[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.