How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Law Educator, Esq. Your Own Question
Law Educator, Esq.
Law Educator, Esq., Lawyer
Category: Real Estate Law
Satisfied Customers: 117433
Experience:  Licensed attorney practicing landlord-tenant, land use and other real estate law and litigation.
Type Your Real Estate Law Question Here...
Law Educator, Esq. is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

If a Tenant" T" of a Sub tenant" ST" of a condominium owner

Customer Question

if a Tenant " T " of a Sub tenant " ST " of a condominium owner agrees to allow another unrelated party " UR " to rent one of the rooms in that condo but UR never signs a lease with T is there a legal obligation for UR to remain in the premises and continue paying rent if upon entering the premises UR discovers the following :
1) ST is still living in the room so UR needs to rent a hotel room until UR vacates
2) Upon entering the Premises UR finds the conditions of the room and condo untenable because the closets were filled with ST's property and the living had art and other personable items of ST which ST then for the first time inform UR and T that UR and T would be held liable for any damage to the valuable art ( which UR immediately refused to accept responsibility and ask ST to remove all of their personal possession only to be told no . Additionally , upon opening the refrigerator and entering the bathroom UR found mold , decayed food and filth whereby UR had to go buy cleaning supplies and spend an entire day deep cleaning those areas.
#) UR immediately place T and ST on formal notice of UR's desire to move out immediately . T and ST requested UR remain for 30 days allowing them to find a replacement .
on the 30th day UR moved out . ST is now trying the threaten UR for July rent and purported damage to some of their items.
Notwithstanding the fact that UR has been damaged by more then the amount ST is claiming UR moved on and dropped the issue . ST and now claimng that UR owes this money of they will sue UR .
I am curious is UR has any liability to ST for the following reasons:
a) UR never signed a lease or entered any agreement with ST or the owner of the condo .
b) UR had a verbal understanding with T to rent one of the rooms for a little over two months from T based upon certain conditions ,none of which were met . Hence, UR never received what UR bargained for in the verbal understanding with T .
c) UR tried to immediately vacate but was asked by ST and T to remain for 30 days and try to help find a replacement tenant.
d) UR attempted to find a replacement tenant but was told in no uncertain terms by T not to look for a replacement5 for him because he would find his own replacement tenant . To make matters worse , UR did find a replacement tenant to mitigate the situation but was yelled at by T not to give out T's number and let T find his own replacement tenant.
e) upon the 30th day , UR settled up for the time UR lived in the room and then cleaned the room and vacated the premises.
Submitted: 1 year ago.
Category: Real Estate Law
Expert:  Law Educator, Esq. replied 1 year ago.
Thank you for your question. I look forward to working with you to provide you the information you are seeking for educational purposes only.
UR can have a verbal lease agreement, so just because there is no written lease with UR does not mean they cannot have rights to the room they agreed to rent. If the room is not available, then there can be a breach of oral lease agreement with UR and T and he could actually sue for breach of that lease. If UR sought to vacate without 30 day proper notice, but did find an acceptable replacement to pay his rent, then the UR has mitigated the landlord's (T) losses and as T could not show loss with the acceptable replacement tenant that UR provided.
So, if UR obtained a suitable replacement and T refused it and UR moved after 30 days, there is no liability on UR. Furthermore, if UR gave 30 day notice he fulfilled his obligation as well as a month to month tenant, so on both grounds he could avoid further liabilities to T.