force a renewal. I think if you read the penalties, none of those penalties forces a renewal. It just compensates the tenant for the non-renewal. While the site does refer to termination of the lease, I believe it does cover a refusal to renew as well.

This is one of the BIG differences between Month to Month agreements and lease agreements.

When the lease is up for renewal. Either party has FULL rights to not renew. For any reason what so ever. That reason does not have to be disclosed either.

Retaliation has absolutely nothing to do with it. I have never seen or heard of case law supporting this. Where a lease renewal is concerned.
A term lease is for a given amount of time. Both decide yes or no.
IF one says no renewal than that is it. End of commitment. It's the mechanics of the document.

BTW Texas is a LL friendly State.
Time for you to move on. Plain and simple.

[QUOTE=scri8e]This is one of the BIG differences between Month to Month agreements and lease agreements.

When the lease is up for renewal. Either party has FULL rights to not renew. For any reason what so ever. That reason does not have to be disclosed either.

Retaliation has absolutely nothing to do with it. I have never seen or heard of case law supporting this. Where a lease renewal is concerned.
A term lease is for a given amount of time. Both decide yes or no.
IF one says no renewal than that is it. End of commitment. It's the mechanics of the document.




I believe if it's a lease with an automatic renewal which the landlord chooses not to renew you could make an argument for retaliation - the purpose of an automatic lease is that the landlord is "guaranteed" a tenant without an annual search and the tenant is "guaranteed" a place to live (without an annual search).

I don't know that it would be a winning argument but I can see points on the side of the tenant.

Where have you checked case Law? Have you checked the automatic renewal States?

Another Big difference in this situation is the tenant created the problem
Repair. This is not a habitability issue and the BBB is NOT a government agency it is a private business I believe?

The landlord was not violating any health codes or standards.
You posted that you paid to have the grass redone. The grass was redone after the complaint was filed correct?

The landlord was punished for your dogs wearing down the grass to the point of replacement. Is that right? Did you remove the complaint? Did you ever think to re-seed the grass yourself? Did you offer to pay for the grass from the very beginning? Or were you trying to get it re-done for free?

So let me understand your thinking here. Your dog caused the damage.
You wanted to have the damage repaired and Property management
Failed to get the job you created done. So you went to the BBB and filed a complaint... which I would call retaliation for a problem you created.
I'll show that Landlord. I'll file a complaint.

What probably happened is the PM didn't communicate to the Landlord.
Not until you made a problem with the BBB. A private business. Not a government org.

Did you submit a written request for the grass to be re-done?
No? Why not?

What is TAA? Texas Apartment Association? If so that is a private business also not a government org.

I doubt that this is an automatic lease. Automatic leases are rarely used.
They are a contract type of old and not legally binding in many states type.

I see no mention of the Landlord Not renewing the lease in the site posted. Only Termination of the lease or eviction.

So the Landlord in this case is well within their rights to not renew the lease.

This is the Texas Statues:

Please pay attention to this part of the statues for Texas.

§ 92.334. Invalid Complaints

(a)


=snip=

Chapter 92, Subchapter H, Texas Property Code

§ 92.331. Retaliation by Landlord
§ 92.332. Nonretaliation
§ 92.333. Tenant Remedies
§ 92.334. Invalid Complaints
§ 92.335. Eviction Suits

§ 92.331. Retaliation by Landlord

(a) A landlord may not retaliate against a tenant by taking an action described by Subsection (b) because the tenant:

(1) in good faith exercises or attempts to exercise against a landlord a right or remedy granted to the tenant by lease, municipal ordinance, or federal or state statute;

(2) gives a landlord a notice to repair or exercise a remedy under this chapter; or

(3) complains to a governmental entity responsible for enforcing building or housing codes, a public utility, or a civic or nonprofit agency, and the tenant:

(A) claims a building or housing code violation or utility problem; and
(B) believes in good faith that the complaint is valid and that the violation or problem occurred.

(b) A landlord may not, within six months after the date of the tenant's action under Subsection (a), retaliate against the tenant by:

(1) filing an eviction proceeding, except for the grounds stated by Section 92.332;

(2) depriving the tenant of the use of the premises, except for reasons authorized by law;

(3) decreasing services to the tenant;

(4) increasing the tenant's rent or terminating the tenant's lease; or

(5) engaging, in bad faith, in a course of conduct that materially interferes with the tenant's rights under the tenant's lease.

Acts 1983, 68th Leg. p. 3637, ch. 576, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1984. Amended by Acts 1989, 71st Leg. ch. 650, § 9, eff. Aug. 28, 1989; Acts 1993, 73rd Leg. ch. 48, § 16, eff. Sept. 1, 1993. Redesignated from V.T.C.A. Property Code § 92.057(a) and amended by Acts 1995, 74th Leg. ch. 869, § 5, eff. Jan. 1, 1996.

§ 92.332. Nonretaliation

(a) The landlord is not liable for retaliation under this subchapter if the landlord proves that the action was not made for purposes of retaliation, nor is the landlord liable, unless the action violates a prior court order under Section 92.0563, for:

(1) increasing rent under an escalation clause in a written lease for utilities, taxes, or insurance; or

(2) increasing rent or reducing services as part of a pattern of rent increases or service reductions for an entire multidwelling project.

(b) An eviction or lease termination based on the following circumstances, which are valid grounds for eviction or lease termination in any event, does not constitute retaliation:

(1) the tenant is delinquent in rent when the landlord gives notice to vacate or files an eviction action;

(2) the tenant, a member of the tenant's family, or a guest or invitee of the tenant intentionally damages property on the premises or by word or conduct threatens the personal safety of the landlord, the landlord's employees, or another tenant;

(3) the tenant has materially breached the lease, other than by holding over, by an action such as violating written lease provisions prohibiting serious misconduct or criminal acts, except as provided by this section;

(4) the tenant holds over after giving notice of termination or intent to vacate;

(5) the tenant holds over after the landlord gives notice of termination at the end of the rental term and the tenant does not take action under Section 92.331 until after the landlord gives notice of termination; or

(6) the tenant holds over and the landlord's notice of termination is motivated by a good faith belief that the tenant, a member of the tenant's family, or a guest or invitee of the tenant might:

(A) adversely affect the quiet enjoyment by other tenants or neighbors;
(B) materially affect the health or safety of the landlord, other tenants, or neighbors; or
(C) damage the property of the landlord, other tenants, or neighbors.

Acts 1983, 68th Leg. p. 3637, ch. 576, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1984. Amended by Acts 1989, 71st Leg. ch. 650, § 9, eff. Aug. 28, 1989; Acts 1993, 73rd Leg. ch. 48, § 16, eff. Sept. 1, 1993. Redesignated from V.T.C.A. Property Code § 92.057(b), (c) and amended by Acts 1995, 74th Leg. ch. 869, § 5, eff. Jan. 1, 1996.

§ 92.333. Tenant Remedies

In addition to other remedies provided by law, if a landlord retaliates against a tenant under this subchapter, the tenant may recover from the landlord a civil penalty of one month's rent plus $500, actual damages, court costs, and reasonable attorney's fees in an action for recovery of property damages, moving costs, actual expenses, civil penalties, or declaratory or injunctive relief, less any delinquent rents or other sums for which the tenant is liable to the landlord. If the tenant's rent payment to the landlord is subsidized in whole or in part by a governmental entity, the civil penalty granted under this section shall reflect the fair market rent of the dwelling plus $500.

Acts 1983, 68th Leg. p. 3637, ch. 576, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1984. Amended by Acts 1989, 71st Leg. ch. 650, § 9, eff. Aug. 28, 1989; Acts 1993, 73rd Leg. ch. 48, § 16, eff. Sept. 1, 1993. Redesignated from V.T.C.A. Property Code § 92.057(d) and amended by Acts 1995, 74th Leg. ch. 869, § 5, eff. Jan. 1, 1996.

§ 92.334. Invalid Complaints

(a) If a tenant files or prosecutes a suit for retaliatory action based on a complaint asserted under Section 92.331(a)(3), and the government building or housing inspector or utility company representative visits the premises and determines in writing that a violation of a building or housing code does not exist or that a utility problem does not exist, there is a rebuttable presumption that the tenant acted in bad faith.

(b) If a tenant files or prosecutes a suit under this subchapter in bad faith, the landlord may recover possession of the dwelling unit and may recover from the tenant a civil penalty of one month's rent plus $500, court costs, and reasonable attorney's fees. If the tenant's rent payment to the landlord is subsidized in whole or in part by a governmental entity, the civil penalty granted under this section shall reflect the fair market rent of the dwelling plus $500.

Added by Acts 1995, 74th Leg. ch. 869, § 5, eff. Jan. 1, 1996.

§ 92.335. Eviction Suits

In an eviction suit, retaliation by the landlord under Section 92.331 is a defense and a rent deduction lawfully made by the tenant under this chapter is a defense for nonpayment of the rent to the extent allowed by this chapter. Other judicial actions under this chapter may not be joined with an eviction suit or asserted as a defense or crossclaim in an eviction suit.

Acts 1983, 68th Leg. p. 3638, ch. 576, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1984. Amended by Acts 1989, 71st Leg. ch. 650, § 11, eff. Aug. 28, 1989. Renumbered from V.T.C.A. Property Code § 92.059 and amended by Acts 1995, 74th Leg. ch. 869, § 5, eff. Jan. 1, 1996

© 2006 TxLIHIS

Since the site that Scott Gem posted is having parse errors.

Here is the text of that page.

Retaliation occurs when the landlord wrongfully terminates the lease, files for eviction, deprives the tenant of the use of the premises, decreases services to a tenant, or increases the rent because a tenant tries to exercise his rights.

Retaliation is often illegal. For example, a landlord is not allowed to retaliate against a tenant for requesting repairs, or calling a government or nonprofit agency about a problem. If the landlord takes any adverse action against a tenant within six months of the tenant's action, the landlord is presumed to have improperly retaliated.

Retaliation is NOT always unlawful

The landlord can always terminate the lease and evict a tenant under certain conditions (regardless of the landlord's real reasons). For example, if you fail to pay your rent, intentionally cause property damage to the premises, or threaten the personal safety of the landlord or employees, your rights to possession can be terminated and you can be evicted.

Nonpayment of rent is the easiest way a landlord can evict a tenant. So, before you plan to take action against a landlord, at least make sure your rent is completely current. The other grounds a landlord can evict a tenant and not be subject to a retaliation claim are easily located in the statute.

There are other proper grounds for termination available to the landlord that are not considered retaliatory. Of course, if you received a notice of termination before you requested repairs, you are not protected. (This is why it is a good idea to give repair notices in writing, date them, and make copies for your protection. If you call a government agency is also good to make a note of who you spoke to and the date and time of your call.)

The landlord can increase the rent if the lease has a provision for an increase in the rent due to higher utility, tax or insurance costs. The landlord may also increase the rent or reduce services if it is part of a pattern of rent increases or service reductions for the whole complex.

Remedies if unlawful

If the landlord engages in activity that constitutes unlawful retaliation, you may seek a judgment against your landlord for: (1) one month's rent, plus $500; (2) the reasonable costs to move to another place (if you were forced out); and (3) attorney's fees and court costs. But remember, the landlord will win if he can prove that his actions were not for purposes of retaliation. Also, you can use retaliation as a defense to an eviction action. For more details check out the statutes on retaliation.

If you believe you have been retaliated against, demand the landlord pay. The landlord demands you pay late fees when you are late on the rent. Tenants need to insist that landlords pay when they break the law. We have provided a form lawsuit you can use to file suit against your landlord.

BTW TAA is Texas Apartment Association. A business not a government org nor a non profit bizz.

What is TAA? Texas Apartment Association? If so that is a private business also not a government org.

I doubt that this is an automatic lease. Automatic leases are rarely used.
They are a contract type of old and not legally binding in many states type.


Actually it's (TAA) a not for profit. Perhaps automatic renewing leases are neither common nor legal in California but pretty common where I am - NYS. On occasion I use them myself. However, the argument is moot because in this case it is very obviously not an automatic lease.

Would be interested in where automatic leases are not binding (it's a legal contract and I wonder just part of the contract cannot be enforced) and why you believe they are "contracts of old."

I also remain interested that your research showed no case law concerning lease renewal and retaliation.

Otherwise if the question is can the tenant sue/make a claim for discrimination you can pretty much claim for anything - it's the winning that is in question.

BTW TAA is Texas Apartment Association. A business not a government org nor a non profit bizz.


Check again - it's a not-for-profit Association, thus the word "Association."

As far as I know, most leases are self perpetuating. In other words, unless either the landlord or the tenant actively terminates the lease it continues on as a periodic lease with all the same terms expect the rental amount and there is no longer an expiration date. Therefore, a landlord's refusal to renew the lease can be considered a termination.

I don't know if there is any case law to support this. I do understand a landlord cannot be forced to renew a lease (except maybe in cases of legal discrimination). But refusal to renew a lease presents a hardship to the tenant. A hardship that a landlord does not incur in the reverse situation. Therefore it makes sense to compensate a tenant IF, the landlord's refusal to renew is in retaliation for the tenant's exercise of their legal rights.


However, the argument is moot because in this case it is very obviously not an automatic lease.

I'm not so sure it's that obvious. An automatic lease renews if there is no action on the part of either the tenant or landlord. Just because the landlord exercised his right to not renew doesn't mean it wouldn't have renewed automatically if he hadn't

I am a member of 3 associations in CA. They make a profit. You bet.

I am a member of 3 associations in CA. They make a profit. You bet.


TAA is incorporated as a not-for-profit. If you belong to not-for-profits that are making a profit, then report them to the IRS.

I'm not so sure its that obvious. An automatic lease renews if there is no action on the part of either the tenant or landlord. Just because the landlord exercised his right to not renew doesn't mean it wouldn't have renewed automatically if he hadn't


I was going by the OP's statement that he/she was advised landlord would not be renewing lease - I suppose (in looking back) that could be read either way - automatic or not.

And you are 100% correct about the lease turning into month-to-month if no one does anything.

Other than that - I think this has gone (me included) w-a-a-a-y off topic.

Nope a lease that is not renewed goes to a periodic lease by default.

Tenants and Landlords with a TERM lease. When that term ends they are to sign another or end the agreement. The default to a periodic or for laymen a month to month rental agreement is designed to cover all parties instead of no contract which it technically is when a term lease
By it's term has ended.

I realize that you want to make this fly. The truth is that if this tenant follows your advice she may be found to be guilty of:

§ 92.334. Invalid Complaints and have to pay one months rent plus $500 to the Landlord. Including the Landlords court and Lawyers cost.

Please DO proceed! I would love to get this case on the books.

But the Landlord in this case IS taking action.
The landlord is NOT renewing the lease. Which is their right.

But the Landlord in this case IS taking action.
The landlord is NOT renewing the lease. Which is their right.



I can't tell which post you are answering -

I realize that you want to make this fly. The truth is that if this tenant follows your advice she may be found to be guilty of:

§ 92.334. Invalid Complaints and have to pay one months rent plus $500 to the Landlord. Including the Landlords court and Lawyers cost.



What I want to do is make sure the tenant is aware of all their options. I don't believe this is an invalid complaint, but didn't and wouldn't advise the OP to take it to court.

The fact of the matter is, if a lease expires without either the landlord or tenant actively not renewing it, then it continues on a periodic basis. Another fact is that a landlord is under no obligation to renew and may terminate at expiration for any reason. Its my belief that a judge would consider retaliation to have occurred if a lease was not renewed after the tenant had made a complaint.