Hello all and thank you for reading,

Here is the story:

This May we moved out of our apartment and found new renters not only for the rest of our term (until July 31st) but until the next year at that time. We moved out and with our good faith we let the new tenants move in and start paying for our lease - with no paper work or anything, and they have been paying. Here is the problem, when we moved out it was our understanding that they were just taking over our lease until July 31st and then would sign a new lease to rent for the next year. I received a letter from the landlord saying that we 'broke' the lease and that we had to pay a half months rent because of that. We never, subleased it or assigned it because there was no paper work from us. We knew the people we were renting to and trusted them to take good care and pay until the end of our lease- which they have been doing.

What should I do here? This in a college town where the ll's love to prey on their leasors. I know what they're doing is wrong because I talked to the landlord and he said that they were signing a new lease from Aug. 1st of this year until July 31st of the next. Now I call and he says that, no, the tenants signed a lease from June 1st (their first full month) until May 31st the next year. So how could they rent the apartment when we are still liable and under the lease terms? We told them we were moving out in mid May which we did, but at that point we were just going to have to pay the rent for the 2 months we weren't there. We never signed anything either 'assigning' or 'subleasing' the apartment. The ll is saying that we did one of those things although there is nothing in writing.

Any help is much appreciated!

Thank you very much,

John

Hate to break it to you, but by moving out and letting someone move in and pay the rent for you, you have subleased your unit. Especially if you told the landlord that you were moving out!

If your lease didn't not allow for a sublease, then you broke it. Whether you signed anything or not with the people who took over, you effectively subleased. Not putting it in writing does not make it that it didn't happen.

Nor does their signing a lease from 6/1 affect you at all.

However, if the landlord was made whole (never lost any rent) and there is nothing in the lease about penalities for breaking the lease, then they would be hard pressed to get a judge to award them anything.

But you DID break the lease.

The landlord never lost any rent and in fact we found him new renters for the next year when the couldn't. So do you think we are still liable for 'breaking' the lease?

The landlord can not accept rent from two different sets of tenants for the same period for the same rental unit. If your lease states that you can not sublet, then yes you broke the lease. Unless the landlord had expenses related to re-renting the apartment to the new set of tenants, the court is not going to award money to the landlord.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by laforzagop

The landlord never lost any rent and in fact we found him new renters for the next year when the couldn't. So do you think we are still liable for 'breaking' the lease?

---

Again, I go back to what the lease states. You ARE liable for breaking the lease, but what that liability is, is questionable.

UPDATE:

Landlord conceeded! I threatened a Small Claims suit. I got my deposit money back. There was nothing in the lease assessing a 1/4 months rent penalty for subleasing.

Thank you

Glad to hear it worked out.