Tenant Breaks Lease - 21 Days Deposit Return Starts When?

[not2cleverRed]

You are wrong.

YOU ARE WRONG.

IN COURT, A JUDGE WOULD AVER THAT IT IS REASONABLE FOR YOUR TENANT TO ASSUME THAT A 3 DAY NOTICE IS A 3 DAY NOTICE.

It is perfectly reasonable for a tenant to suspect, upon receiving a 3 day notice, that the next step(s), should they choose not to pay is eviction.

THE TENANT HAS NOT REASON TO BELIEVE, AFTER A 3 DAY NOTICE, THAT IF THEY STAY WITHOUT PAYING, YOU WILL NOT ESCALATE YOUR EFFORTS TO GET THEM TO PAY UP.

The tenant is asking to move early and breaking the lease. In exchange, I will not evict them and save their credit and rental history. The lease will terminate, when the new tenant moves in, I think

YOU ARE WRONG. YOU ARE WRONG. YOU ARE WRONG.

YOU ARE SAVING NO ONE ANYTHING.

The tenant is obligated to pay the rent until a new tenant moves in or the end of the lease term whichever comes, first. Tenant has breached the lease, not me. The 3 day pay or quit does not release the tenant's obligations to pay the rent for the remainder of the lease term. At the end of the lease, I can go back and sue tenant for any back rent.

YOU ARE WRONG.

THE 3 DAY NOTICE EFFECTIVELY CANCELS THE LEASE IF THE TENANT DOES NOT IMMEDIATELY PAY UP.

IF THE TENANT PAID THE BACK RENT, AND THEN GAVE YOU ONE WEEK NOTICE THAT THEY WERE MOVING, YOU WOULD HAVE A POINT.

THE TENANT HAS NOT PAID THE BACK RENT.

THE TENANT HAS TAKEN YOU AT YOUR WORD THAT YOU ARE GOING TO EVICT THEM IF THEY DON'T PAY UP AND QUIT.

Given that I have never met you, or at least never had to deal with you as a landlord, and your posts make me want to SCREAM, I can only conclude that you have a similar effect on others.

Expect to find a completely trashed apt when the tenant moves out.

Expect that if you do not send out that letter with everything itemized in it, etc., in 21 days that on day 22 your now ex-tenant will take steps to sue you.

Expect to find yourself hearing the same things you have heard REPEATEDLY here in court.

Expect to be found in contempt when you interrupt the judge repeatedly with your misguided reasoning.

Because you KNOW you're wrong, or you wouldn't be here. But you can't accept that you are indeed wrong.

 

[Morgan05]

if you do not follow up on the 3 day pay or quit it is meaningless. The notice allows you to file an unlawful detainer but since you do not intend on doing so, your 3 day pay or quit means nothing, unless they leave due to the demand.

The tenant said they want to move. So, eviction is not necessary. If they do not move, I will file to evict them.

Then the lease terminates on the day they vacate and that is when the 21 day count starts for you to send an accounting of the deposit along with a refund of any money not claimed in the accounting.

My post was deleted for some reason (could be my fault for posting a legal website link?) However at the moment, in post #27 you can read what another attorney had posted regarding CA law and similar situation. He is confirming what I have been saying, if I am understanding him correctly.

 

[Gail in Georgia]

Look; we get that you don't want to return any of their security deposit.

We also get that you've been a lax landlord by allowing your tenants to reside in your rental unit for two months without paying rent and not doing a thing about this until now.

Just how much security deposit do you have on these folks?

As the attached states, a landlord in your state is allowed to take this amount for the security deposit:

Refunds of Security Deposits.

The law limits the total amount that the landlord can require you to pay as a security deposit. The total amount allowed as security depends on whether the rental unit is unfurnished or furnished and whether you have a waterbed.

Unfurnished rental unit: The total amount that the landlord requires as security cannot be more than the amount of two months' rent. If you have a waterbed, the total amount allowed as security can be up to two and-a-half times the monthly rent.
Furnished rental unit: The total amount that the landlord requires as security cannot be more than the amount of three months' rent. If you have a waterbed, the total amount allowed as security can be up to three-and-a-half times the monthly rent.


Is this an unfurnished rental unit without a waterbed? If so, you had better taken just the equivalent of two months worth of rent as the security deposit. Which your tenants now owe as back rent. Thus, they get nothing back when you notify them within the required 21 day period after they vacate the rental unit (and may owe more IF they leave damages beyond normal wear and tear).

If a furnished unit and they've had to come up with 3 months worth of rent (or 3 1/2 months worth) for a security deposit find damages above normal wear and tear, carefully document these as required by your state to justify keeping these funds out of their security deposit.

If you've taken more than you legally should have for a security deposit, heaven help you in tenant friendly California. Let your tenants go and hope they don't sue the socks off of you for doing so.

Gail

 

[Morgan05]

Look; we get that you don't want to return any of their security deposit.

I want to return the security deposit, within the time the law allows me. It’s a matter of when. I do not know what the unpaid rent will be until I get the new paying tenant in.

I want to deduct unpaid rent from the security deposit.

I do not want to have to sue for the unpaid rent after tenant is gone and hope that they pay on their judgment.

Just how much security deposit do you have on these folks?

One and-a-half times the monthly rent. Tenant is being subsidized. Their rent portion is smaller.

 

[justalayman]

Subsidized by whom? That could bring about a whole new set of problems


And again: you have 21 days to send a detailed accounting of any deductions from the deposit existing at that time and you are required to refund the remisnder. Without cause to retain the money or not refunding money due at that time can result in you being sued and if requested and the judge agrees your withholding was in bad faith, you can be ordered to pay triple damages of the amount that you should of refunded to the tenant.

 

[Morgan05]

Subsidized by whom? That could bring about a whole new set of problems

Standard association of realtor lease between tenant and I, only. Not Section 8.

 

[Zigner]

Standard association of realtor lease between tenant and I, only. Not Section 8.

Then who is the tenant subsidized by?

 

[Morgan05]

Then who is the tenant subsidized by?

I don't want to say at least until the lease terminates, for privacy reasons. But, it has no effect on the question of when the 21 days clock starts, when a tenant breaches the lease with early termination.

I will post a question on CA Civil Code 1950.5(g)(1), later. The wording doesn't stop at tenant vacating. The answer is in the interpretation of that code.

 

[not2cleverRed]

Then who is the tenant subsidized by?

Moreover, is OP saying that the tenant, who is being subsidized, paid a security deposit based on the un-subsidized rental rate?

Isn't the intent of the law to have the security deposit based on the rent the tenant is actually paying, not some hypothetical rate?

 

[justalayman]

I know, the "or 60 days prior..."


The lease will not remain intact until that time so it is not applicable. That clause is referring to a situation where the lease terms are intended on being fulfilled.

 

[Zigner]

Moreover, is OP saying that the tenant, who is being subsidized, paid a security deposit based on the un-subsidized rental rate?

Isn't the intent of the law to have the security deposit based on the rent the tenant is actually paying, not some hypothetical rate?

I think the fact that the tenant is "subsidized" really has no bearing on this matter and that the OP only threw it out there in order to further disparage his tenant. I mean, heck, I subsidized my daughter's rent for a time...wouldn't change things in this type of situation.

 

[Morgan05]

I think the fact that the tenant is "subsidized" really has no bearing on this matter and that the OP only threw it out there in order to further disparage his tenant.

I only mentioned subsidy because other posters were asking if I was overcharging for the security deposit and that there was no more money left in the security deposit, not to disparage.

I know, the "or 60 days prior..."

The lease will not remain intact until that time so it is not applicable. That clause is referring to a situation where the lease terms are intended on being fulfilled.

Yes, that part.

I think there is a difference between termination of tenancy and termination of lease (?).

Other attorneys have posted that the lease would stay intact, even if the tenant moves out early.

A tenant moving out might terminate the tenancy, but not the lease (?). They are still obligated to pay rent until termination of lease, new tenant or end of the term of the lease.

 

[justalayman]

I only mentioned subsidy because other posters were asking if I was overcharging for the security deposit and that there was no more money left in the security deposit, not to disparage.



Yes, that part.

I think there is a difference between termination of tenancy and termination of lease (?).

Other attorneys have posted that the lease would stay intact, even if the tenant moves out early.

A tenant moving out might terminate the tenancy, but not the lease (?). They are still obligated to pay rent until termination of lease, new tenant or end of the term of the lease.

so you are saying a month, two months, three months (if there is that much time remaining on the lease) after the tenants leave they can simply come back and expect they can move right back into the apartment?

The lease terminates. They would owe damages (the remainder the lease) but the lease does terminate upon vacating the premises.

 

[Zigner]

I already tried pointing that out, just...

https://forum.freeadvice.com/landlord-tenant-issues-42/tenant-breaks-lease-21-days-deposit-return-starts-when-618233.html#post3363372

 

[Silverplum]

*smh*

Savagely hard-headed poster. Very nice of y'all to try.