Surrendering lease due to loss of job

[rmalayappan]

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


Hello...i have a question specific to how New Jersey law treats lease breakage and surrender due to a loss of a job. After extensive research on the Internet ( I am not a lawyer), i find that there is no provision that allows a tenant to break a lease and surrender it due to losing a job and moving to a different State.

Here is the issue...my nephew lost his job in November during the severe economic downturn but was lucky enough to find a new one in Arizona. He surrendered his lease, handed over the keys to his Landlord ( a management company of several residential complexes), and moved with his family to Arizona for his new job. The Landlord (the management company) told him that he needed to continue to pay his rent until they found someone to replace him or until the lease ran out which will be in June/09. My nephew has made two $1600 payments so far to this NJ landlord, in addition to the rent that he is paying in Arizona. Finally, in exhaustion, he asked me to try and help him.

I contacted the management company and wanted to get some specifics. First they wanted me to get a POA authorization from my nephew and fax it to them which i did. Next, they told me that due to the severe economic downturn they have not been able to find any tenant....nobody is willing to rent. I have not yet gone into specifics such as whether they were able to rent any unit after the October economic downturn. However, they did say that they were not actively advertising...and stated that there are signs on the road next to the complexes, trees etc.

I looked up NJ law, noticed the case of Sommer v. Kridel, 74 N.J. Super. 446. and found that landlords in NJ are required to mitigate damages when a tenant is forced to vacate due to situations such as losing a job etc. They have to show reasonable efforts that they have been making to mitigate damages. However, i am not sure what constitutes reasonable effort and whether the lack of specific advertising relating to the now vacated apartment counts or not. Also, if they have rented any unit after my nephew vacated the apartment, does that mean that he can now stop paying rent?

Please advise..

 

[Gail in Georgia]

Signs on the road, etc. would certainly be considered advertising in an attempt to rent this unit. This would imply that the landlord are making a reasonable effort to mitigate the damages. Advertising does not have to mean ads in the local papers.

They are also correct that both the winter and the change in economic are making it harder in many parts of the country to find tenants.

If the unit is rented prior to your nephews lease running out he would no longer owe any rent on this unit.

Gail

 

[Hot Topic]

If someone should look at the apartment your nephew rented and another apartment and decide to rent the latter for whatever reason, your nephew is still on the hook for rent. The person cannot be forced to take your nephew's apartment so that he no longer has to pay rent.

The landlord has to try to find another tenant; however, he doesn't have to accept the first one who shows interest. If you believe he should be advertising in a different venue or increase the number of advertisements, you can always offer to pay those charges.

 

[rmalayappan]

Multiple units

Hot Topic - you raise an interesting question and i had been trying to research that. I found one opinion from an author saying that when a landord of a multiple unit complex could be considered a "volume seller" and that in a scenario such as the one that you presented, the very fact that another unit rented would be considered mitigation by itself and my nephew would be off the hook. Does that make sense?

Unfortunately the management company is being quite unreasonable in my opinion. For instance, i asked whether they could advertise the apartment (or we could advertise it), with plenty of ways to sweeten the offer. Since the lease runs out in June and this complex only rents yearly leases, a six month lease could be an attactive one to potential tenants. In addition, we proposed that we offer to pay part of the new tenants rent, and reduce the rent to much below market price such as $1000, and make this apartment more attractive than the other apartments in the complex. They refused that also. Finally, they are standing by the "No Sublease" clause of the contract and refuse to let a sublease.

In the meantime, they are offering a six week free rent to those renting for a year and are saying that even if someone rents for a year, my nephew is still responsible for six weeks worth of rent since this is still part of the original contract. I get the feeling that somewhere these guys are overreaching themselves and tripping over the law in their eagerness to hold on to what they have got in this tough economy where i suspect no one is going to come and rent for even another six months.

I wonder why the government is not looking at this angle to help out. Too many perfectly employable people are losing jobs, and those lucky enough to get a new one are getting doubly punished. The only way to get a new job is to be completely flexible and be willing to move anywhere. My nephew did that and now wishes that he had just gone on unemployment benefits.

 

[vb11]

Hi I read your post and have a cousin in a similar situation. He lost my job and has almost finalized another job overseas. However his apt mgmt company is saying the same thing -- that he needs to keep paying rent till my apt is rented. It is very difficult and does not seem reasonable considering he'll have to pay rents for 2 apts -- which god only knows how he'll pay. His apt is part of a multi-apt complex.

Did your nephew find a workable solution?

 

[Alaska landlord]

The rational you are missing is that we landlords don't care what your circumstances for wanting to break the lease are. We are running a business to make a profit. When a tenant signs a lease, the understanding is that you are financially stable enough to be able to honor the contract. No matter what happens to your employment. That's why people put money away in savings account for. That the employment of the tenant has dissolved into oblivion is of little importance to the landlord. The tenant is required to meet his or her obligation.

Regardless, your incentives can be difficult to accept since you might decide to quit making payments and stick the landlord with tenants unwilling to make the full payment once your checks stop coming.

Now if you were to pay off in full a certain percentage of the rent up front, the landlord might show some interest.

 

[rmalayappan]

Updates

Alaska Landlord - You make a good point...and show that reasonable landlords like yourself are at least open to discussion. We are also trying to make it work since we are trying to avoid ruining the credit history. You mentioned counter suggestions such as paying off a percentage in full. However, this mgt company does not want to consider anything at all. They keep saying that a one year lease from the time a new tenant is found is required, even if the current lease ends in June. I don't see why my nephew should agree to pay a portion of the rent until December.

These are extraordinary times. A two way conversation is needed. Rules change a little bit, that is why our government is using our tax payer dollars to bail out wall street "experts" who made bad bets. I would imagine any landlord would like to get their money back if there is a reasonable way to do it using a mix of approaches. Otherwise forcing someone like my nephew to stop paying rent does not help anyone. The landlord does not get the money and my nephews credit gets ruined...nobody wins.

 

[ecmst12]

6 weeks free rent is a pretty attractive incentive. Sounds like that makes their efforts reasonable. Nephew could also put ads up (with LL's information) on craigs list and pay for local paper ads himself.

 

[Hot Topic]

You can't force the landlord to do something he doesn't want to do. Perhaps he's concerned that if he lets your nephew out of the lease, then other tenants will think that they can get out of it too by doing X, Y or Z. Maybe if they can't do X, Y or Z, the landlord will agree to doing A. He might find himself on a merry-go-round of people moving in and moving out, sometimes leaving the apartment in great shape, other times requiring considerable work before it can be rented out again. A place like that can acquire a reputation, and it's not a good one.