Tenant may have abandoned my rental!

[LdiJ]

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.

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.

 

[not2cleverRed]

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.

Well, it's not exactly fair that the tenant has either left or taken a prolonged vacation and has not responded to attempts by OP to contact him. OP wouldn't be here if their tenant had answered the phone or texted something to the effect of, "I've moved out as of zzz. I've left the keys xxx. I can be contacted at yyy."

So, what is "fair" here is for OP to go through the steps outlined in Georgia code. If the tenant hasn't given a new address and is not using USPS forwarding, that's on the tenant, not OP. If OP goes through the legal steps properly and gets a default judgement, that is TOTALLY fair. Because of the tenant's actions, OP is not getting rent on that unit, and has delayed cleaning up the place and finding a replacement tenant.

 

[LdiJ]

Well, it's not exactly fair that the tenant has either left or taken a prolonged vacation and has not responded to attempts by OP to contact him. OP wouldn't be here if their tenant had answered the phone or texted something to the effect of, "I've moved out as of zzz. I've left the keys xxx. I can be contacted at yyy."

So, what is "fair" here is for OP to go through the steps outlined in Georgia code. If the tenant hasn't given a new address and is not using USPS forwarding, that's on the tenant, not OP. If OP goes through the legal steps properly and gets a default judgement, that is TOTALLY fair. Because of the tenant's actions, OP is not getting rent on that unit, and has delayed cleaning up the place and finding a replacement tenant.

I don't disagree with any of that. If the OP is out of pocket for anything that the OP should not be out of pocket for, then there should be consequences to the tenant. I am just not sure that the consequences should be an eviction on his record. He still hasn't told us if he went in, or what he found when he did.

 

[quincy]

I don't disagree with any of that. If the OP is out of pocket for anything that the OP should not be out of pocket for, then there should be consequences to the tenant. I am just not sure that the consequences should be an eviction on his record. He still hasn't told us if he went in, or what he found when he did.

An eviction is the legal option available to the landlord so that he can enter the rental and clear out whatever property has been left behind (if any) and clean the rental and change the locks and re-rent the property. IF the landlord tries to do any of this without following the proper legal procedure first and the tenant returns, the landlord opens himself up to a lawsuit.

The attorneys advised Russ07 on what to do. We should not be second-guessing what those attorneys advised, even if you (a random person on the internet) thinks it could be unfair to the tenant (a tenant who, by the way, breached his lease and left without paying owed rent).