Apartment holding me responsible for new tenant?

[Mark217]

What is the name of your state? California

So 2 months ago I transferred my apartment to another person. We went to the leasing office together and signed the paper, I thought I was no longer responsible as now I'm not on the lease anymore.
Today the manager called me and told me that apparently the new tenant didn't sign the lease agreement, which included all the terms condition and all the details. So I went the the leasing office to get a better understanding of the situation. He said they have tried calling, emailing and evening knocking on his door everyday to sign the paper, but they weren't able to get ahold of him. It seems like he is refusing to sign that lease agreement. He said the new tenant paid July rent very late. The apartment even sued him, but he paid the rent and fees eventually. What I was told is that since he didn't sign the lease agreement, I was still responsible for the apartment. He said that he is on my side and will try to work with their legal team so I'm not responsible for the apartment.
However, I think it's not fair that I'm hold responsible. Me and the new tenant already signed a paper that states that I'm not longer responsible for the apartment and that he is now responsible. The manager said that the transfer isn't complete until he signs the lease. That doesn't make sense because we already transferred the lease by signing the form. The apartment trying to get ahold of the new tenant should be an issue between the new tenant and the apartment.
I even asked my friend and they all say that I shouldn't be responsible for the new tenant since we already signed the paper. This make me feel more assured. My friend, who rent room to people told me to not worry about it since I'm not responsible. My friend also told me that the apartment may be taking advantage of me since I am scared and they're tring to get ahold of this guy. My friend told me to get a copy of the vacate/add on form that me and the new tenant signed and stop worrying about it. Now that I have analyze the situation, I feel I should not be responsible since I already signed the paper to vacate. Is my friend right and that I should not worry about it? Our lease ends August 12, and we didn't renew it, so if worst comes to worst would be just be responsible for the 12 days?

 

[LdiJ]

What paper did you sign and do you have a copy of said paper?

 

[Mark217]

The paper is a tenant release and add form. Basically I signed as the person vacating and he signed as the person adding on. It's the form that is used when transferring lease. I don't have a copy, but the apartment does. I'm going to go to the apartment tomorrow to get a copy.

 

[LdiJ]

The paper is a tenant release and add form. Basically I signed as the person vacating and he signed as the person adding on. It's the form that is used when transferring lease. I don't have a copy, but the apartment does. I'm going to go to the apartment tomorrow to get a copy.

Good luck with that. If they released you and they now want to hold you responsible they are not going to give you a copy of that form.

 

[STEPHAN]

They exact working matters.

 

[xylene]

The form is not important compared to the reality that they accepted your ending the tenancy and the new tenant as exclusive leadeholder. There isnt any dispute about that. If there was any paperwork it was on the landlord to get it.

You are right, at most they can hold you to is the prorated portion of august. They may try to get more. Answer all mail or calls promptly and be prepared. Don't ignore them or court. Don't agree to be responsible for anything g else.

What happened to your deposit? Did new guy pay deposit?

 

[adjusterjack]

We went to the leasing office together and signed the paper

Who is "we"? You and the other tenant or you, the other tenant, and the manager? If the manager didn't sign anything relieving you of your obligations, then you aren't off the lease.

What I was told is that since he didn't sign the lease agreement, I was still responsible for the apartment.

If you weren't expressly relieved of your obligations by management, then he's right.

He said that he is on my side and will try to work with their legal team so I'm not responsible for the apartment.

And I've got a bridge in Brooklyn that I can sell you real cheap.

I think it's not fair that I'm hold responsible

Fair is where you go on rides and eat cotton candy. Has nothing to do with contract law.

Me and the new tenant already signed a paper that states that I'm not longer responsible for the apartment and that he is now responsible.

All that does is give you a right of indemnification from the new tenant if you end up having to pay anything.

The manager said that the transfer isn't complete until he signs the lease. That doesn't make sense because we already transferred the lease by signing the form.

It makes sense if only you and the other tenant signed the form.

I even asked my friend and they all say that I shouldn't be responsible for the new tenant since we already signed the paper. This make me feel more assured. My friend, who rent room to people told me to not worry about it since I'm not responsible.

Your friend may be clueless, as are many who rent out rooms to others.

Our lease ends August 12, and we didn't renew it, so if worst comes to worst would be just be responsible for the 12 days?

Maybe. Depends on whether your replacement tenant moves out by August 12. Also depends on the condition of the apartment and whatever money the management has to spend on resolving the situation.

The paper is a tenant release and add form. Basically I signed as the person vacating and he signed as the person adding on. It's the form that is used when transferring lease.

That seems to confirm that the agreement is only between you and the new tenant and doesn't relieve you of your obligations to the landlord.

I don't have a copy

Life lesson from the school of hard knocks. Never sign anything without having a copy in hand. Or take a picture of it with your cell phone.

 

[Whoops2u]

Leases allow for assignment with (not unreasonably denied) consent of the landlord, but, the assignor (you) are still responsible.

Kendall v. Ernest Pestana, Inc., 709 P. 2d 837 - Cal: Supreme Court 1985 (at 500):
A comment to the section explains: "The landlord may have an understandable concern about certain personal qualities 500*500 of a tenant, particularly his reputation for meeting his financial obligations. The preservation of the values that go into the personal selection of the tenant justifies upholding a provision in the lease that curtails the right of the tenant to put anyone else in his place by transferring his interest, but this justification does not go to the point of allowing the landlord arbitrarily and without reason to refuse to allow the tenant to transfer an interest in leased property." (Id., com. a.) Under the Restatement rule, the lessor's interest in the character of his or her tenant is protected by the lessor's right to object to a proposed assignee on reasonable commercial grounds. (See id., reporter's note 7 at pp. 112-113.) The lessor's interests are also protected by the fact that the original lessee remains liable to the lessor as a surety even if the lessor consents to the assignment and the assignee expressly assumes the obligations of the lease. (Peiser v. Mettler (1958) 50 Cal.2d 594, 602 [328 P.2d 953, 74 A.L.R.2d 1]; Samuels v. Ottinger (1915) 169 Cal. 209, 212 [146 P. 638].)