Dispute with landlord, he's threatening to sue

I'm writing about a situation i have with my landlord in new york city in manhattan. Basically I was in an apartment last year, and my lease was up september of 2002. I did not renew the lease because one of my roommates bailed at the last minute and the place was not affordable anymore. It took me till the end of september to find a new place, so i stayed one month past the lease. On september 30th, after moving to my new place, I called the realty office and informed them of the situation and told them that they could keep my 1 month security deposit towards the rent for that extra month that i stayed over, past my lease. They told me to turn in the keys along with a letter signed by my roommate and I, stating that as of october 1st, 2002, we are surrending possesion of the apartment along with 2 sets of keys. About a few months ago, i guess june of 2003 i start getting collection calls from a credit agency claiming that we did not check out properly and that the realty company is seeking the rent for the month of october as well. Its come now to the point were they are threatening to sue, any ideas/suggestions as to what i should do? Are they just trying to scare me? I mean would they take me to court over $1800? Also, if it does go to court its basically my word against their's right? I'm a college student so this is the last thing i need, any help/advice would be greatly appreciated.

THanks

Ahhhh the stuff they DON'T teach you in college.

In NYC if you had just moved out when your lease is up they could not come after you for the months rent, but you stayed, and therefore had to give a 30 day notice in writing to the managment company.

The only way out of this is to see if the person who moved in the apartment after you is still there and if they have a copy of their lease, and if they paid rent for oct 2002, then the landlord cannot collect double rent from you and the present tenant. And you should be able to end the collection agency calls and not go to court.

But if they did not rent it till Nov 1st, then you are liable for oct 2002 rent, since you cannot use your security deposit anywhere in America for the last months rent...REMEMBER THAT.it is strickly a LANDLORD'S decision to let you use the security for the last months rent......NOT YOURS!

Also what is going against you is that you didnt let the landlord SHOW the apartment while you were living there, so that a new tenant could have easily signed a new lease for Oct 1st. and you would owe ZERO.

Sorry but i thnk you will have to pay this bill...i live in NYC too.

RE: Landlord dispute

thanks macktosh, i guess i should try to find out when exactly that apartment was rented after i left, however, if i didn't sign a lease to renew can they still legally charge me for october? I mean i know that if you leave while your lease is still active they can charge me till they find someone else to replace me, but can they still do that considering i didn't renew the lease? It looks to me like its more along the lines of my word against their's?

What happened to your security deposit? If it was the same amount as the rent and you followed their instructions to return the keys and relinquish the apartment, they established their agreement to accept your relinquishment of the unit.

If they didn't do a move-out inspection with you pursuant to legal requirements, then they should have refunded your deposit.

It would be great if Home Guru or JETX would jump in here and give you some 'expert' advice.

Re:

Hi Charlee,


When I called them and informed them that i would not be extending the lease and that i would be surrendering the premisies as of the first of october, and that they could keep the deposit towards the month's rent that i stayed over, they instructed me to return the keys to the office along with a simple letter signed by both my roommate and i that states that we are surrending the premisies as of october 1st, 2002, along with 2 sets of keys. I never got a deposit back because as far as i knew we had come to an understanding that i was indeed surrending the apartment, as stated in my letter, which they still have in their records. They never informed me of any specific check out procedures.

Did you keep a copy of the letter you sent them when you sent the keys?

Re:

Yes I do have a copy of the letter, and they have a copy on file as well which was achknowledged by the credit collection agency guy who started calling me earlier this summer to try to collect on the payment.

What position is the collection agency taking with respect to the letter? Are they aware that the LL asked you to put in writing that you were moving out?

Did the LL do a move-out inspection with you? Are they claiming you owe anything for damages?

Re

Hey,

The collection agency initially achknowledged the existence of the letter but brushed it off very quickly saying that i did not check out properly and surrender the premises properly. I think they are fully aware that the landlord told me to put that letter in writing, but they kept asking if i had a receipt for handing over the keys, which i never got from the realty office. The realty office never informed me of having to do a move out inspection when i called to tell them that i am leaving, and therefore did not conduct a move out inspection with me. They are not claiming any damages, just the rent for the month of october.

just wondering...

If they're not claiming any damages, what happened to your deposit. You didn't get it back, you didn't get an accounting of how it was used, it would seem that since they're not claiming damages, the deposit would be used to pay the rent for the month they're claiming. Ask the collection agency guy what they did with your deposit the next time he calls.

Re

Hi,

my lease was up end of august, 2002, i left the apartment end of september, 2002, and when i spoke to them and told them to use the deposit towards rent for september they agreed and told me to turn in the keys to the realty office along with a letter stating that as of october 1st, 2002, i am surrendering posession of the apartment along with the set of keys. They still have this letter on record and the credit guy achknowleged the existence of this letter as well. I never received any bill of any sort claiming and charges for damages to the apartment, nor did the credit collector mention any. The amount that they are seeking is that equivalent to one month's rent.

YOU posted >>>> When I called them and informed them that i would not be extending the lease and that i would be surrendering the premisies as of the first of october, <<<<< You understand that doesnt make it a 30 day notice that yor going to move out dont you ?? If you had sent your WRITTEN 30day notice out to them so they would have had it before sept 1 you would be able to prove you had no further obligation to your MONTH to MONTH rental wich is what it became the day after your lease expired . If you fail to give proper written notice that you were going to move yes you are on the hook for more rent just as you were told in the first answer . unless you can prove otherwise . ASK your folks for the money to pay off this error of yours .

Re

In response to what farmer wrote, is that still valid considering that i did not renew the lease and was not bound by the terms of the lease after it's expiration?

Actually Both answers are right.....You are liable for the month of October by not getting a release from all claims from the landlord, AND they cannot collect rent from you and a new tenant.

So that is what you need to prove, that the apartment was or was not empty til nov 1st.

That will determine if you owe the money or not.

Re

In response to what Macktosh said, isn't them telling me to give them a letter which states that i am surrendering the premises proof of that? I mean i remember the credit collection guy kept asking if i had proof of moving to a new place, so it seems like they are trying to prove that i still had posession till the end of october. The new place i moved to did not have my name on the lease, so i can't provide that as evidence.