rent increases

[DizneKat]

On Nov 2, 1999 I rcvd notification of a rent increase to take effect Dec 1, 1999 or in 30 days, whichever is later. As the notice was rcvd 11/2/99 I felt that the rent increase did not take effect until 12/2/99 (30 days. As rent is stated to be due on or before the first of every month, I started paying the increased rent as of January 1, 2000. Today I rcvd a letter from my rental company stating that as the letter reads the rent increase would be due effective 12/2 and therefore despite the rent being due before that, I would still owe them the pro-rated increase (the increase minus the 2 days). As I have a month to month rental, not a day by day, who do you feel is correct legally? Thank you in advance for your assistance.

ps: I had this same problem approx 8 months ago when they did the last increase but when I sent my explanation as to why I started paying the increased rate, they did not question it. Thanks again!

 

[msattorney]

A month to month tenancy goes from the first of the month to the first of the month unless otherwise stated. I will bet that the notice was delayed in being sent, and they are now hoping that some tenants will pay without question. Iwoud send them in writing the fact that you did not receive notice until the 2nd and since rent is due the first, it did not take effect until the next month. I would be surprised if they press the issue any further.