Forum
« Help with Bathroom Vanity HPD Violation Explanation »
September 10, 2009
Lease Notice & Termination
We had a lease that went from Aug 15 2008 - Aug 15 2009. In the lease it states that if I want to renew the lease or end the lease I need to give at least 60 days notice so the landlord have time to find a new tenant. I told him when it was less than 30 days left until the termination of the lease ending date (Aug 15), thinking the lease was expiring on the Aug 15 anyway and there is no automatic renewal in the lease or mention of month to month. Really confusing. He said nothing to me when I told him that we were leaving, just a OK, no problem.
Now my security deposit is being used to pay for the rent until my Landlord finds a new tenant, since he claims I never fulfilled the 2 months notice the lease says. He is also starting to accuse me for damages in the house common areas. The landlord refuses to listen and have nor stopped communicating with me. His last word was, you will hear from us when whatever is left of your deposit shows up in the mail.
If a lease terminates at a date without a option to automatic renewal, do you need to notify by law if you don't intend to stay?
Also I paid to much in rent I found out since he added $150 to the rent after it was signed, claiming extra cost to fix a boiler, this in a email and not in the signed lease.
And is all of this legal action from the landlord?
On a personal note. All other Landlords we have been having for the last 6 years have loved us.
They are still contacting us every now and then when they available apartments to get us back. Not sure if this could be worth something in a court though.
Comments
Just go to the landlord tenant court. They have free advice for tenants, just bring all your paperwork. The cost to file is minimal, the judges tend to be friendly. One thing to check before you rent is whether your LL sues or gets sued habitually. It can give you a heads up about deadbeat landlords.
Posted by: Maly at September 9, 2009 3:47 PM
I don't think the extra 150.00 to fix a boiler is legal. He didn't upgrade the boiler, he repaired the old one. They can't add to your rent for that. Plus a broken boiler means he is not fulfilling his part under "arrant of habitibility."
Had he put in a new boiler maybe he could have claimed it was a capital improvement but I don't think so. My previous landlady had to put in a new boiler but did not raise rents. New windows and hall carpets did.
Posted by: bxgrl at September 9, 2009 3:54 PM
Oops- sorry. Meant to say, that still doesn't help you with the 2 months notice. You didn't give him that. But depending on how much money is involved (from over charges), you may have something to confront him with but in the long run, it just may be more aggravation than its worth.
Posted by: bxgrl at September 9, 2009 3:56 PM
Housing Court help center: http://www.nycourts.gov/courts/nyc/housing/resourcecenter.shtml
Posted by: vinca at September 9, 2009 3:56 PM
It's probably not worth getting a court case over. It seems rather shady that the LL would charge you for something they're normally responsible for - the boiler. As for your lease. I'm not a Lawyer but the 60 day notice clause seems self serving and not even legal, it's up to the LL to ask about a renewal 30-60 days before expiration (either you re-sign or you allow access for the apt to be shown.) As I understand it, once a non stabilized lease ends, it ends. That's the point of having a lease. Speak to legal aid or your attorney.
Posted by: Crownlfc at September 9, 2009 4:35 PM
As a LL, we have a 45 day clause in the lease, but I can't imagine it is any kind of default if they don't tell us. If we ever got to the 45 day point and hadn't heard, we would ask. If tenant said they still hadn't decided, i would give a deadline by which I would start listing it if tenant hadn't committed to staying. I consider it up to me to make sure I know whether I can renew or need to list, but the clause gives the tenant notice as to when to start (and finish) thinking about it. Can't imagine a court would back the LL up on the 60 day clause if the LL never asked after the 60 day mark. First thing I would ask the LL if I were the judge -- "well, did you ask them what their plans were?"
Posted by: slopefarm at September 9, 2009 4:44 PM
Yea the extra for the boiler is not my cost, that's also what I suspected. But what do you do once you have moved in and a email like that comes, start a dispute right away? I guess, but that's not me, I don't wanna fight unless I have to.
As for the 60 days. If a lease is from Period A - Period B, why do you need to inform him that you are moving out when the lease is up at Period B. It is in his interest to find out if it's vacant after Period B so he can rent it out.
The lease also seems to be a cut and paste job, not written by a real lawyer and I think he has been doing this to past tenants, it all seems to well rehearsed
So legal aid is the start here it sounds like!
You live and you learn :)
Posted by: manneman at September 9, 2009 4:50 PM
As far as I know, using the security deposit as your last month's rent is a big no-no and it will cause you to lose any remaining security deposit. For instance, when you sign the lease and give them first month, last month, and security you figure you can use the last month for the last month. Wrong. The lease more than likely says the security deposit = 2 months rent. If you do not pay the last month you are in default, therefore you lose it all.
Posted by: wilso26941 at September 9, 2009 5:50 PM
Your security should have been returned on a pro rata basis. 30 day notice would of netted you 1/2 your deposit. He is not allowed to "punish" you by keeping it all.
On the $150 extra charge you should of simply ignored it and paid the rent as required. It is up to the LL to initiate the suit.
I can't imagine how he can hold you to damages in the common area without legally submittable evidence. Witnesses willing to testify etc. Sounds like he is just clouding the waters. Look to Small Claims for relief.
wilso26941, LLs can use the security to pay owed rent.
Posted by: modsquad at September 9, 2009 6:22 PM
I mean, we moved out and paid the rent until the date that the lease ended - We never skipped out on any rent that the lease said.
What's being argued by the landlord is that I never gave him 60 days notice (I gave him 30, read the first posting about the claim he makes), so he is using 50% of the deposit to pay for the time the apartment is standing empty, which might very well be a month or more...
Posted by: manneman at September 9, 2009 6:25 PM
It's comical for you to write "But what do you do..., start a dispute right away? I guess, but that's not me, I don't wanna fight unless I have to." Yet here you are, trying to argue your point on a board where it's meaningless whether you "win" or "lose." Go consult an attorney at the Housing Court help desk and get some actual, informed advice. Or continue doing nothing more than pointless complaining....
Posted by: vinca at September 9, 2009 6:44 PM
"His last word was, you will hear from us when whatever is left of your deposit shows up in the mail."
What a bad ass LL. I would never get away with that crap.
Hire a lawyer or a law student to draft a letter requesting your full deposit back. Send it via certified/registered mail with copies of all his emails attached. He'll shit his pants. Good luck!
Posted by: jack slade at September 9, 2009 9:07 PM
I have never heard of an affirmative obligation for a tenant to notify the landlord 60 days in advance if he planned to move at the end of the lease, or forfeit a security deposit. I am no lawyer, but I would be very surprised if your landlord had any right to hold a security deposit on the grounds that you did not affirmatively notify him you planned to move at end of lease. That's utterly ridiculous. I would get a lawyer friend to draft an official letter threatening to sue not only for the return of the security deposit, but for damages as well, based on the landlord's untenable claim that you didn't give 60 days notice (since that is his reason for holding the deposit).
Posted by: CGfan at September 9, 2009 9:18 PM
Agree with CGfan. And if he isn't responsive, just bring an action in small claims court. Cost is minimal.
Posted by: aishling at September 9, 2009 11:23 PM
vinca you're an idiot. seeking advice in this situation from other tenants and landlords is invaluable-- they can point you toward resources, and share their limited knowledge of the law, so you can decide whether it worth fighting or spending more money on, before ever going to an attorney. I got news for you: until you are at the point of starting a legal action (before you need to know civil procedure), you can get the lay of the land yourself. Especially in landlord-tenant law, which is specifically designed to be user-friendly, and accessible by laypersons. But maybe not idiots.
Posted by: blowfish at September 10, 2009 10:51 AM
small claims court is the easiest and fastest. Cost about $20 to start the lawsuit. Sue him for the deposit and the $150.00. Unless you stayed after the lease ended you have no obligation at all. If you stayed after 8/15 you became a month to month tenant or a holdover by operation of law having nothing to do with the lease.
Posted by: smeyer418 at September 10, 2009 10:59 AM
Blowhard...er, fish...how unfortunate, since your bio claims you're an attorney, that you do not recognize that half the information being offered is wrong. Services at the Housing Court help desk are FREE(!), and actually provided by people who deal with landlord-tenant issues on a daily basis. Exactly which resource did you provide for OP?...(unless namecalling is the most valuable resource in your own professional practice).
Posted by: vinca at September 10, 2009 11:09 AM
vinca,
You've given a lot of very helpful advice on many forum threads. But you do come on awfully strong. Blowfish wasn't criticizing your advice about housing court services, but was complaining that you ridiculed the OP for seeking advice here. I thought you were a bit over the top on that as well, even if the advice was good. It's a good idea to take a deep breath before you post. Cheers.
Posted by: slopefarm at September 10, 2009 11:20 AM
Seriously...you're coming off like a jerk.
Posted by: boofer at September 10, 2009 12:02 PM
Technically, you have breached a covenant of the contract. However, the problem for your landlord is that he has not suffered any damage as a result of the breach. Furthermore, he has a duty to mitigate his damages. This would have been done by asking you if you intend to renew on day -59. The apartment was going to be vacant after the term of the lease regardless. Your breach did not cause this. Sue him- and do it fast so he may just relent quickly.
Posted by: orestes at September 10, 2009 2:08 PM
orestes said what I was trying to say, only better.
Posted by: slopefarm at September 10, 2009 2:40 PM
Update:
After meeting a lawyer, who made a investigation of the building, it turns out it is a illegal premises which are breaking the multiple dwelling laws 301 and 302-a.
The house was apparently registered as a 1 family house, but now holds 4 units which of 3 are rentals and 1 basement unit were the landlord lives.
We can't claim back the money we have paid during our 1 year stay but we can claim back the full deposit since the lease is invalid.
Does anyone have experience with these multiple dwelling laws in a court?
Posted by: manneman at September 10, 2009 6:32 PM
You will get a judgment for your deposit and probably have to put a lien,
it's unlikely such a scuzzy landlord will actually pay. It's very easy to win when you are right in housing court, to get paid is another story. On the plus side there are absolute jackasses whose business is to buy liens on pennies on the dollar. For $150 you can be assured your scuzzy landlord will suffer a long term relationship with an equally disgusting person. Karma!
Posted by: Maly at September 11, 2009 12:08 AM
From what I am reading, you actually gave your landlord 12 months notice of your intent to terminate the lease. Your statements reads as follows.
"We had a lease that went from Aug 15 2008 - Aug 15 2009. In the lease it states that if I want to renew the lease or end the lease I need to give at least 60 days notice so the landlord have time to find a new tenant".
Accordingly, you already gave your LL a full 12 months notice. You gave your LL the 12 month notice the day you signed the lease. The lease, which was signed 8/15/08 clearly states that it terminates on 8/15/09, so there you have your 12 month advance notice. You do not need to give 2 notices, no matter what the LL says.
Furthermore, pursuant to law, a lease is a contract and when the is ambiguity in a contract, it is interpreted against the party who drafted the contract, who, in your case is the landlord.
You will have no problem prevailing in court.
Posted by: jre at September 11, 2009 2:47 AM
ha that is awesome, bet the LL never figured you would question things so much! they probably thought you would be a pushover since you paid that initial overcharge on the rent. have you informed the LL you have retained an attorney and discovered the illegality? i'm not saying you should blackmail them, but it would probably be cheaper for the LL to return your deposit plus overcharges than get caught for incorrect C of O.
and honestly, your lease ran out mid-august; your responsbilyt ends there. the 60 days notice thing is clearly for terminating the lease early. your LL is either a simp or thinks you are, don't let them get away with it.
Posted by: Jimmy Legs at September 11, 2009 11:21 AM
No I have not informed the LL yet, we are having the lawyer drafting up a letter to him, informing him on what is going on and what laws he are breaking. We are figuring it's better to have the proper legal language and paper trail going into court (cause I have a feeling that's were this case will end).
I informed him early on that we would seek legal help regarding the questionable notice, but he only answered, "I am not playing these games, sue me then, it's a free country" and then said "the next communication you will hear from us is when whenever is left of the deposit comes in your mail".
And it's right about the questionable lease, the notice he has there is BS, so is the extra charge and that was confirmed by the lawyer as well. But since it's a illegal premise, the lease is not even worth the paper it's written on.
I'll update more as we move forward!
Posted by: manneman at September 11, 2009 12:18 PM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.