Breaking a Lease in California

[oiprocs]

I entered an agreement with tenants in the house, under the authorization of the landlord, to live there until Sep. 1st 2008.

Long story short, I will not be able to fulfill the terms of the lease. The tenants are pretty upset but they want to work it out with me.

They are asking me to pay rent for the month of January only, so that they can find another person to live there. I have no problems doing so, except that I would like to make sure that I have all my bases covered.

On the lease it says I agreed to pay rent "beginning January 2007". Obviously the date was wrong; it's supposed to be January 2008, but I did not notice it until I knew I was not going to be able to live there. Does the incorrect date negate the lease? Would this hold up in court?

Also, I paid a security deposit in the amount of half the rent. It would be nice if they could just apply that deposit to the January rent, and I would then only have to give them the other half, but they said that I lost the deposit when I broke the lease. If that is so, can they make me pay one month's rent as an additional penalty?

I tried searching on tenant's law for California, and I found a lot of good information, but nothing that really pinpointed the issues I'm trying to figure out. Should I pay the rent for January, I'll have them sign a contract that states the amount I pay releases me from the lease and I will not be held responsible for any rent owed past January, and that my credit will not be damaged from these actions.

 

[HannibalX]

Your deposit is gone if you break the contract. Pay what they are asking and move on.

 

[Epic Fail]

Are you subleasing? Your use of the term tenants is confusing.

 

[Dunbar]

The lease probably addresses breaking the lease. Mine costs over two months of rent. If they are charging you less than what is specified in the lease go for it. Once you signed that contract it's binding. Definitely get something in writing so they can't change their minds later and sue.

 

[BoomerD]

If they've offered you the opportunity to break the lease and it only costs you your deposit and one month's rent, grab it! They COULD charge you not only the deposit, but full monthly rent until they find someone else to rent it...and they aren't really required to try very hard to do so...you COULD get stuck paying the full monthly rent until the end of the lease if they want to be pricks...

 

[oiprocs]

Yes, I believe it was setup as a sublease. 3 people lived there, 1 moved out, and the other 2 subleased the room to me.

I did not sign the original lease; rather, they typed up a contract under the guide of the landlord which states how much the deposit is, how much my rent will be, what dates I'm starting/ending, splitting of utilities, etc. It does not mention any breaking the lease, or anything like that. Of course, I'm sure the original lease says something to that extent, but it looks like I'm going to just compromise with them, rather than get stuck with the full terms of the lease.

Thanks!

 

[Gibson486]

is losing your deposit for breaking a lease a cali thing? Or is that a term on the lease? I hope it is one of those two because I am breaking a lease and I am expecting my desposit.

 

[Epic Fail]

You shouldn't ask your housemates for the security deposit, the landlord is holding it right now. Maybe ask the landlord about taking your share back and have the next person pay it again.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Gibson486
is losing your deposit for breaking a lease a cali thing? Or is that a term on the lease? I hope it is one of those two because I am breaking a lease and I am expecting my desposit.

read your lease. usually exercising your option to cancel the lease early involves the lessor keeping the lessee's deposit.

 

[BoomerD]

Originally posted by: Gibson486
is losing your deposit for breaking a lease a cali thing? Or is that a term on the lease? I hope it is one of those two because I am breaking a lease and I am expecting my desposit.

It's actually a pretty common part of leases everywhere. Gotta be some kind of incentive for you not to break your lease...

 

[Delta6Echo]

Originally posted by: Oiprocs
I entered an agreement with tenants in the house, under the authorization of the landlord, to live there until Sep. 1st 2008.

Long story short, I will not be able to fulfill the terms of the lease. The tenants are pretty upset but they want to work it out with me.

They are asking me to pay rent for the month of January only, so that they can find another person to live there. I have no problems doing so, except that I would like to make sure that I have all my bases covered.

On the lease it says I agreed to pay rent "beginning January 2007". Obviously the date was wrong; it's supposed to be January 2008, but I did not notice it until I knew I was not going to be able to live there. Does the incorrect date negate the lease? Would this hold up in court?

Also, I paid a security deposit in the amount of half the rent. It would be nice if they could just apply that deposit to the January rent, and I would then only have to give them the other half, but they said that I lost the deposit when I broke the lease. If that is so, can they make me pay one month's rent as an additional penalty?

I tried searching on tenant's law for California, and I found a lot of good information, but nothing that really pinpointed the issues I'm trying to figure out. Should I pay the rent for January, I'll have them sign a contract that states the amount I pay releases me from the lease and I will not be held responsible for any rent owed past January, and that my credit will not be damaged from these actions.

What kind of half-assed, dumbshit lease is this? Was this even done with an actual residential lease agreement?

If not, then you have a case. A piece of paper that all three of you signed does not give you the same rights that a residential lease agreement does. If there is an error, (i.e. January 2007) it still holds. You all agreed to the same terms.

Unless it specifically says that you would lose your deposit if you broke the lease, they cannot do it. Everything has to be agreed upon before you move in. They cannot make stuff up as they go.

I am in California and have renters and everything is outlined in the original rent agreement. If it isn't covered, then you are asking for trouble.

 

[Gibson486]

Originally posted by: BoomerD

Originally posted by: Gibson486
is losing your deposit for breaking a lease a cali thing? Or is that a term on the lease? I hope it is one of those two because I am breaking a lease and I am expecting my desposit.

It's actually a pretty common part of leases everywhere. Gotta be some kind of incentive for you not to break your lease...

Ah man....I can't find my lease. I just read the part about a $500 fee...I do not remember anything about forfieting my deposit, but i wasn't looking for that so I would not be surprised if it is in there. I hope my gf just put the lease in storage.

 

[BoomerD]

You DEFINITELY have to read the "fine print" in leases as with any other legal document. MANY leases allow the landlord to keep your deposit AND make you pay the full rent on the unit, some until it's rented, others, for the full term of the lease...depending on the applicable state law.

 

[Nutdotnet]

Originally posted by: Oiprocs
Yes, I believe it was setup as a sublease. 3 people lived there, 1 moved out, and the other 2 subleased the room to me.

I did not sign the original lease; rather, they typed up a contract under the guide of the landlord which states how much the deposit is, how much my rent will be, what dates I'm starting/ending, splitting of utilities, etc. It does not mention any breaking the lease, or anything like that. Of course, I'm sure the original lease says something to that extent, but it looks like I'm going to just compromise with them, rather than get stuck with the full terms of the lease.

Thanks!

Does the lease say you will continue to pay rent until September 2008? Or say it's a one-year lease or SOMETHING like that?

If not...you might be able to say "f'em" and skip on them...hell, they may not even be legally able to sub-lease or what-not...you're not on the original lease and may not be tied to that lease agreement.

However, good faith plays a large part here...I don't know, if it was me, since I have good morals, I would give a 30-day notice, pay January and let them keep the deposit since I am not living up to the terms we agreed on. I think that is fair to all parties.

If I was an immorral jerk-wad I would not pay rent and let them keep the security deposit I put down...I bet they won't have much of a leg to stand on to go after you legally.

 

[oiprocs]

Originally posted by: Delta6Echo

Originally posted by: Oiprocs
I entered an agreement with tenants in the house, under the authorization of the landlord, to live there until Sep. 1st 2008.

Long story short, I will not be able to fulfill the terms of the lease. The tenants are pretty upset but they want to work it out with me.

They are asking me to pay rent for the month of January only, so that they can find another person to live there. I have no problems doing so, except that I would like to make sure that I have all my bases covered.

On the lease it says I agreed to pay rent "beginning January 2007". Obviously the date was wrong; it's supposed to be January 2008, but I did not notice it until I knew I was not going to be able to live there. Does the incorrect date negate the lease? Would this hold up in court?

Also, I paid a security deposit in the amount of half the rent. It would be nice if they could just apply that deposit to the January rent, and I would then only have to give them the other half, but they said that I lost the deposit when I broke the lease. If that is so, can they make me pay one month's rent as an additional penalty?

I tried searching on tenant's law for California, and I found a lot of good information, but nothing that really pinpointed the issues I'm trying to figure out. Should I pay the rent for January, I'll have them sign a contract that states the amount I pay releases me from the lease and I will not be held responsible for any rent owed past January, and that my credit will not be damaged from these actions.

What kind of half-assed, dumbshit lease is this? Was this even done with an actual residential lease agreement?

If not, then you have a case. A piece of paper that all three of you signed does not give you the same rights that a residential lease agreement does. If there is an error, (i.e. January 2007) it still holds. You all agreed to the same terms.

Unless it specifically says that you would lose your deposit if you broke the lease, they cannot do it. Everything has to be agreed upon before you move in. They cannot make stuff up as they go.

I am in California and have renters and everything is outlined in the original rent agreement. If it isn't covered, then you are asking for trouble.

No, it was not done with an actual residential lease agreement. It is a paper that the tenants typed up with approval of the landlord.

It does not say anything about what happens if the lease is broken. It doesn't mention a return of the deposit or a loss of it. It DOES say that I will be paying rent until Sep. 1st 2008. I have never seen the original lease agreement.

One of the girls sent me this email:

Who is a subtenant?

A subtenant is a person who has the right to use and occupy rental property leased by a tenant from a landlord. A subtenant has responsibilities to both the landlord and the tenant. A tenant can sublet rental property to a subtenant, but often must obtain the prior agreement of the landlord; the tenant still remains responsible for the payment of rent to the landlord and any damages to the property caused by the subtenant.

If you sublease your space, you'll want to have a written agreement with the new subtenant, spelling out the obligations of the subtenant.

If you sublease your space, you'll want to have a written agreement with the new subtenant, spelling out the obligations of the subtenant.

******-We had our landlords approval to sublease the room to you. You signed a contract clearly stating your financial oblligations to the tennants. If you do not choose to honor their request of at least a 30 day notice including payment of january rent, expect a demand for payment letter in the mail immediately. If payment has not been made within 7-10 business days, expect a promptly filed case within San Diego County Small Claims Court.

 

[oiprocs]

The contract I signed says this:

"The new tenant ****** will be moving in on Saturday, the 22nd of December 2007. Prior to the move in date, tenant agrees to pay a rent deposit in the amount of $250.00, and a prorated amount of $170.00 for the last ten days of the month of December (22-31st). Rent is due on the first of every month thereafter, however the acceptable late rent payment may be made between the first and third of the month. After the third of each month, all tenants may be subject to applicable late fees. Tenant **** agrees to pay rent in the amount of $525.00 beginning January 2007. Acceptable terms of payment include cash, check, or official money order. Tenant also agrees to split utilities evenly among the other roommates. Lastly, tenant agrees to pay rent and fulfill the occupancy of the room through the end of the lease, ending on September 1st, 2008."

 

[Delta6Echo]

Originally posted by: Oiprocs

Originally posted by: Delta6Echo

Originally posted by: Oiprocs
I entered an agreement with tenants in the house, under the authorization of the landlord, to live there until Sep. 1st 2008.

Long story short, I will not be able to fulfill the terms of the lease. The tenants are pretty upset but they want to work it out with me.

They are asking me to pay rent for the month of January only, so that they can find another person to live there. I have no problems doing so, except that I would like to make sure that I have all my bases covered.

On the lease it says I agreed to pay rent "beginning January 2007". Obviously the date was wrong; it's supposed to be January 2008, but I did not notice it until I knew I was not going to be able to live there. Does the incorrect date negate the lease? Would this hold up in court?

Also, I paid a security deposit in the amount of half the rent. It would be nice if they could just apply that deposit to the January rent, and I would then only have to give them the other half, but they said that I lost the deposit when I broke the lease. If that is so, can they make me pay one month's rent as an additional penalty?

I tried searching on tenant's law for California, and I found a lot of good information, but nothing that really pinpointed the issues I'm trying to figure out. Should I pay the rent for January, I'll have them sign a contract that states the amount I pay releases me from the lease and I will not be held responsible for any rent owed past January, and that my credit will not be damaged from these actions.

What kind of half-assed, dumbshit lease is this? Was this even done with an actual residential lease agreement?

If not, then you have a case. A piece of paper that all three of you signed does not give you the same rights that a residential lease agreement does. If there is an error, (i.e. January 2007) it still holds. You all agreed to the same terms.

Unless it specifically says that you would lose your deposit if you broke the lease, they cannot do it. Everything has to be agreed upon before you move in. They cannot make stuff up as they go.

I am in California and have renters and everything is outlined in the original rent agreement. If it isn't covered, then you are asking for trouble.

No, it was not done with an actual residential lease agreement. It is a paper that the tenants typed up with approval of the landlord.

It does not say anything about what happens if the lease is broken. It doesn't mention a return of the deposit or a loss of it. It DOES say that I will be paying rent until Sep. 1st 2008. I have never seen the original lease agreement.

One of the girls sent me this email:

Who is a subtenant?

A subtenant is a person who has the right to use and occupy rental property leased by a tenant from a landlord. A subtenant has responsibilities to both the landlord and the tenant. A tenant can sublet rental property to a subtenant, but often must obtain the prior agreement of the landlord; the tenant still remains responsible for the payment of rent to the landlord and any damages to the property caused by the subtenant.

If you sublease your space, you'll want to have a written agreement with the new subtenant, spelling out the obligations of the subtenant.

If you sublease your space, you'll want to have a written agreement with the new subtenant, spelling out the obligations of the subtenant.

******-We had our landlords approval to sublease the room to you. You signed a contract clearly stating your financial oblligations to the tennants. If you do not choose to honor their request of at least a 30 day notice including payment of january rent, expect a demand for payment letter in the mail immediately. If payment has not been made within 7-10 business days, expect a promptly filed case within San Diego County Small Claims Court.

You just said it was an actual residential lease agreement, then you say a letter was typed up. Which is it?

This is a confusing mess and your landlords are idiots. Do me a favor, scan in everything you signed and PM or e-mail them to me so I can take a look. It sounds to me like they are trying to cover up their own mistakes.

Let me see if I can help you.

Originally posted by: Oiprocs
The contract I signed says this:

"The new tenant ****** will be moving in on Saturday, the 22nd of December 2007. Prior to the move in date, tenant agrees to pay a rent deposit in the amount of $250.00, and a prorated amount of $170.00 for the last ten days of the month of December (22-31st). Rent is due on the first of every month thereafter, however the acceptable late rent payment may be made between the first and third of the month. After the third of each month, all tenants may be subject to applicable late fees. Tenant **** agrees to pay rent in the amount of $525.00 beginning January 2007. Acceptable terms of payment include cash, check, or official money order. Tenant also agrees to split utilities evenly among the other roommates. Lastly, tenant agrees to pay rent and fulfill the occupancy of the room through the end of the lease, ending on September 1st, 2008."

Once again, did YOU fill out a FULL residential lease agreement form when you moved in? (the one from the DRE)

....or did you just sign a word document and you never saw the lease? If that is the case, why the fvck didn't they show it to you? There are terms/etc in there that will address your deposit. Also, I don't see anything in there that says you agree to everything in the initial lease agreement (i.e. you didn't agree to the terms)

Can you get a copy of the ACTUAL lease, not the letter?

 

[oiprocs]

Sorry for my confusion. It IS a letter typed up, straight word document. Everything in the contract I signed is stated in my previous post, and quoted by you. That is the extent of it. One sheet, and at the bottom has the spaces for signatures.

I have NEVER seen the actual lease, nor did they show it to me at all. I never saw terms of the deposit, and you are correct in saying that the contract does not state that I agree to the terms of the original lease.

** I will send you a PM with a pic of the lease.

 

[Delta6Echo]

Originally posted by: Oiprocs
Sorry for my confusion. It IS a letter typed up, straight word document. Everything in the contract I signed is stated in my previous post, and quoted by you. That is the extent of it. One sheet, and at the bottom has the spaces for signatures.

I have NEVER seen the actual lease, nor did they show it to me at all. I never saw terms of the deposit, and you are correct in saying that the contract does not state that I agree to the terms of the original lease.

** I will send you a PM with a pic of the lease.

I understand. You only signed a piece of paper which doesn't address what occurs if you break the lease and whether you lose your whole deposit (or a portion of it). You also did not agree to the terms in the lease agreement so they cannot just take whatever they want.

As far as your credit, don't worry. That is an empty threat because they cannot do anything to your credit without hard proof. If they do, you can take them to court for violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act ($5000 fine PER infraction).

Are you already moved in or have you yet to do so?

 

[oiprocs]

I moved my stuff in on Sunday, left it in boxes and stuff, came back on Tuesday and took everything out. Didn't touch anything else.

 

[Injury]

For starters, whether you consider what you signed a lease or not, I don't think any small claims court is going to somehow believe you were tricked into agreeing to live in this place until September. It might just be best to cut your losses and let them have the deposit and January's rent rather than escalating it and having them find out whether you leave or not that you are required to pay the rent up until September. $775 versus $4725 is pretty much a no-brainer. Yeah, it sucks ass, but sometimes, that's how it is.

I'm sure it's been covered, but a minor mistake such as a mis-written date does not nullify an entire contract, as it's pretty easy to understand that it was a mistake.

Additionally, I don't think that these two individuals can really do anything to your credit. If your name isn't on the original lease or the lease isn't amended to add you in, then the landlord likely can't do anything, either.

Lastly, I think it's important to the situation to know WHY you are leaving. That may actually have some legal bearing on the situation as there are LEGAL reasons you can break a lease or rental agreement without penalty.


edit: Just read your previous post and after being there for 3 days, I REALLY wanna know why you moved on... as it may make me say "I would just tell them to STFU and leave. Let them do what they have to." What does CA law say about backing out of contracts?

 

[oiprocs]

The room does not have a lock on it.

Is that a legal reason?

Also, one of the roommates smokes cigarettes. Not sure what else. I told them I didn't smoke and I wanted a smoke free environment, and they said that would not be a problem.

 

[Injury]

Originally posted by: Oiprocs
The room does not have a lock on it.

Is that a legal reason?

Also, one of the roommates smokes cigarettes. Not sure what else. I told them I didn't smoke and I wanted a smoke free environment, and they said that would not be a problem.

I get the impression you didn't check the place out before moving in which was a bad move on your part. I'm mostly tempted to say "call their bluff" about taking you to court.


Is the landlord's name on this contract?

 

[oiprocs]

No it is not. I have never met the landlord.

 

[Injury]

Doing some reading... this may be of interest to you...

http://www.caltenantlaw.com/Habitability.htm