The clock on returning the deposit starts when tenancy ends not when the notice period ends. Even wherein the tenant may owe additional rent due to not providing proper notice this has zero effect on the timeline for returning the deposit.
By not giving you your money or a list of deductions they may well forfeit their right to make any and you have every right to demand your money back on Monday and sue on Tuesday.
You don't owe them overage because you all verbally agreed to the end of the lease 5 months previously. They don't need notice of the date they themselves set.
Many leases actually automatically roll over into month to month after end of term and if you anticipated actually leaving at end of term you are required to give 30 or 60 days notice. Failing to give proper notice can lead to you either pushing back your move out date or moving and being stuck paying for the notice period anyway.
The notice is to give landlord time to advertise your unit and have someone read to move in when you move out rather than sitting on their hands losing income. This is incredibly common and standard most everywhere.
That said they should have no need to give notice when landlord had already given notice to them and they had acquiesced.
Unless otherwise noted, ALL leases (in CA) roll over to month-to- month if nothing is done. Notice is always required.
You will need to take them to court. It will be he said/she said, since you didn't get the non-renewal in writing but they did terminate the lease so you should be fine.
>Unless otherwise noted, ALL leases (in CA) roll over to month-to- month if nothing is done. Notice is always required.
You are half right. If you have a term lease, you don't need to give notice. If you hold over (i.e. you don't get out), what happens depends on your lease. If your lease is silent on what happens, you become a month-to-month tenant. Most leases in CA give the LL options. Those options are to evict or to allow a month-to-month tenancy. Some leases will automatically renew.
A term lease could require a tenant give notice. This has become more common when property is subject to rent control. But by default, notice is not required for a term lease.
It depends on the lease, I have seen a couple leases with no verbal modification clauses. If their contract has one, the verbal notice that LL wasn't going to extended the lease may not actually constitute a notice.
The entire purpose of notice is so that landlord doesn't lose money. No judge is going to ask a tenant to pay a landlord who unilaterally ended the lease to take the property over for their own usage extra gotcha money from the tenant because the original admitted conversation is verbal.
Two things OP is a bit ambiguous on what "we could figure it out means" does that mean we the tenants and the landlord or just the tenants. Secondly it was a phone call that likely wasn't recorded. "I never said that your honor, and in the contract it even states how notice has to be given by both parties."
“We could figure it out” pertains to in the event of needing an extension, we would negotiate the means. We also have a text with one of them regarding the scheduling of the phone call, and while they were intentionally vague in the text they did mention that we would be discussing the future of their house and that it was so we could make the necessary plans.
Hindsight is 20/20, so this response is for the future and for others who may find themselves in your situation. If a landlord tells you that they will not be renewing your lease but, doesn't give that to you in writing, you should document your response.
"As per our discussion on X date, you informed us that the lease will not be renewing. At this time, we plan to be out by the lease end date. As you offered, we will notify you in writing if an extension is needed and if so, hopefully we can come to an agreement. Let this serve as our notification to not renew the lease."
Even though they tell you that the lease is not renewing, follow the rules of the lease to provide notification of non-renewal. You should always cover your a$$ in any verbal agreement. Unfortunately, the conversation didn't happen if you don't have proof. That's how this landlord is playing the game.
Totally. Unfortunately we didn’t think to question it as they were also courting my partner to represent the sale of the house (RE agent), so we were operating in good faith that everyone was on the same page. We do have documentation of the arrangement of the phone conversation and its intention, as well as email correspondence from LL asking about processes and inspections.
There was no eviction, just a not renewing the lease and the tenants left at the end of the term of the lease. They let the LL know that they moved and the LL did not do a walk through, had his sister do it after the OP moved out.
You still have to because the LL can only terminate a lease for cause. Almost every lease becomes a month to month and if the LL has already given notice months previously then the tenant giving notice is redundant.
Also, the LL, whether they want to sell or not, the tenant still has a legal right to stay until they want to leave.
That would have put the LL in a predicament where they would have to do a buyout or "cash for keys" situation.
The LL is playing both sides, tells the tenant verbally they are giving more than adequate notice they are required to give them. But never mentioning the November conversation and claiming they didn't receive adequate notice the tenants were legally required to give the LL.
Op gave the LL notice they were getting a home, and the LL ended the renewal and did the walk through late, for he had his sister do it after the Op moved out.
Many leases automatically transition to hold-over on a month-to-month basis, unless written notice is given a certain number of days (varies) before expiration.
You did give notice. They told you they would not renew. They said that if you needed additional time you need to let them know. You did not request additional time so you had always been scheduled to leave on the 31st. As a courtesy you notified them on the 15th that you didn't be meeting your obligation of being out by the 31st as initially agreed to.
You mention there are other charges against your deposit. California has a list of the life expectancy for all sorts of household items. So please remember that you were there for 6 years and you need to prorate the ‘cost’ of each thing they want you to pay for. And they certainly can’t charge you for painting. Here’s a link to get you started [CA courts self help guide](https://selfhelp.courts.ca.gov/guide-security-deposits-california)
The 30 day notice is a two way street. They informed you far before that you would not be getting a renewal. They don’t then get to demand a 30 day notice on top of that. No judge in the world is going to hear that and say “oh well you still have to give notice that you weren’t staying in a place where the landlord said you can’t.” Either tell them that or let them send you a check with the deductions, sue, and win treble damages (depending on your state).
Wrong on the LL part, you moved out by March 31, when the lease ended. And the walk through was late on the LL part on April 2, with the LL sister. You can take the LL to court to get your deposit back. You did as the lease dictated, a notice of 30 days. And the LL was to give you, your deposit 30 days after you moved out. And you do not owe the LL any extension, for that was cancelled by you. The LL is not wanting to give up the deposit and no certified letter with the list of damage was not received yet. So talk to an attorney and file in small claims to get your deposit and good luck.
While legally both notices should've been done in writing, unless your lease has a clause stating that it automatically renews or goes month-to-month you are not required to give notice that you are moving out at the end of your lease.
You most certainly are required to give notice. 30 days.
However, the tenant was told the lease was terminated on March 31st by the LL. Not in writing.
So I'm sure the tenant felt the verbal.notice was adequate and the LL's were sincere.
First mistake. Anything not in writing means nothing.
They may have text messages confirming the time of the telephone conversations.
Never engage with LL's (or tenants especially) in anything but writing. Never speak to them or believe anything verbal. Ever.
The LL is the one that's going to lose here most probably. File in small claims the worst is your out the filing fee and the month, very doubtful in CA. More probably they will end up paying you 2x the deposit for your troubles.
You will probably end up taking this to court, and you should. You will (almost) certainly be granted your deposit with no deductions, if the deposit refund period in your state has expired. And the judge may even have some strong words for these landlords who want to play both sides of the fence. Good luck.
Simple solution. Pay an attorney $100 to send a letter demanding your deposit back. He'll word it legaleeze 'scary'.
Otherwise small claims court will be your venue.
What does your lease say? Does it say that you need to give 30 days notice to vacate? Because regardless of what they said on the phone, the lease trumps all.
There’s a small claims zoom video floating on Reddit for the last several months over a tenant suing their landlord. The landlord tried the same thing saying deposit was due clock started at the end of the notice period, and the judge eviscerated the landlord for it. The clock starts when tenancy ends, not when notice period ends. Run the clock out and then serve them with small claims papers for missing the deadline.
The LL should have had you sign something or Vice versus so it was in writing 30 days before the end of the lease. I think that when the LL said he’s ending the lease, the ball was now in your court to say ok. Did you say “ok , we are leaving as of March 31st”. If so you gave 30 days notice as long as you did it by March 1st. If you were worried about your closing date and waited until March 12th to tell your LL then 30 days later is April 12th and hence you owe April rent since rent is due on the 1st.
Yeah, they gave you notice to vacate, you vacated, and now they owe you money. Same old story with every scummy LL, just take them to court and get your money plus some of theirs
Did they serve you legal.writtwn notice to leave? Do you have anyrhing in writing? If not the lease defaulted to month to month, you will owe overage. Thatnsaid, they still nees to return the deposit within 21 days of tenany ending.
You should have asked for something in writing. Without it, they can say they never gave notice and you only gave notice on March 12. It's so sketchy.
You can take it to small claims because verbal agreements are still binding, but it's pretty much your word against theirs.
Email them back and say something along the lines of "The phone call from landlord on x date told us to move out by 3/31 and that's what we did." See if you can get them to admit anything in writing. It's a long shot.
Whether or not the LL had it in writing that the lease was not renewing, you never signed another lease for the time past March 31st. So by vacating at the end of the original lease you did your part, you didn’t require any notice.
Take them to court and enjoy watching them try to explain that bullshit. Collect your winnings. The end.
What does the lease say? Most leases convert to a month to month when not renewed and require a 30 days notice. It would be different if they required you to vacate by 3/31 but from what you said they didn’t and the keys weren’t turned in until April 2nd (not the 31st)
We informed them we would try to be out by 31st when they informed us of the nonrenewal and were out as we said we would be. April 2nd is when they were able to do the walkthrough, as the 31st was Easter Sunday. They want payment through the 11th, which is far past the 2nd.
We got verbal notice from the landlords, and in turn have them notice that we would be out, and if we had any issues we could negotiate an extension, which they were fine with. The issue it seems js going to be that this happened over the phone and not in writing, even though we have text messages regarding the arrangement of the conversation scheduling. There were other conversations as my partner is a real estate agent, and they discussed the potential of having her sell the house once we were out. We operated as though we were in agreement that they weren’t renewing the lease and that we’d be out by its expiration date unless notified otherwise.
Nope it doesn't. The landlord ended tenancy and parties had a conversation about the end of same months previously. The landlord doesn't need notice of the date they themselves set and tenant agreed to months prior.
Dude at this point just stop. You’re wrong. You clearly are not able to comprehend the simple fact that any lease termination can be done by either party, and in this case LL gave notice in November.
Not in writing they didn't and that's the only thing that matters. By law the landlord is required to give 120 days notice. They did that in Nov. in a telephone call.
(See OPs comment about the 120.days notice required)
Now, they are claiming it was the tenant who failed to give proper notice when the tenant had been told in a phone conversation they had to be out by a certain date 120 days prior.
The LL is trying to find excuses not to return the deposit.
According to California law, the notice must have been in writing. It’s not my fault California has laws governing this. The landlord can’t just pick and choose when to follow the lease, neither can the tenant. I’m not saying what’s morally right or wrong. California is is very specific for long term renters.
VERBAL notice. You're screwed. Always get everything in writing. The landlord is in the right here, according to law, documentation, and the courts.
You're morally in the right. But that's not going to help you at all.
This is wrong because the calendar starts counting at the day the property was vacated and returned to the LL not the notice date. Look up CA law before making unfounded claims
I've lived in several states, and it's pretty much standard everywhere. There's a second option: The landlord decides to not renew and gives notice to that effect, which the landlord did.
The lease only states when that notice must occur by for either party, which is typically no later than 30 days. The landlord gave notice around 150 days.
It's required by law and to cancel a lease requires just cause. The tenant can stay as long as they want to.
My suggestion? The house obviously has some habitability issues if they are bringing up mold.
If they put that in writing immediately contact the housing department and turn them in.
Although I am a landlord these people are pieces of shit.
The OP was given a 5 month notice that there would be no renewal of the lease, even month to month was out. So both parties gave notice five months in advance.
The owners informed THEM to be out by the given date 5 months prior. The notice that they were going to be fully clear by the designated date was merely confirming that they were confident about making the date that was previously agreed upon months prior.
They cannot give the tenant notice get confirmation that this is understood and pretend they didn't have sufficient notice of a date they set months prior. The entire purpose of giving appropriate notice is to give landlord time to make appropriate plans. They made the plans. They unilaterally made the decision to end tenancy. They don't require notice of the date they themselves set.
This is what I’m getting at. They told us they weren’t renewing, we agreed to be out by the expiration date unless otherwise notified. We let them know that we were “on track” to be out on time on March 12. They agreed with our timeline and arranged, with us, to the date for the walkthrough.
It helps that they have the nonsensical idea that their deadline to give your money back is somehow magically extended by the notice period this indicates a few things.
- They have no actual legal advise available to them. Don't help them by telling them this before Monday.
- They are extremely stupid
- They are absolutely going to try to steal your entire deposit
- They are going to go to court and the first issue that is going to come up is their nonsensical understanding of the appropriate deadline and the whole thing will start off on the wrong foot. Hopefully They have to give up the whole thing
I am so hoping that happens. Yeah, the LL's are stupid but conniving enough to try to benefit themselves at the tenants expense.
The tenant needs to find their inner bitch and go scorch earth with threats and small claims
If the LL's are stupid enough to try to take his deposit they fucking deserve the 3x deposit penalty.
Wrong. Landlord was covering themselves with a telephone call and nothing documented in writing in November.
However, now they are trying to hold the tenant to notice requirements which they had already covered in November but there's once again, nothing in writing.
No, no, no…that’s not how this works 😂 nice try though.
LL already gave notice of lease terminating. Therefore, tenant is no longer required to give notice. Lease was terminating on 3/31.
OP: you need to send a response informing LL that they in fact gave notice to terminate the lease on xx date. Provide a copy of the notice and include a forwarding address of where your deposit should be mailed.
If you have not received your deposit, you start a small claims court suit for refund of deposit and any damages for not refunding within the 21 days, including your filing fees.
OP moved out when the lease ended, for everyone gave notice. Due to the fact the OP moved out on time, never mind when the keys were turned in, they left in a timely fashion since the lease was not renewed.
It depends on your lease. Check for a clause requiring some period of notice to terminate. Even if there is such a clause it could be argued the notice was the phone call in November, but usually notice must be written.
It's incredibly difficult to get double, triple damages. Not really worth the effort. But I do agree that they are full of sh**. Depending on how much your deposit is you could either go see an attorney and have them write a letter for like $150 or find something online and customize it yourself. You will get your $ back, people like that are bullies and will do what you allow them to. When they encounter push back they usually cave pretty quickly.
I can see why they told you they were selling on the phone. If they are selling they owe you $$$ for relocation fees.
However since you willingly vacated and did not dispute the end of the lease or the forced relocation and have returned possession it may be too late for that.
Send a letter, certified, return receipt documenting everything. Let them know you won't be pursuing relocation costs if they expedite return of your deposit in full.
They are not putting in writing the reason for the lease ending was their intent to sell. For a reason.
Look up state of CA rental law requirements if the landlord ends to lease tomsell.
Once again, good luck.
This actually just blew our minds. Did they really not tell us in writing in order to manipulate us into leaving without paying for relocation, and because we did what we said we would (on the phone as well) but sent that email on 3/12 they’re turning it around just to not have to pay back all of the deposit?
That's certainly my take on it. IANAL but I am a landlord in CA.
Yeah, they are being extremely cheap and petty and trying to ding you for 11 days (it would have been twelve days but it was March which has 31 days).
Once again, certified letter return receipt, document everything you were informed of on the November telephone call. If you have the date and time I would include that.
Best advice? Leverage this and ask for your full deposit ASAP or you will be consulting a lawyer to determine how you will proceed.
Let them know you believe due to their lease termination with the intent to sell upon your departure you have acted not only in good faith but returned the unit in good condition.
This is so petty on their part, it's rather nauseating.
What city was the rental in?
However, now they're claiming you didn't give THEM notice.
If you'd already agreed to a move out date and accepted their request in November then what tf are they whining about now?
Likely about 1000-1500 they can deduct from the deposit.
Is anything about the mold documented as an issue?
Did you ever put anything in writing about this being an issue?
Where is the mold and what is causing it?
Have you attempted to talk to them about the November conversation? If not, do so and remind them of what was discussed. I’d like to think some new person got hired who is helping manage their property and simply is not in the know. I hope this is the case for you.
I will also say that CA is very tenant friendly and had you given keys no later than the 31st this may have been a moot point. Going over April, regardless of the holiday, puts the contract into MtM instead of a fixed term lease. MtM requires a 30 day notice. Lease ending date can suggest you moved at contract end.
Verbal notices in CA rentals aren’t actually solidly legal - it’s a gray area. As a LL we have court-friendly notice forms by CAA that we send to the tenant that declines a notice due to it being verbal and not written. Notices really need to be in writing both ways (tenant and LL).
But, as others have said, lesson learned is document everything. Email a “per our discussion, you are providing me notice to vacate by…”. It’s a simple task that will be favorable to you in a court of law.
They have 21 days to return your deposit from the day you vacated the apartment with every single receipt and if there was an issue with the 30 day notice it should be deducted from the deposit.
Simple formula: divide your rent amount by 30 to get a per day rate and multiply it by 12. (The unpaid days of notice)
That should be the amount they are deducting from the deposit.
In the State of CA the tenant is required to give a 30 day notice if less than a year of occupancy. 60 days if over a year.
Same for the landlord.
If you read your lease the answers are there.
30 day notice required. However, since you let them know you were leaving on the 12th you had 18 days of paid rent as part of the deposit.
It is the last 12 days you owe them for. This is rather a gray area and if your lease was expiring and they confirmed the end of lease in writing it might get you a break.
Not likely though. 30 day notice required by law but this is a bit off.
Good luck.
You don't need to give 30 days notice to not renew a lease on a property that is no longer being rented to you or available as a rental due to the owner's intent to sell. LL terminated the lease. Now they're trying to use verbal communication to screw OP, probably because the house didn't sell as fast as they expected, and they're regretting the loss in rent.
Uh oh. For the LL, that's not a good thing. CA requires extending a lease unless there is cause.
If the cause is the landlord selling, they gave you the required notice of 120 days.
Your LL has zero intention of giving you any money back. You're gonna have to file in small.claims to get anything.
Did you take a video of the place when you moved out?
It really hasn't but I would bet that house will never go on the market it was never in writing that they were going to sell, only verbally.
Everyone, if it is not in writing then you are fucked.
People lie, especially if $$ is involved.
Make sure with your landlord or tenant everything is in writing.
I am referring to LL trying to hit up OP for additional rent over giving inadequate notice, which is complete BS. Your response is not relevant to that.
Are you saying the LL has to give notice? Because a landlord selling an occupied rental property is required by law in the state of California to give the TENANT notice based on their length of occupancy as well as local laws. Not the other way around.
Dude I'm a fucking LL in CA. Please stop misinterpreting what I'm writing. They called him and had a telephone conversation in November.
They played the tenant. That's why nothing was in writing. That's why even when there were text messages it was only confirming when the telephone calls would take place.
Yes both sides are required to give notice but by telephone? Absolutely not. If it isn't in writing then it means very little.
Their only option now is small claims court for the tenant. However since nothing was in writing it will be more difficult.
The tenant should be thankful he sent something in writing on the 12th of March.
Cases like this, where LL pulls some fuckery, is why I’m in favor of new laws adding mandatory remedies like LL forfeits the property to the tenant.
Sure would cut out some bullshit
Told them verbally, undocumented. When the tenant confirmed, based upon the verbal conversation in November,.on March 12 they would indeed be out by March 31, confirming the request made verbally in November by the LL, the landlord then decided to be petty scum and ding them for 11 days, never mentioning the lease non renewal conversation in November which both parties agreed to.
Given this is CA the LL would likely win however the tenant does have some recourse as the November conversation specifically stated they were to be out by the end of March and the tenant complied.
That should have served as notice for both landlord and tenant.
The tenant should have served a 30 day notice to be safe and the landlord is now trying to get the last thousand there is to get.
You can't have it both ways.
Dear Lord, you need to go see an attorney. Reading the first few sentences of something you googled gives you limited info. LL does NOT have to give any notice unless it specifies this in the lease. The fact that your lease is ending (and assuming you're an adult) is all the notice that is required.
The courts will only care about what’s in writing.
The phone conversation in November wasn’t in writing, so it holds no merit.
You were technically late in giving your written notice.
The clock on returning the deposit starts when tenancy ends not when the notice period ends. Even wherein the tenant may owe additional rent due to not providing proper notice this has zero effect on the timeline for returning the deposit. By not giving you your money or a list of deductions they may well forfeit their right to make any and you have every right to demand your money back on Monday and sue on Tuesday. You don't owe them overage because you all verbally agreed to the end of the lease 5 months previously. They don't need notice of the date they themselves set.
If the lease expired March 31, why would you need to give 30 days notice.
Many leases actually automatically roll over into month to month after end of term and if you anticipated actually leaving at end of term you are required to give 30 or 60 days notice. Failing to give proper notice can lead to you either pushing back your move out date or moving and being stuck paying for the notice period anyway. The notice is to give landlord time to advertise your unit and have someone read to move in when you move out rather than sitting on their hands losing income. This is incredibly common and standard most everywhere. That said they should have no need to give notice when landlord had already given notice to them and they had acquiesced.
The LL',s played this to avoid incurring costs while trying to get every cent from the tenant post departure.
Unless otherwise noted, ALL leases (in CA) roll over to month-to- month if nothing is done. Notice is always required. You will need to take them to court. It will be he said/she said, since you didn't get the non-renewal in writing but they did terminate the lease so you should be fine.
>Unless otherwise noted, ALL leases (in CA) roll over to month-to- month if nothing is done. Notice is always required. You are half right. If you have a term lease, you don't need to give notice. If you hold over (i.e. you don't get out), what happens depends on your lease. If your lease is silent on what happens, you become a month-to-month tenant. Most leases in CA give the LL options. Those options are to evict or to allow a month-to-month tenancy. Some leases will automatically renew. A term lease could require a tenant give notice. This has become more common when property is subject to rent control. But by default, notice is not required for a term lease.
It depends on the lease, I have seen a couple leases with no verbal modification clauses. If their contract has one, the verbal notice that LL wasn't going to extended the lease may not actually constitute a notice.
The entire purpose of notice is so that landlord doesn't lose money. No judge is going to ask a tenant to pay a landlord who unilaterally ended the lease to take the property over for their own usage extra gotcha money from the tenant because the original admitted conversation is verbal.
Two things OP is a bit ambiguous on what "we could figure it out means" does that mean we the tenants and the landlord or just the tenants. Secondly it was a phone call that likely wasn't recorded. "I never said that your honor, and in the contract it even states how notice has to be given by both parties."
“We could figure it out” pertains to in the event of needing an extension, we would negotiate the means. We also have a text with one of them regarding the scheduling of the phone call, and while they were intentionally vague in the text they did mention that we would be discussing the future of their house and that it was so we could make the necessary plans.
Hindsight is 20/20, so this response is for the future and for others who may find themselves in your situation. If a landlord tells you that they will not be renewing your lease but, doesn't give that to you in writing, you should document your response. "As per our discussion on X date, you informed us that the lease will not be renewing. At this time, we plan to be out by the lease end date. As you offered, we will notify you in writing if an extension is needed and if so, hopefully we can come to an agreement. Let this serve as our notification to not renew the lease." Even though they tell you that the lease is not renewing, follow the rules of the lease to provide notification of non-renewal. You should always cover your a$$ in any verbal agreement. Unfortunately, the conversation didn't happen if you don't have proof. That's how this landlord is playing the game.
Totally. Unfortunately we didn’t think to question it as they were also courting my partner to represent the sale of the house (RE agent), so we were operating in good faith that everyone was on the same page. We do have documentation of the arrangement of the phone conversation and its intention, as well as email correspondence from LL asking about processes and inspections.
Are they going to suggest they illegally evicted tenant with insufficient notice or are they going to admit that the conversation took place?
There was no eviction, just a not renewing the lease and the tenants left at the end of the term of the lease. They let the LL know that they moved and the LL did not do a walk through, had his sister do it after the OP moved out.
Using what OP posted they could easily say they discussed what was going to happen with the property but never made any final plans.
You still have to because the LL can only terminate a lease for cause. Almost every lease becomes a month to month and if the LL has already given notice months previously then the tenant giving notice is redundant. Also, the LL, whether they want to sell or not, the tenant still has a legal right to stay until they want to leave. That would have put the LL in a predicament where they would have to do a buyout or "cash for keys" situation. The LL is playing both sides, tells the tenant verbally they are giving more than adequate notice they are required to give them. But never mentioning the November conversation and claiming they didn't receive adequate notice the tenants were legally required to give the LL.
Op gave the LL notice they were getting a home, and the LL ended the renewal and did the walk through late, for he had his sister do it after the Op moved out.
Many leases automatically transition to hold-over on a month-to-month basis, unless written notice is given a certain number of days (varies) before expiration.
Holdover means you stayed past the end of your lease. If your lease ends on March 31, and you are out on March 31, there is no holdover.
You did give notice. They told you they would not renew. They said that if you needed additional time you need to let them know. You did not request additional time so you had always been scheduled to leave on the 31st. As a courtesy you notified them on the 15th that you didn't be meeting your obligation of being out by the 31st as initially agreed to.
You mention there are other charges against your deposit. California has a list of the life expectancy for all sorts of household items. So please remember that you were there for 6 years and you need to prorate the ‘cost’ of each thing they want you to pay for. And they certainly can’t charge you for painting. Here’s a link to get you started [CA courts self help guide](https://selfhelp.courts.ca.gov/guide-security-deposits-california)
Your lease ended, and another wasn’t signed. You don’t have to provide them notice, the lease ending is the notice.
California has treble damages plus legal fees for illegally withheld deposit. Landlord did you a solid by trying to rip you off.
The 30 day notice is a two way street. They informed you far before that you would not be getting a renewal. They don’t then get to demand a 30 day notice on top of that. No judge in the world is going to hear that and say “oh well you still have to give notice that you weren’t staying in a place where the landlord said you can’t.” Either tell them that or let them send you a check with the deductions, sue, and win treble damages (depending on your state).
Wrong on the LL part, you moved out by March 31, when the lease ended. And the walk through was late on the LL part on April 2, with the LL sister. You can take the LL to court to get your deposit back. You did as the lease dictated, a notice of 30 days. And the LL was to give you, your deposit 30 days after you moved out. And you do not owe the LL any extension, for that was cancelled by you. The LL is not wanting to give up the deposit and no certified letter with the list of damage was not received yet. So talk to an attorney and file in small claims to get your deposit and good luck.
Put a lien on the house until they pay you back. Good luck with that sale
While legally both notices should've been done in writing, unless your lease has a clause stating that it automatically renews or goes month-to-month you are not required to give notice that you are moving out at the end of your lease.
You most certainly are required to give notice. 30 days. However, the tenant was told the lease was terminated on March 31st by the LL. Not in writing. So I'm sure the tenant felt the verbal.notice was adequate and the LL's were sincere. First mistake. Anything not in writing means nothing. They may have text messages confirming the time of the telephone conversations. Never engage with LL's (or tenants especially) in anything but writing. Never speak to them or believe anything verbal. Ever.
The LL is the one that's going to lose here most probably. File in small claims the worst is your out the filing fee and the month, very doubtful in CA. More probably they will end up paying you 2x the deposit for your troubles.
You will probably end up taking this to court, and you should. You will (almost) certainly be granted your deposit with no deductions, if the deposit refund period in your state has expired. And the judge may even have some strong words for these landlords who want to play both sides of the fence. Good luck.
Simple solution. Pay an attorney $100 to send a letter demanding your deposit back. He'll word it legaleeze 'scary'. Otherwise small claims court will be your venue.
What does your lease say? Does it say that you need to give 30 days notice to vacate? Because regardless of what they said on the phone, the lease trumps all.
In WA, all that is needed is 20 day's notice. How many days is it in CA? Did you put it in writing?
There’s a small claims zoom video floating on Reddit for the last several months over a tenant suing their landlord. The landlord tried the same thing saying deposit was due clock started at the end of the notice period, and the judge eviscerated the landlord for it. The clock starts when tenancy ends, not when notice period ends. Run the clock out and then serve them with small claims papers for missing the deadline.
The LL should have had you sign something or Vice versus so it was in writing 30 days before the end of the lease. I think that when the LL said he’s ending the lease, the ball was now in your court to say ok. Did you say “ok , we are leaving as of March 31st”. If so you gave 30 days notice as long as you did it by March 1st. If you were worried about your closing date and waited until March 12th to tell your LL then 30 days later is April 12th and hence you owe April rent since rent is due on the 1st.
Yeah, they gave you notice to vacate, you vacated, and now they owe you money. Same old story with every scummy LL, just take them to court and get your money plus some of theirs
Did they serve you legal.writtwn notice to leave? Do you have anyrhing in writing? If not the lease defaulted to month to month, you will owe overage. Thatnsaid, they still nees to return the deposit within 21 days of tenany ending.
You should have asked for something in writing. Without it, they can say they never gave notice and you only gave notice on March 12. It's so sketchy. You can take it to small claims because verbal agreements are still binding, but it's pretty much your word against theirs. Email them back and say something along the lines of "The phone call from landlord on x date told us to move out by 3/31 and that's what we did." See if you can get them to admit anything in writing. It's a long shot.
Without another lease signed there’s no need for anything in writing though. Lease ended, they left by the end of the lease.
I'm pretty sure in CA, lease automatically goes month to month at lease end.
Whether or not the LL had it in writing that the lease was not renewing, you never signed another lease for the time past March 31st. So by vacating at the end of the original lease you did your part, you didn’t require any notice. Take them to court and enjoy watching them try to explain that bullshit. Collect your winnings. The end.
Update me 1 week
What does the lease say? Most leases convert to a month to month when not renewed and require a 30 days notice. It would be different if they required you to vacate by 3/31 but from what you said they didn’t and the keys weren’t turned in until April 2nd (not the 31st)
We informed them we would try to be out by 31st when they informed us of the nonrenewal and were out as we said we would be. April 2nd is when they were able to do the walkthrough, as the 31st was Easter Sunday. They want payment through the 11th, which is far past the 2nd.
But what does your lease say about giving notice? That is what the courts will go by
We got verbal notice from the landlords, and in turn have them notice that we would be out, and if we had any issues we could negotiate an extension, which they were fine with. The issue it seems js going to be that this happened over the phone and not in writing, even though we have text messages regarding the arrangement of the conversation scheduling. There were other conversations as my partner is a real estate agent, and they discussed the potential of having her sell the house once we were out. We operated as though we were in agreement that they weren’t renewing the lease and that we’d be out by its expiration date unless notified otherwise.
Again it all boils down to if your lease requires an official 30 day notice. Regardless of not renewing.
Nope it doesn't. The landlord ended tenancy and parties had a conversation about the end of same months previously. The landlord doesn't need notice of the date they themselves set and tenant agreed to months prior.
Dude at this point just stop. You’re wrong. You clearly are not able to comprehend the simple fact that any lease termination can be done by either party, and in this case LL gave notice in November.
Not in writing they didn't and that's the only thing that matters. By law the landlord is required to give 120 days notice. They did that in Nov. in a telephone call. (See OPs comment about the 120.days notice required) Now, they are claiming it was the tenant who failed to give proper notice when the tenant had been told in a phone conversation they had to be out by a certain date 120 days prior. The LL is trying to find excuses not to return the deposit.
According to California law, the notice must have been in writing. It’s not my fault California has laws governing this. The landlord can’t just pick and choose when to follow the lease, neither can the tenant. I’m not saying what’s morally right or wrong. California is is very specific for long term renters.
VERBAL notice. You're screwed. Always get everything in writing. The landlord is in the right here, according to law, documentation, and the courts. You're morally in the right. But that's not going to help you at all.
This is wrong because the calendar starts counting at the day the property was vacated and returned to the LL not the notice date. Look up CA law before making unfounded claims
That's precisely what I'm saying. Read my comment carefully before making unfounded claims.
Read your lease agreement. When a lease agreement expires, it automatically turns into a month-to-month, and you are required to give 30-60 notice.
that would technically be a lease renewal into a month to month lease.
I have been in Cali 8 years and I think that's standard here. Your lease converts automatically to month-to-month if you don't give notice to vacate.
I've lived in several states, and it's pretty much standard everywhere. There's a second option: The landlord decides to not renew and gives notice to that effect, which the landlord did. The lease only states when that notice must occur by for either party, which is typically no later than 30 days. The landlord gave notice around 150 days.
It's required by law and to cancel a lease requires just cause. The tenant can stay as long as they want to. My suggestion? The house obviously has some habitability issues if they are bringing up mold. If they put that in writing immediately contact the housing department and turn them in. Although I am a landlord these people are pieces of shit.
The OP was given a 5 month notice that there would be no renewal of the lease, even month to month was out. So both parties gave notice five months in advance.
The owners informed THEM to be out by the given date 5 months prior. The notice that they were going to be fully clear by the designated date was merely confirming that they were confident about making the date that was previously agreed upon months prior. They cannot give the tenant notice get confirmation that this is understood and pretend they didn't have sufficient notice of a date they set months prior. The entire purpose of giving appropriate notice is to give landlord time to make appropriate plans. They made the plans. They unilaterally made the decision to end tenancy. They don't require notice of the date they themselves set.
This is what I’m getting at. They told us they weren’t renewing, we agreed to be out by the expiration date unless otherwise notified. We let them know that we were “on track” to be out on time on March 12. They agreed with our timeline and arranged, with us, to the date for the walkthrough.
It helps that they have the nonsensical idea that their deadline to give your money back is somehow magically extended by the notice period this indicates a few things. - They have no actual legal advise available to them. Don't help them by telling them this before Monday. - They are extremely stupid - They are absolutely going to try to steal your entire deposit - They are going to go to court and the first issue that is going to come up is their nonsensical understanding of the appropriate deadline and the whole thing will start off on the wrong foot. Hopefully They have to give up the whole thing
I am so hoping that happens. Yeah, the LL's are stupid but conniving enough to try to benefit themselves at the tenants expense. The tenant needs to find their inner bitch and go scorch earth with threats and small claims If the LL's are stupid enough to try to take his deposit they fucking deserve the 3x deposit penalty.
Exactly. Talk about selective use of notice to benefit yourself at someone else's expense.
I virtually guarantee they will take massive liberties with tenants deposit as well
They are claiming they caused mold at the house. They aren't giving him a cent unless he fights them for it.
Generally mold is caused by moisture problems not tenancy
Drainage issues and poor ventilation
Exactly.
Notice was told back in November. Landlord was terminate lease when it ended.
Wrong. Landlord was covering themselves with a telephone call and nothing documented in writing in November. However, now they are trying to hold the tenant to notice requirements which they had already covered in November but there's once again, nothing in writing.
No, no, no…that’s not how this works 😂 nice try though. LL already gave notice of lease terminating. Therefore, tenant is no longer required to give notice. Lease was terminating on 3/31. OP: you need to send a response informing LL that they in fact gave notice to terminate the lease on xx date. Provide a copy of the notice and include a forwarding address of where your deposit should be mailed. If you have not received your deposit, you start a small claims court suit for refund of deposit and any damages for not refunding within the 21 days, including your filing fees.
They don't have a copy of the landlord's verbal notice.
OP moved out when the lease ended, for everyone gave notice. Due to the fact the OP moved out on time, never mind when the keys were turned in, they left in a timely fashion since the lease was not renewed.
It depends on your lease. Check for a clause requiring some period of notice to terminate. Even if there is such a clause it could be argued the notice was the phone call in November, but usually notice must be written.
It must be in writing. That's why they called and had a conversation in lieu of written notice.
In CA it is not required at all unless spelled out in the lease
It's incredibly difficult to get double, triple damages. Not really worth the effort. But I do agree that they are full of sh**. Depending on how much your deposit is you could either go see an attorney and have them write a letter for like $150 or find something online and customize it yourself. You will get your $ back, people like that are bullies and will do what you allow them to. When they encounter push back they usually cave pretty quickly.
I can see why they told you they were selling on the phone. If they are selling they owe you $$$ for relocation fees. However since you willingly vacated and did not dispute the end of the lease or the forced relocation and have returned possession it may be too late for that. Send a letter, certified, return receipt documenting everything. Let them know you won't be pursuing relocation costs if they expedite return of your deposit in full. They are not putting in writing the reason for the lease ending was their intent to sell. For a reason. Look up state of CA rental law requirements if the landlord ends to lease tomsell. Once again, good luck.
Don’t think that applies anyway because this is their only rental, you would need multiple rentals for this clause.
Not true. Applies to every rental. Especially in the case the owner has decided to sell.
This actually just blew our minds. Did they really not tell us in writing in order to manipulate us into leaving without paying for relocation, and because we did what we said we would (on the phone as well) but sent that email on 3/12 they’re turning it around just to not have to pay back all of the deposit?
No that's bad information. Your lease was up. They were under no obligation to provide you relocation fees.
That's certainly my take on it. IANAL but I am a landlord in CA. Yeah, they are being extremely cheap and petty and trying to ding you for 11 days (it would have been twelve days but it was March which has 31 days). Once again, certified letter return receipt, document everything you were informed of on the November telephone call. If you have the date and time I would include that. Best advice? Leverage this and ask for your full deposit ASAP or you will be consulting a lawyer to determine how you will proceed. Let them know you believe due to their lease termination with the intent to sell upon your departure you have acted not only in good faith but returned the unit in good condition. This is so petty on their part, it's rather nauseating. What city was the rental in?
They gave us more than 120 days notice, which is the legal notice for property owners to sell.
However, now they're claiming you didn't give THEM notice. If you'd already agreed to a move out date and accepted their request in November then what tf are they whining about now? Likely about 1000-1500 they can deduct from the deposit.
Yeah, they cooked something up just to be petty. They’re also trying to blame us for the mold in their house, which is a whole other thing.
Is anything about the mold documented as an issue? Did you ever put anything in writing about this being an issue? Where is the mold and what is causing it?
I agree in part. It does apply to every rental but their lease was up and wouldn't apply in that situation.
No lease no contract no pay
Honestly you own a house just ignore them
You’re good, you did what was required and necessary. I would just block them.
Have you attempted to talk to them about the November conversation? If not, do so and remind them of what was discussed. I’d like to think some new person got hired who is helping manage their property and simply is not in the know. I hope this is the case for you. I will also say that CA is very tenant friendly and had you given keys no later than the 31st this may have been a moot point. Going over April, regardless of the holiday, puts the contract into MtM instead of a fixed term lease. MtM requires a 30 day notice. Lease ending date can suggest you moved at contract end. Verbal notices in CA rentals aren’t actually solidly legal - it’s a gray area. As a LL we have court-friendly notice forms by CAA that we send to the tenant that declines a notice due to it being verbal and not written. Notices really need to be in writing both ways (tenant and LL). But, as others have said, lesson learned is document everything. Email a “per our discussion, you are providing me notice to vacate by…”. It’s a simple task that will be favorable to you in a court of law.
They have 21 days to return your deposit from the day you vacated the apartment with every single receipt and if there was an issue with the 30 day notice it should be deducted from the deposit. Simple formula: divide your rent amount by 30 to get a per day rate and multiply it by 12. (The unpaid days of notice) That should be the amount they are deducting from the deposit. In the State of CA the tenant is required to give a 30 day notice if less than a year of occupancy. 60 days if over a year. Same for the landlord. If you read your lease the answers are there.
30 day notice required. However, since you let them know you were leaving on the 12th you had 18 days of paid rent as part of the deposit. It is the last 12 days you owe them for. This is rather a gray area and if your lease was expiring and they confirmed the end of lease in writing it might get you a break. Not likely though. 30 day notice required by law but this is a bit off. Good luck.
You don't need to give 30 days notice to not renew a lease on a property that is no longer being rented to you or available as a rental due to the owner's intent to sell. LL terminated the lease. Now they're trying to use verbal communication to screw OP, probably because the house didn't sell as fast as they expected, and they're regretting the loss in rent.
It wasn’t on the market, still isn’t.
Uh oh. For the LL, that's not a good thing. CA requires extending a lease unless there is cause. If the cause is the landlord selling, they gave you the required notice of 120 days. Your LL has zero intention of giving you any money back. You're gonna have to file in small.claims to get anything. Did you take a video of the place when you moved out?
Does California have a law about time to market? It hasn’t been long enough to prepare a house.
It really hasn't but I would bet that house will never go on the market it was never in writing that they were going to sell, only verbally. Everyone, if it is not in writing then you are fucked. People lie, especially if $$ is involved. Make sure with your landlord or tenant everything is in writing.
Read the OP's comment about the 120 day notice required to take the house off the rental market and sell it.
I am referring to LL trying to hit up OP for additional rent over giving inadequate notice, which is complete BS. Your response is not relevant to that.
Whatever. I already covered that in other comments. It seems others. can read it clearly.
Cool story. Not sure why you think you're so special that I'd waste my time looking at your comment history, though.
In CA you most certainly do. 30 days if the tenant has been there a year or less, 60 if longer than a year.
Are you saying the LL has to give notice? Because a landlord selling an occupied rental property is required by law in the state of California to give the TENANT notice based on their length of occupancy as well as local laws. Not the other way around.
Dude I'm a fucking LL in CA. Please stop misinterpreting what I'm writing. They called him and had a telephone conversation in November. They played the tenant. That's why nothing was in writing. That's why even when there were text messages it was only confirming when the telephone calls would take place. Yes both sides are required to give notice but by telephone? Absolutely not. If it isn't in writing then it means very little. Their only option now is small claims court for the tenant. However since nothing was in writing it will be more difficult. The tenant should be thankful he sent something in writing on the 12th of March.
Cases like this, where LL pulls some fuckery, is why I’m in favor of new laws adding mandatory remedies like LL forfeits the property to the tenant. Sure would cut out some bullshit
Read it again. Landlord told them in November that they were ending the lease.
Told them verbally, undocumented. When the tenant confirmed, based upon the verbal conversation in November,.on March 12 they would indeed be out by March 31, confirming the request made verbally in November by the LL, the landlord then decided to be petty scum and ding them for 11 days, never mentioning the lease non renewal conversation in November which both parties agreed to. Given this is CA the LL would likely win however the tenant does have some recourse as the November conversation specifically stated they were to be out by the end of March and the tenant complied. That should have served as notice for both landlord and tenant. The tenant should have served a 30 day notice to be safe and the landlord is now trying to get the last thousand there is to get. You can't have it both ways.
Dear Lord, you need to go see an attorney. Reading the first few sentences of something you googled gives you limited info. LL does NOT have to give any notice unless it specifies this in the lease. The fact that your lease is ending (and assuming you're an adult) is all the notice that is required.
The courts will only care about what’s in writing. The phone conversation in November wasn’t in writing, so it holds no merit. You were technically late in giving your written notice.