Students, group lease : ezLandlordForms

B

Brokk G

started a topic almost 12 years ago

I've rented this property without issue for 4 years. This year the group living there exploded a few months into the lease and 2 have moved out, sending me "notice" that they no longer intend on paying the rent. I realize by law that I can still hold them responsible for the rent. However if they fight it in court and the judge releases them from the lease, are the remaining tenants responsible for lost rent? The lease is written as a single document with multiple tenants listed and a single rental amount for the whole house.

L

Luis M

said almost 12 years ago

Brokk, did all tenants sign the lease? The law states - Tenants at sufferance in possession of land or tenements shall be liable to pay rent therefor for such time as they may occupy or detain the same.

B

Brokk G

said almost 12 years ago

Yes, all signed the one lease. Copies were provided to everyone. Your statement says "in possession" and "such time as they may occupy". Which sounds like the tenants that broke the lease and left are no longer liable for the rental amount of the house. The laws are written as "tenant" in a singular, so the situation seems a bit confusing when the group splits up. I know that here in MA, if a "tenant" breaks a lease and moves out, they are still liable for the rent for the rest of the term of the lease, but the landlord must show proof of "mitigating damage" by attempting to get a new tenant in their place. The remaining tenants don't believe they can be held responsible for the full rent of the house, while the ones who left feel that the court system here favoring tenants, makes it highly unlikely I would be able to get the rent from them if it came down to a law suit. So I am pursuing both yet confused about what the likely outcomes are.

B

Brokk G

said almost 12 years ago

Yes, all signed the one lease. Copies were provided to everyone. Your statement says "in possession" and "such time as they may occupy". Which sounds like the tenants that broke the lease and left are no longer liable for the rental amount of the house. The laws are written as "tenant" in a singular, so the situation seems a bit confusing when the group splits up. I know that here in MA, if a "tenant" breaks a lease and moves out, they are still liable for the rent for the rest of the term of the lease, but the landlord must show proof of "mitigating damage" by attempting to get a new tenant in their place. The remaining tenants don't believe they can be held responsible for the full rent of the house, while the ones who left feel that the court system here favoring tenants, makes it highly unlikely I would be able to get the rent from them if it came down to a law suit. So I am pursuing both yet confused about what the likely outcomes are.