The binding effect of being a written occupant, but not tenant, on a 1 yr res. Lease
My friend entered into a one-year residential lease in New Jersey for an apartment along with her significant other and one other individual. When going to sign the lease, the other individual did not have his driver's license as the front office required. However, instead of coming back another time, the three agreed as follows: the couple would be on the lease as tenants, but the other individual would be listed as an occupant on the lease. He also paid his share of the security deposit.
Four months passed, with the occupant paying his share each month on a timely basis to the couple, who in turn paid the entire rent to the landlord. However, due to a number of disagreements the individual occupant moved out last week and now both refuses to pay rent for the remainder of the lease and demands the return of his security deposit.
I'm a new lawyer in a different state who has no more experience with LL-T law than what was required by the Bar. I'm inclined to say that he has no chance of getting back the deposit, and that he should be held to a contractual obligation with the remaining tenants for his share of the rent for the remainder of the lease. I think his being listed on the lease as an occupant, four months of paying on a timely basis, and the payment of the deposit is enough to constitute a written periodic tenancy for a year (with he has a sublessee and the couple as a sublessor). This conclusion, for me, is reinforced by the fact that interestingly, the previous year the same individuals lived together, but then the now-tenant was listed as an occupant and the now-occupant was listed as a tenant. So there's really a 16-month course of conduct here, that should at the least result in an implied contract.
Is my conclusion way off? I don't think that my friend the tenant will push to get the rent going forward, but if he continues to insist on getting his deposit yet she probably will take him to court. I think she should be able to, and that the deposit pales in comparison to his rental obligation for the next 8 months.
Thanks for your help.
