The Lawyers.com Law Forums will be shutting down on June 30, 2017. We encourage you to resolve any outstanding discussions prior to that time. If you have any questions about this change, please email info@martindale.com.

Landlord Wants to Sell Instead of Re-Rent

Previous | Next
 rated by 0 users
Latest post Thu, Jun 8 2017 11:13 AM by Drew. 3 replies.
  • Thu, Jun 8 2017 5:58 AM

    Landlord Wants to Sell Instead of Re-Rent

    Long story short, I requested that the landlord agree to terminate my residential lease early.  Instead of attempting to re-rent, the landlord wants to sell the property.  Selling obviously is a longer process and much more complex and invase to me as a tenant than simply re-renting.  I am located in New Jersey, which requires that landlord's mitigate their damages.  Is attempting to sell instead of re-rent reasonable mitigation? 

  • Thu, Jun 8 2017 9:27 AM In reply to

    Re: Landlord Wants to Sell Instead of Re-Rent

    RBarbour12345:
    Selling obviously is a longer process and much more complex and invase to me as a tenant than simply re-renting.

    If you're terminating your lease and moving, what difference does it make?

     

    RBarbour12345:
    Is attempting to sell instead of re-rent reasonable mitigation?

    It's not mitigating at all, and you should have no liability for rent after the time when the landlord could have secured a replacement tenant.

  • Thu, Jun 8 2017 9:51 AM In reply to

    Re: Landlord Wants to Sell Instead of Re-Rent

    RBarbour12345:
      Is attempting to sell instead of re-rent reasonable mitigation? 

    That question may be premature.

    A landlord has no duty to mitigate until the tenant breaches the lease which involves abandoning or surrendering the premises and ceasing the payment of rent.

    As long as you are still in occupancy and still paying, you are not in breach of the lease so what the landlord is doing or not doing is irrelevant at this point.

    Even after you've breached the lease the question of mitigation doesn't arise until the landlord sues you and you get to raise lack of mitigation as a defense. That's when the landlord has to show that he properly mitigated. If he didn't it could reduce or eliminate any monetary damages to which he may be entitled.

    Read Sommer v Kridel. The NJ Supreme Court explained the landlord's duty to mitigate and that rule has generally been followed since then.

    https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=446948677125117679&q=sommer+v+kridel&hl=en&as_sdt=4,31

    For more information on New Jersey's position on mitigation read:

    http://mskf.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/AMS_ChangingStandards.pdf

    Bottom line: Saying he isn't mitigating at this point is likely meaningless.

     

     

    • The right of the people 
    • to keep and bear arms,
    • shall not be infringed.
  • Thu, Jun 8 2017 11:13 AM In reply to

    • Drew
      Consumer
    • Top 10 Contributor
    • Joined on Thu, Mar 30 2000
    • PA
    • Posts 51,431

    Re: Landlord Wants to Sell Instead of Re-Rent

    I am agreeing with adjusterjack...and adding IF you reach a mutual separation agreement and surrender  then the issue of mitigation should be moot....but it might be wise to carefully word the separation/surrender so it is clear .

    As a practical matter if you want a cooperative exit it may be logical to cooperate with LL to show the unit be it to potential buyers or to potential tenants .

     



Page 1 of 1 (4 items) | RSS

My Community

Community Membership Search Community