[pseudotensor]

Lease: I honestly didn't understand that (according to email from managing unit Capital, my lease requires 60 day notice even on a month-to-month lease. However, the 60 day notice bit appears to only apply to termination in the "initial term" due to "cause" such as military or other reasons (section 32). The only part about normal termination is some complicated embedded note about "last day of second month in which notice was given." (section 22). That's not really clear and hidden within the text.In addition, during my stay since August 2012 (converted to month-to-month on Oct 2013), they failed to adhere to the contract expected from a manager:1) They didn't provide me entry keys (2 keyfobs) to the building, 1 visitor pass for parking, and door keys to interior 2 bedrooms didn't work. I requested these items about 5 times until giving up. They kept saying they'd get them back from old tenants, but never did after repeated queries. I finally mostly gave up, bought keyfobs myself, bought the visitor pass myself, but still have never had access to lock bedrooms as I should have had (they gave me the correct # of keys for the interior bedrooms, but they didn't work). The lack of visitor pass caused a zip car rental to be towed for $250.2) The lease has a major mistake regarding the dates. They say the month-to-month starts Jan 2013, but it was supposed to be Jan 2014. Can I use this against them?3) The bathroom ceiling has been leaked on multiple times. At this point, they have not repaired the ceiling of the leak after a week despite my requests that they do so. There could be mold or other things growing just under the paint, which is bubbly and filled with water.Overall, is the section 22 applicable or section 32? If 22, is it written clearly enough to be lawful? Can any of my issues with the keys, lease mistakes, or maintenance be considered grounds for breach of contract on their side?Thanks!Jon

[ScottGem]

First, citing phrases from your lease out of context isn't going to tell us anything. Second, Any question on law needs to include your general locale as laws vary by area. But generally, when a lease converts to month to month all the provisions of the original lease remain in effect except for term and rental. So if the lease states, then you must give 60 days notice prior to vacating, then you need to give 60 days.

Second, you might have been able to use the issues about keys and stuff to terminate the lease for breach, but not at this late date. The date mistakes are not going to do it. Have you talked to the management company about it?

[pseudotensor]

First, citing phrases from your lease out of context isn't going to tell us anything. Second, Any question on law needs to include your general locale as laws vary by area. But generally, when a lease converts to month to month all the provisions of the original lease remain in effect except for term and rental. So if the lease states, then you must give 60 days notice prior to vacating, then you need to give 60 days.

Second, you might have been able to use the issues about keys and stuff to terminate the lease for breach, but not at this late date. The date mistakes are not going to do it. Have you talked to the management company about it?

I only reverted to getting the correct number of keyfobs very recently and the visitor pass very recently, because I always assumed the management would eventually get them to me.

Another issue is that multiple times a major leak has occurred from the bathroom ceiling due to another apartment unit above me having leaking pipes. The original leak was supposedly repaired on Feb 2, 2014, and the ceiling was removed and redone and repainted over a period of a few days.

The leak appeared yet again 2 weeks ago on Feb 24, 2014. The maintenance supposedly fixed the pipe leak, but has yet to fix the ceiling that has bubbles of stale water filling the ceiling.

This is exposing me to mold and other dangerous allergens. I no longer want to live in the unit due to these unsafe conditions that can readily generate "toxic mold." Mold health issues - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia .

I've sent a letter to the management in this regard.

[ScottGem]

It was probably deleted because it had too much personal info. That would have been for your protection. As a Mod I've removed it also. I suggest you make a copy then redact ANY identifying info then scan it back to PDF before you attach it.

However, I was able to download and review it. I see no conflicts between those two clauses. Clause 32 is an escape clause for you. It provides you protection if, for some reason you are forced to move due to circumstances beyond your control. It still requires 60 days notice and allows the landlord to refuse to accept your reason for moving.

Clause 22 is the one that applies. It's kind of cute the way its worded. Basically it says you have to give notice by the first day of the month you want the lease to expire, but that the lease doesn't terminate until the end of the second month. Basically this is to make the lease self renewing. If you want to lease to expire on 3/31, you have to give notice by 3/1, but the lease will not terminate until 4/30.

Also, since you initialed each page, the errors in dates were accepted by you.

As for the mold issue. You would have to prove mold exists, that you gave management sufficient notice to repair it and that they haven't done so.

[pseudotensor]

It was probably deleted because it had too much personal info. That would have been for your protection. As a Mod I've removed it also. I suggest you make a copy then redact ANY identifying info then scan it back to PDF before you attach it.

Clause 22 is the one that applies. It's kind of cute the way its worded. Basically it says you have to give notice by the first day of the month you want the lease to expire, but that the lease doesn't terminate until the end of the second month. Basically this is to make the lease self renewing. If you want to lease to expire on 3/31, you have to give notice by 3/1, but the lease will not terminate until 4/30.

Also, since you initialed each page, the errors in dates were accepted by you.

As for the mold issue. You would have to prove mold exists, that you gave management sufficient notice to repair it and that they haven't done so.

Understood on the PDF, thanks! The lease is for College Park area (near UMD Campus) for rent of about $1600 for a month-to-month lease.

Don't you think Clause 22 is worded to obscure the actual need for an effective 60 day notice? Isn't it illegal to word things in a confusing way in rental leases, as nominally one should not be expected to have a lawyer read simple cheap rental leases?

I'll continue to push forward on the mold issue by getting an inspection done.

In the meantime, I've told them my move-out date of March 8. I've paid through end of March already, so the only contentious issue is paying for April. They have my security deposit that is equal to a month's rent. I assume they are likely just going to ignore the issue and keep my security deposit, despite my request for them to send it back to a specific address via a letter mailed to them and emailed to them.

But, given I've specified my move-out date, aren't they required by law to make every normal attempt to fill the unit? If they don't have documentation that they tried in court (or don't show up for court) regrading not returning my deposit, then wouldn't I win the case?

Thanks!

[smoothy]

They don't have to even start looking to fill the unit until you have actually vacated it (not when you tell them you are going)... and thirty days to allow for preparing the unit.. advertising it... waiting for and getting applications and processing them and by the time someone actually can move in... will burn through that second thirty day period probibly 80-90% of the time (rough guess).

Its not like questioning a place for not trying hard enough thats claiming they couldn't rent it out for ten months if you bail out two months into a one year lease and holding you responsible..

[pseudotensor]

They don't have to even start looking to fill the unit until you have actually vacated it (not when you tell them you are going)... and thirty days to allow for preparing the unit.. advertising it... waiting for and getting applications and processing them and by the time someone actually can move in... will burn through that second thirty day period probibly 80-90% of the time (rough guess).

Its not like questioning a place for not trying hard enough thats claiming they couldn't rent it out for ten months if you bail out two months into a one year lease and holding you responsible..

Yes, I understand. The wording in the lease, as Scott saw, is quite obscure. You have to calculate what could have just been said to be 60 days. They use no numbers, so it's clear they are simply trying to trick people into not knowing what it really means.

A simple example contradiction to why month-to-month with 60-day lease makes no sense: I might have only wanted to stay 1 month. Yet, that would have required me to give them notice 30 days before I even started the month-to-month lease.

Consider a week-to-week lease. Should that have 60 days too? No, should be 7, because otherwise it simply makes no sense to have stayed (say) 2 weeks but then require 60 days notice that would be 46 days prior to starting the week-to-week lease.

I'll post the redacted lease later in the evening.

Thanks!

[smoothy]

I think I managed to leave the point I was trying to make out of my last post.

THat being if you leave after 30 days of giving a required 60 days notice.. they can and will most likely hold you to the full 60. And if it came to a fight... they really wouldn't have to prove they tried because of the customary period to prepare a vacant unit for market is roughly the same period in question.

The security deposit is a secondary issue... rarely can they use a deposit for unpaid rent.

A falacy on your argument is... no place is going to rent you an apartment... for only one month to begin with. They would lose money.

It doesn't have to make sense... if the local law allows it... and you agree to it and its written in the lease when you sign it... then you can be held responsible for it.

[ScottGem]

No its not illegal to obscurely word a contract. The signer is expected to ask questions about what they don't understand. You signed the contract initially each page. What the reasoning is behind that clause I don't know. Here is the wording for others to check

22. Termination Hold-Over.
a. Either Landlord/Agent or Tenant may terminate this Lease at the expiration of said Lease or any extension
thereof by giving the other written notice of termination on the first day of the month in which the tenancy or
intended tenancy will expire. This Lease will then terminate on the last day of the second month in which notice
was given. If Tenant holds over after the expiration of the term of this Lease, Tenant shall, with the
Landlord/Agent's consent and in the absence of any written agreement to the contrary, become a Tenant from month
to month at the monthly rate in effect during the last month of the expiring term. All other terms and provisions of
this Lease slhall remain in full force and effect.
b. If Tenant holds over (fails to vacate) the premises after proper notice, Landlord/Agent may hold the Tenant
accountable for rent for the period of the holdover and for consequential damages due to an incoming occupants
inability to enter the premises because of tenant's holdover occupancy. Tenant is responsible for the entire month's
rent in the cases of a hold over, although the tenant vacates prior to the end of the month.

The only thing that really matters is the first two sentences. The rest deals with you staying past the expiration of the lease. Those 2 sentences say you have to give notice of at least one month before the lease expires that you don't plan on renewing. And since it's a month to month, it expires each month. But it states that the lease won't end until the end of the second month after notice is given.

[smoothy]

Scott another point as to why they may have things worded in specific ways... is he lives in an area where a large percentage of rentals are going to be groups of college students (this area is close enough to me I'm familiar with it). THey've probibly had enough people bailing without ANY notice they are going the longer route to cover their own butts and minimize potiental losses.

[ScottGem]

Scott another point as to why they may have things worded in specific ways... is he lives in an area where a large percentage of rentals are going to be groups of college students (this area is close enough to me I'm familiar with it). THey've probibly had enough people bailing without ANY notice they are going the longer route to cover their own butts and minimize potiental losses.

Along with that point, is that it may be difficult to get new tenants mid term. So that may be another reason.

[pseudotensor]

Scott another point as to why they may have things worded in specific ways... is he lives in an area where a large percentage of rentals are going to be groups of college students (this area is close enough to me I'm familiar with it). THey've probibly had enough people bailing without ANY notice they are going the longer route to cover their own butts and minimize potiental losses.

Smoothy, yes, makes sense as this is a college area. I just wish the wording was actually clear and I knew about the 60 days notice. I feel tricked because I gave them 30 days notice thinking that was enough, but one has to dig into their lease and compute in some non-obvious way that their words mean 60 days notice.

[smoothy]

Consider this a valuable learning experience... always read everything before you sign. And if you don't understand you ask them. Most contracts are written by lawyers... in what we fondly call legaleze. Meaning certain words , terms and phrases have very specific legal meanings... which is why they are used... and trust me... until you become familiar with them... they are confusing to most people.

[ScottGem]

and I knew about the 60 days notice.

I'm sorry, but your initials were on that page. That means you DID know about it. If you didn't understand what it meant, you should have asked before signing. You could have even asked that the wording be cleared up. I never sign anything unless I fully understand it.

[pseudotensor]

I'm sorry, but your initials were on that page. That means you DID know about it. If you didn't understand what it meant, you should have asked before signing. You could have even asked that the wording be cleared up. I never sign anything unless I fully understand it.

As I said to smoothy, I did not expect to have to calculate from words to numbers based upon some obscure text. Sure, lesson learned and all, but I did not know it would be 60 days and they could have made it clear by simply stating so instead of using some odd phrasing that does require multiple steps to arrive at the result that could have been put down as a single number.

[ScottGem]

I have no clue whether that is deliberately obscure phrasing or standard boilerplate for Maryland leases. I sympathize with you over the odd wording, but the bottom line is you still signed it.

[smoothy]

Its legal the way it is... what some people might consider "making it clear" would actually require changing the wording... which would in turn change the legal meanings of parts of the contract from something legally clear and defined... to something legally unclear.

That ODD Phrazing has specific legal significance. Its only odd to the layperson... in legal circles... those odd phrases have very clear legal significance. And what I referred to as Legalese.

If you think thats difficult to read...you should look at the paperwork involved in buying a house.....or business contracts. Even easier...Google up and read legislation for any particular law you can find.

[talaniman]

I think you will find that leases and service agreements are written to cover the corporate butt, against liability, or law suits. Ever lease a car? Same difference.