Check out some similar questions!

borncrabby5 · Oct 18, 2006, 04:09 PM

:confused: Hi there. I just recently broke my rental lease agreement with my landlord in California by giving her a 60 day notice to vacate. She said she would do her best to get someone else into it and I offered to let her show the house early in order to help find a new renter. I paid the full rental amount for September. I gave the keys to the landlord on September 18th, giving her back possession of the premises. She signed a statement after our walk through that there was nothing wrong in the house that wasn't already there before move in. On September 23rd she moved a new set of renters into the premises. She also verbally stated that I would receive a prorated amount back for the time I had already paid for.
A week and a half later, I received a statement from her returning my full deposit but not the prorated rental amount for September. She stated that it was used as a lease break fee. Unfortunately there was nothing in the lease contract stating any kind of lease break fee. I wrote her a letter asking for that money back or for her to show me where in the lease it is stated that we would have to pay a fee for breaking the lease. She wrote back stating that I caused damage to the property after returning the keys to her and that one set was missing, some mysterious third set I never got to begin with. She also stated that she had to put new carpet in two bedrooms due to our tenancy and that none of this she charged us for, yet she could still not supply where in the lease contract it stated a lease break fee.
My question is can she legally keep that money? I was under the impression that two tenants couldn't pay rent for the same premises. Is it possible for her to say that the new tentants didn't move in until the first of October in order to keep the money?

safire923 · Oct 18, 2006, 06:46 PM

I work in a real estate office in New Jersey that also deals with property management. I'm not sure if it's the same in California, but in NJ there is a fine for breaking a lease agreement. Once that fine is paid and a tenant vacates a property, it is still their responsibility to cover the rents for the months that were lost to the owner unless of course the owner finds a new tenant to cover that time.
I guess my first question to you would be: when was your lease suppose to expire?

It might not matter, but legally you had a binding agreement with her. Technically she could have held you liable until your tenancy expired. I would double check and re-read your lease. In a standard NJ lease, addendums are attached which specify certain fees including a lease cancellation fee.

I hope this may have helped you in any way. I'll be glad to help you out in anything I can.

Good luck!

Cvillecpm · Oct 19, 2006, 06:32 AM

CA rules are VERY specific to NJ rules would be of little help.

You need to request the pro-rated rent amount IN WRITING and give her 10 days to return it and if she does not, then sue her in Small Claims Court.

Many states DON'T require the landlord to mitigate your damages and re-rent the property and CA does so her getting a new tenant in is to your benefit.

excon · Oct 19, 2006, 06:36 AM

Hello born:

Yeah! I'm crabby too! Cvill is right on - sue 'em. Doncha just hate landlords who do that?

excon

ScottGem · Oct 19, 2006, 07:48 AM

Your only avenue is what Cville said. However, do you really want to sue for what amounts to 1 weeks rental? You are responsible for the rental up to when unit was re-rented. Its very possible the new tenant's lease took effect on 10/1 and the landlord just allowed them to move in early. You need to confirm that they actually paid for that week.

You got your deposit back. You could have been liable for October or more if she wasn't able to rent the unit. Frankly I think you should leave well enough alone.

borncrabby5 · Oct 19, 2006, 09:59 AM

THank you so much guys!! This does help because at this point, yes, it would be petty to go after her for such a small amount. I guess maybe I just needed to know what I could do for my own piece of mind. Had the amount been more, I would have used this information to aide in my decision to sue. Sometimes its just good to hear "yep, you were in the right". Had the landlord been more clear and up front with her intentions, I would have understood a little better what was going to happen. Her lease contract was vague and only 3 pages long with large print. I think if you are in California and you are a landlord, a lease break fee is a MUST and should be stated in your lease contract. I guess our landlord just felt like being a bully about it all. :mad: I appreciate you all responding. Thank you so much! :D

ScottGem · Oct 19, 2006, 12:46 PM

Most landlords, especially small ones, probably use preprinted leases they buy in a stationary store. They probably read them as closely as the tenants do.

Since a lease is a contract for a specified term, not fulfilling the terms of the lease (its length for example) is a breach of contract and subject to financial penalites. So, whether she called it a lease break fee or prorated rent or whatever, it probably doesn't matter.

AKaeTrue · Oct 19, 2006, 01:21 PM

Unless you have in writing that she owes you the remainder of money, you'll probably never get it from her. In court, it would be her word against yours and going to court may end up costing more than she owes you. For the future, always, always put everything in writing.