If 1 year Lease converts to month to month are both parties liable even if one moved out?

[beachguysb]

Jurisdiction

California

I was curious if Bill Handle (on the Law - on KFI Radio Los Angeles) was right.

He said that if there were two signers to a year lease and it then converted to month to month thereafter - and the girlfriend decided to stay, but the boyfriend didn't - Bill said that the boyfriend would forever be responsible for the rent on the month to month - even though the lease was over - since the girlfriend remained.

But since the month to month conversion wasn't written - shouldn't that release the boyfriend from obligation, since he only signed for 1 year? or since the girlfriend decided to stay, the boy is forever obligated because the terms of the unwritten month-to-month stay the same? That would seem so unfair.

 

[adjusterjack]

There is no one-size-fits-all answer. A lot depends on the terms and conditions of the lease and what happened after the boyfriend leaves and the girlfriend stays. Who said what to who? Who did what? How much time elapsed until a problem arose?

Talking heads on radio and TV often tell only part of the story and leave people with misinformation. Even Judge Judy gets it wrong more often than she would care to admit.

Can you post a link to the broadcast?

 

[zddoodah]

He said that if there were two signers to a year lease and it then converted to month to month thereafter - and the girlfriend decided to stay, but the boyfriend didn't - Bill said that the boyfriend would forever be responsible for the rent on the month to month - even though the lease was over - since the girlfriend remained.

Where there are two tenants, the tenancy does not terminate - and both tenants remain liable to the landlord - until everyone has moved out or a different agreement is made between the tenants and the landlord.