[jedberg]

You're actually in a pretty strong position. Normally to leave a lease you need to give notice, usually 30 days. But there is one time you don't have to do that -- when the lease ends.

If you lease ends on July 1, you can turn in your keys on June 30 and walk away. Your landlord knows this.

Rents won't go back up in July. Even if the economy recovers 100% in the next two weeks, most tech employers in the area are doing WFH until at least the fall if not next year or forever.

If your lease ends on July 1, start looking for a new place now, but don't sign anything. As soon as you find something tell your current landlord that you are about to sign a new lease but you'd much rather not go through the hassle of moving. If they say yes, great, and if they say no, at least you have a new place lined up.

Just make sure you take lots of pictures when you move out because your landlord sounds like the type that will nickel-and-dime you on your deposit.

[pb7]

>Normally to leave a lease you need to give notice, usually 30 days. But there is one time you don't have to do that -- when the lease ends.

Every lease I've ever signed required 30 days notice from either party to end the lease when the lease term ends, otherwise it proceeds on a month to month basis with no further action required.

Edit: Technically not required in California but confirmed that it was in fact required for a previous state I lived in.

[jldugger]

This is not really an option in California in my experience. There is no automatic month-to-month conversion, and it's pretty rare as far as I can tell.

[t3rabytes]

Jinx, just commented the same thing. Mine is even 60 days!

[jedberg]

I replied below to the other person saying the same thing. In California this is not the law, but they should check their lease.

[t3rabytes]

> Normally to leave a lease you need to give notice, usually 30 days. But there is one time you don't have to do that -- when the lease ends.

This isn't guaranteed. In my case (renter in North Carolina), even at the end of my lease I have to give a 60 day notice prior to the lease-end or else my lease switches to month-to-month automatically.

[jedberg]

Check your lease, but at least on my leases, it says that it only goes month to month if you pay the rent and the landlord accepts. If you don't pay the rent, the lease just ends.

It's certainly a nice courtesy to let them know if you're leaving, but at least in California, it isn't required by law.

[t3rabytes]

> This Lease Contract will automatically renew month-to-month unless either party gives at least 60 days written notice of termination or intent to move-out as required by paragraph 35 (Move-Out Notice).

Mine is pretty clear that it's an automatic rollover, but fair -- every state (and lease!) is different.

> If you don't pay the rent, the lease just ends.

Oof, sounds like a nice way to end up with a bad mark against you nonetheless.

[pb7]

Good note, you are correct, my California lease says the same thing. Previous leases in other states were specific about giving notice but this one does not. In my opinion, this is worse for the renter than the landlord as the landlord can choose not to accept your month-to-month rent offer at the last minute leaving you stranded. I prefer the notice from either party route.

[jedberg]

> In my opinion, this is worse for the renter than the landlord as the landlord can choose not to accept your month-to-month rent offer at the last minute leaving you stranded.

This is definitely a possibility. In practice it doesn't happen because it's a pain to find new renters, especially if you don't list and show the property ahead of time. Unless you're trying to get rid of a tenant it's unlikely to happen.

Also the tenant has other protections. If they won't renew your lease, they would have to evict you. A process that takes 30 days at least, and requires a visit to a judge. The judge would most likely side with the tenant on this one.

[pb7]

>If they won't renew your lease, they would have to evict you. A process that takes 30 days at least, and requires a visit to a judge. The judge would most likely side with the tenant on this one.

Why would the judge side with someone that is no longer in a contractual relationship with the landlord? I would certainly not risk the mark against my renting record.

[jedberg]

Because judges are human and at least in the California cities tend to be more liberal and anti-landlord.

Also there are so many tenant protection laws, it may not be possible to just not accept rent. I've honestly never looked into it because I wouldn't do that to someone.