Which takes legal precedence: a 60-day notice or back-dated lease renewal?
I provided a 30-day notice, in accordance with my present lease just as it was about to expire. The next month I informed him I changed my mind and decided to stay, but the topic of renewing the lease never arose. Evidently the landlord had already agreed to rent to someone else and accepted a cash deposit from that person. He is now being sued because he refuses to return any money claiming it was given to his crooked partner and not him and never received. He has since asked me to "cover" for him by saying I renewed my lease, not to even mention that I gave a 30-day notice, and to sign a new agreement that is back-dated, which he plans to provide in court. I really don't want to get in the middle but I know I will be dragged into it because I've already received a call from the other party's attorney. In a case like this, is the "back-dated lease" legal, or would the court say the 30-day notice (IF they find out, which I'm sure they will because they're lawyers) negate that? I really didn't want to be bound to another full year and I'm afraid I'll end up in court with my landlord as well over this lease. I also didn't want to move.
Comment on AK lawyer's post
Hi AK Lawyer,
Let me rephrase my question. If I offered a 30 day notice in writing on March 1st, then on April 1st signed a lease dated March 1st, is said lease legal and binding? Or does the 30 day notice negate its validity?