Multiple/New Tenants and Property Damage

[LifeLessons]

My jurisdiction is: Georgia, USA

I've already read through the Official Code of Georgia and West's Annoted Georgia Code, as well as Georgia Jurisprudence on this issue but still have a lot of questions.

My friend (henceforth the SUBJECT) entered into a lease agreement for 6 months along with 2 other people (henceforth referred to as co-tenants). 1 of the co-tenants never did sign the lease, but I understand this is not necessary. The lease was simply a house, the owner is a private person who does NOT own 10 properties or use a property manager. The owner was agreeing to the lease with some understanding that the Subject would be the more "responsible" party.

The Subject decided they did not want to move into the house, so never did. The landlord was made aware that the Subject would not be living in the house, and thus was asked to take the Subject off the lease and/or redo or end the lease. The landlord did not do this. The Subject continued paying rent although not residing on the property.

Later on, two more people moved in to this house (new tenants), who were friends of the co-tenants. The landlord was aware of this and accepted money directly from the new tenants. At this point the Subject ceased paying rent. The co-tenants and new tenants all moved out at the end of the original 6 month term.


Questions: Wouldn't the landlord accepting money directly from new tenants create a landlord-tenant relationship? Clearly, this was an oral agreement for less than one year. Would it be considered an assignment of Subject's lease? Or a sub-lease? (not initiated by Subject) Or?

Was the Subject's lease effectively cancelled when new tenants moved and started paying? Is the Subject still liable for any damages caused by new tenants?

 

[Gail_in_Georgia]

If the landlord sues, he's likely to go for the person(s) whose name(s) is/are on the lease. Your friend Mr. Subject never got his name off the lease (although he asked and the landlord refused).

When the new tenants moved in, did anyone come up with a sublease so that, if the issue of damages goes to court they'll be some evidence of the new folks living there?

Gail

 

[LifeLessons]

Landlord has begun suit, against only the Subject and no others, even though it is for damage by one new tenant, witnessed by several people.

New tenants apparently did not have any official paperwork.

 

[LifeLessons]

Also, is the landlord allowed to go around telling people that Mr. Subject owes them money?

 

[Gail_in_Georgia]

Just who is he providing this information to?

Gail

 

[LifeLessons]

To quite a few unrelated parties around this small town, including co-workers at the landlord's office job and people at a party.

 

[LifeLessons]

Okay, another relevant fact, the lease was for 6 months, but just before 5 months were up the landlord told the tenants the lease was "over" and to get out immediately, which they did.

I understand in GA that a lease-for-years cannot be verbally "cancelled" early by the landlord, and even a month-to-month lease or lease at will requires a 60-day notice by the landlord!! Right? So the landlord could actually be sued for breach of contract, right?

 

[Gail_in_Georgia]

Possibly. The landlord verbally telling the tenants to "get out" had no legal power behind it; they could have ignored this. They didn't.

And unless Mr. Subject can prove that the landlord going around telling folks he owes money has damaged him in some way (i.e., cost him to lose his job, for example) there is nothing wrong with this.

Gail

 

[LifeLessons]

The lease specified there was to be no subletting. Unknown to Mr. Subject, 2 different people moved in to this house and started sharing rent with the 2 lessee occupants. The landlord did know about this. When Mr. Subject found out, he approached the landlord and requested to be removed from lease and for a new lease to be drawn up, as he did NOT agree to be on any lease with these new people. The landlord refused. But doesn't the allowing of subletting, in violation of the lease and against the will of one of the lessees, terminate the lease? (In which case the occupants all would have been tenants-at-will?)

 

[Gail_in_Georgia]

Nope. As you yourself wrote in your first posting, signing a lease is not required (and yes, all these folks who didn't sign would be considered month to month tenants, or tenants at will).

Mr. Subjects big problem was that he signed a legal contract (the lease) for a six month period of time and then decided he didn't want to live there.

Gail

 

[LifeLessons]

So, within the same home, there can be a 6 month lease-for-years, as well as tenants-at-will? Even though the tenant-at-will is paying their rent to one of the tenants who pays the landlord in lump sum?

The landlord verbally told the tenants that the lease "was over" a month prior to the 6 month period, as there was a late fee unpaid although rent was paid up. Not knowing any better, all occupants moved out. They had not turned in the keys yet as they were planning to fix the damage, but the landlord changed the locks and installed new people before the 6 months was up. Since the landlord didn't properly request possession (in writing), and then took possession before the tenants officially quit the place (did repairs and turned in keys) is the landlord at fault for doing an improper eviction?

 

[Gail_in_Georgia]

The fellow who signed the six month lease is only responsible for this time period UNLESS the lease stipulated differently. Some leases will document they will switch to a month to month tenancy after the initial lease period is over UNLESS the tenant or landlord formally ends this. Formally means written documentation.

What does the lease say about this?

When all the tenants left, it could certainly be argued in court that the landlord felt the tenants abandoned the place and went ahead, changed the locks and rerented it. If he was smart he would have filed for a dispossessory affidavit to legally get the unit back.

Whether the landlord did an illegal eviction would be up to a judge to decide.

Once new tenants were in and paying, the previous tenants would no longer be responsible for the rent, although they might be reponsible for any damage beyond normal wear and tear that took place while they occupied the unit. The options the landlord then has is keeping a certain portion (or all) of any security deposit to pay for these damages (they would still need to notify the former tenants of the status of any security deposit within the 1 month requirement in Georgia) or filing a lawsuit against them for the amount not covered by the security deposit.

Gail

 

[LifeLessons]

"The fellow who signed the six month lease is only responsible for this time period UNLESS the lease stipulated differently. Some leases will document they will switch to a month to month tenancy after the initial lease period is over UNLESS the tenant or landlord formally ends this. Formally means written documentation.

What does the lease say about this?"

Three people signed the 6 month lease that said "no subleasing".
Later, a 4th person moved in and started paying rent, which the landlord knew and allowed, but Mr. Subject, one of the original three, did NOT agree to and objected.

All these things happened before the original 6 months were up!

 

[LifeLessons]

Okay, thank you. I think this might be amiably resolved, and if it isn't, we found out that the probable judge (up near Roswell) has a good record for these type cases.