30 Day Extension Granted - Tenants take advantage and do not vacate for 6 MONTHS

[PixelRogue]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? PA

Hello everyone,

Wanted to double check to see if anyone would see the following situation a bit muddy, or how a judge might perceive the differentiation.

Situation - Part A
• Tenant leases auto-renew for year unless either party provides 60-day notice.
• Long term tenants ask for a one-month extension. Tenant will be moving, but needs a month after lease period.
• Request is granted, along with a clear explanation the lease is not moving to month-to-month.

Situation - Part B
• Do not hear from the tenant. 30 day window nearly up, no updates.
• Tenant resides in apartment. Rent is being paid, however tenant will not vacate as they instructed.
• Tenant eventually moves in December, leaving me w/an empty unit all winter (hard rental market).
• Was unable to market the apartment until knowing when the tenant would leave -marketed ASAP once tenant communicated with another "final" notice. Made offers to paint the apartment during the transition (help the tenants out by getting the apartment rented faster) all offers ignored.

Differentiation
• Tenant claims they asked for, and were granted, month-to-month lease (not a single 30 day extension).
• Tenant claims there were no efforts to re-rent the apartment (tenant ignored, denied, fought showings, updates etc).
• I have documentation trail showing the communication and clear expectations that there was no month-to-month.
• Lot of emails transpired towards the end making it hard to make out what's what, though I have summary of key messages.

Current State
• Registered letter to tenant in December was never claimed.
• Now the lease expired, a second registered letter to tenant was never claimed.
• Broken lease filed in district court.

Tenants purchased a house, with intentions of moving into house in July. Tenants were unable to move into house (due to U&O, repairs etc) until December. I empathize w/the situation of the tenants, and was very very very clear the apartment could not go vacant in the winter months. They took major advantage of the situation (common pattern observed in other situations and their interactions w/others) ~ how might a judge rule?

Judge Perspectives:
• Will judge determine suitable circumstance to infer month-to-month lease was in effect based on pattern, regardless of communication otherwise. (Note: Judge has reputation (and personally witnessed) as pro-tenant anti-owner in demeanor).
• What steps could I take to ensure judge's clear understanding of the situation.
• What steps could I take to ensure a better outcome?​

Thank you everyone.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

Unless your lease had an automatic renewal clause, you could have stood on a mountain proclaiming how you wanted to interpret they time the rented beyond its expiration, by law it defaulted to a month to month lease. If you did not want month to month, you should have evicted them at that point.

 

[PixelRogue]

Lease Clause

Auto-renewal is clearly included in the lease, along with how it works. Not hidden nor in small print.

My perspective at the time was they had 30 day extension. If they stay over the 30 days, the lease is renewed. I did proactively seek out a response - then firmly stated in a formal letter the 'second' month that they have not been responsive and and they remained in the apartment, the lease remains in full force..

 

[Zigner]

Nope - you agreed to a 1-month extension. They are month-to-month renters at that point.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

Without seeing the terms of your auto renewal clause, we cannot determine for sure whether you allowing the extension caused it to void or was permissible, by the terms of the lease. Generally speaking, I go with Zigner, that you likely voided it and are on a month to month.

 

[tranquility]

I agree with Zigner. By waiving the portion of the lease having to do with automatic renewal (by allowing it extended 30 days), I'd say the tenancy is now month to month.

 

[justalayman]

My perspective at the time was they had 30 day extension. If they stay over the 30 days, the lease is renewed

Lease terminated at its expiration date and you allowed a 30 day extension of the tenancy based on that lease. Once they stayed beyond that 30 day extension, there was an unlawful detainer. Your actions at that time were to file notice of eviction based on the termination of the lease and the extension. Once you allowed a continuance of tenancy, it became a month to month tenancy as there was no agreement to engage in a lease, by either side actually.

You can't argue the lease renewed yet you attempted to rent the place out in the middle of their lease period. You could actually be faced with actions intended to harass the tenant if you want to stand by that claim.


So, which is it;

they were month to month and you were attempting to lease the unit or

the lease renewed and you were harassing the tenants by attempting to show and engage into a lease with another party while the current tenants were in the middle of their lease?