LdiJ
Senior Member
Again, we don't know that the keys were not left inside. The OP has never said anything about the condition of the home or any other details that would indicate that he had been inside. He gave the tenant sixty days notice of a rent increase. It is quite possible that the tenant interpreted that as either agree to the increase or move out, and chose to move out. Was the tenant technically wrong to handle it that way? Absolutely. Would that be the normal advice given by an attorney? Absolutely. Do I believe that it is the fair thing to do IF (and only if) there was a security deposit available to cover the last months rent, the unit was left in good condition and the keys were inside? No, I do not think it would be the fair thing to do. I particularly don't think it would be the fair thing to do if the OP cannot actually serve the tenant with the lawsuit. Technically he can serve the tenant because the unit is the tenant's last known address, but if he does not have a forwarding or emergency address he cannot actually serve the tenant. So the tenant won't be able to settle or defend himself and won't know about the lawsuit until it shows up on his record and he can't get a place to live.Russ07 said he spoke to two attorneys who advised him to file for dispossession. I think it is best for Russ07 to listen to these attorneys rather than people on an Internet forum.
When rental property is vacated by a tenant, keys to the rental are returned to the landlord/prooerty owner. Russ07’s tenant not only failed to give notice that he was terminating the lease and failed to pay rent for the month, he also failed to return keys, meaning he can enter the rental at any time. And, because technically according to the terms of the lease, it automatically became month-to-month when the tenant failed to give a 30-day notice, the tenant still has a lease. He now needs to be evicted for non-payment.