3K lease breaking clause in VA - how would you handle?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So I'm looking to move to a bigger place before school registration and realized I would owe a fee of nearly $3,400 by my current lease. I'm considering fighting the fee - it is a commercial property so they will re-rent it quickly. I would argue that I will pay any actual costs of the unit being vacant up to the $3400 fee but will not pay if they cannot prove the apartment isn't rented. What would you do?

Well, I certainly wouldn't start out by saying this to them. You need to check with a real estate lawyer familiar with VA laws. Your analysis doesn't sound accurate.

Your position seems to be that you willing to pay the cost of the rent only if the unit is vacant. But, this is not really the situation. If there was no penalty for breaking a lease early, then everyone would essentially have a month-to-month lease and landlords would never be able to plan what their income stream will be for a given month. When a landlord agrees to a month-to-month lease, they usually charge a higher rent, so the cost of a possible tenant change and vacancy is built into the rental price and they are covered for any potential losses. You did not agree to a month-to-month lease with a higher rent. You have been paying the lower rent that is contingent on staying the year so the landlord knows that there will not be a vacancy for that time period and is therefore able to offer you a lower rate. If you want to break the lease early, you are essentially paying at the end the premium that you would have been paying all along if you were renting month-to-month. You are not paying double rent for the months after you leave. The landlord structures his business this way so that over all of his or her units the losses from vacancies are mitigated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it's in your lease and you signed it, why do you feel you don't need to pay it?

Because the clause is illegal.

Why is it illegal?

Falls under double rent and liquid damages which are both illegal in VA.

I didn't realize it was illegal when I signed it.

If you have a commercial landlord, they make sure there are no illegal provisions in their leases as they are a big target for suits. Are you mis-interpreting the provision?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just ask the manager of the property if he is able to rent your apt would he waive your fee. We did and they did. I referred two other families who both rented there and we are all happy.

Thank you PP

[Anonymous]

VA real estate lawyer here. There is a decent argument that the charge is illegal but it would be a fact-specific inquiry. There's no VA statute directly on point, just squishy caselaw. What does this mean for you in practice? If you break your lease early without permission, you WILL be charged, and if you don't pay the charge, they WILL take it out of your sec'y deposit and could well sue you for the balance and report it to the credit bureaus. Without a lawyer, you WILL lose that suit; with a lawyer, you might win, but you'd easily pay a few thousand bucks for the privilege, and you still might lose also, depending on the facts.

That said, to PP: Do not assume that just because a provision is in a lease or contract, it must be legal. Many class action consumer lawyers have made small fortunes by being smarter, and reading more carefully, than the lawyers for the banks/credit card companies.

[Anonymous]

No, it's not illegal if it's a break lease fee. Landlords can't charge double rent, but they can write in a reasonable fee for breaking a lease early (and anything less than the remaining months of rent is not only reasonable, it's a gift). Why do you think this is illegal? If the landlord was somehow stupid enough to call it rent, then sure, but you even used the word fee.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:VA real estate lawyer here. There is a decent argument that the charge is illegal but it would be a fact-specific inquiry. There's no VA statute directly on point, just squishy caselaw. What does this mean for you in practice? If you break your lease early without permission, you WILL be charged, and if you don't pay the charge, they WILL take it out of your sec'y deposit and could well sue you for the balance and report it to the credit bureaus. Without a lawyer, you WILL lose that suit; with a lawyer, you might win, but you'd easily pay a few thousand bucks for the privilege, and you still might lose also, depending on the facts.

That said, to PP: Do not assume that just because a provision is in a lease or contract, it must be legal. Many class action consumer lawyers have made small fortunes by being smarter, and reading more carefully, than the lawyers for the banks/credit card companies.

Speaking of on point, how about lawyers for commercial landlords?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:VA real estate lawyer here. There is a decent argument that the charge is illegal but it would be a fact-specific inquiry. There's no VA statute directly on point, just squishy caselaw. What does this mean for you in practice? If you break your lease early without permission, you WILL be charged, and if you don't pay the charge, they WILL take it out of your sec'y deposit and could well sue you for the balance and report it to the credit bureaus. Without a lawyer, you WILL lose that suit; with a lawyer, you might win, but you'd easily pay a few thousand bucks for the privilege, and you still might lose also, depending on the facts.

That said, to PP: Do not assume that just because a provision is in a lease or contract, it must be legal. Many class action consumer lawyers have made small fortunes by being smarter, and reading more carefully, than the lawyers for the banks/credit card companies.

Speaking of on point, how about lawyers for commercial landlords?

?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No, it's not illegal if it's a break lease fee. Landlords can't charge double rent, but they can write in a reasonable fee for breaking a lease early (and anything less than the remaining months of rent is not only reasonable, it's a gift). Why do you think this is illegal? If the landlord was somehow stupid enough to call it rent, then sure, but you even used the word fee.

Not true. It's called an acceleration clause and VA courts gave occasionally held them to constitute unlawful penalties. But, again, it's a fact-specific inquiry and the law is far from settled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it's in your lease and you signed it, why do you feel you don't need to pay it?

Because the clause is illegal.

Why is it illegal?

Falls under double rent and liquid damages which are both illegal in VA.

I didn't realize it was illegal when I signed it.

Incorrect, in fact in virginia you can legally have the tenants owe the entire

I have a clear rent break clause, an early terminiation fee equivillent to 1 month of rent and any rents due while the unit is vacant.

Under virginia law you cannot collect rent from the previous tenant IF the current unit rented out but a fee is different then rent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it's in your lease and you signed it, why do you feel you don't need to pay it?

Because the clause is illegal.

Why is it illegal?

Falls under double rent and liquid damages which are both illegal in VA.

I didn't realize it was illegal when I signed it.

Incorrect, in fact in virginia you can legally have the tenants owe the entire

I have a clear rent break clause, an early terminiation fee equivillent to 1 month of rent and any rents due while the unit is vacant.

Under virginia law you cannot collect rent from the previous tenant IF the current unit rented out but a fee is different then rent.

Actually the courts have held that the fee is double rent since the fee is usually equal to rent. Also as a liquid damage (estimated damage) the amount won't hold up in court because there is no proof of damage if the unit was rerented.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it's in your lease and you signed it, why do you feel you don't need to pay it?

Because the clause is illegal.

Why is it illegal?

Falls under double rent and liquid damages which are both illegal in VA.

I didn't realize it was illegal when I signed it.

No. You're an idiot.

Pay the fee of you want to be released from your lease early.

[Anonymous]

The point is, if you have to go to court and hire a lawyer, even if you win, you lose.

If more people realize this there wouldn't be nearly as much litigation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it's in your lease and you signed it, why do you feel you don't need to pay it?

Because the clause is illegal.

Why is it illegal?

Falls under double rent and liquid damages which are both illegal in VA.

I didn't realize it was illegal when I signed it.

Incorrect, in fact in virginia you can legally have the tenants owe the entire

I have a clear rent break clause, an early terminiation fee equivillent to 1 month of rent and any rents due while the unit is vacant.

Under virginia law you cannot collect rent from the previous tenant IF the current unit rented out but a fee is different then rent.

Actually the courts have held that the fee is double rent since the fee is usually equal to rent. Also as a liquid damage (estimated damage) the amount won't hold up in court because there is no proof of damage if the unit was rerented.

And my PP calling you an idiot is further reinforced. It is a termination fee, not rent and not accelerated damages. Rent is rent, damages are damages, security deposit is a security deposit, app fees are app fees and termination clauses and fees are termination clauses and fees. There are laws bit UCC and VRLTRA that govern these things.

Suck it up. You're trying to have your cake and eat it too. Basically this post is "I'm not trustworthy and not willing to live up to my word or binding signature. Please someone tell me it's okthT I'm a terrible human being that wants to screw someone else over."

[Anonymous]

UCC is re: goods, does not apply to real property.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it's in your lease and you signed it, why do you feel you don't need to pay it?

Because the clause is illegal.

Why is it illegal?

Falls under double rent and liquid damages which are both illegal in VA.

I didn't realize it was illegal when I signed it.

Incorrect, in fact in virginia you can legally have the tenants owe the entire

I have a clear rent break clause, an early terminiation fee equivillent to 1 month of rent and any rents due while the unit is vacant.

Under virginia law you cannot collect rent from the previous tenant IF the current unit rented out but a fee is different then rent.

Actually the courts have held that the fee is double rent since the fee is usually equal to rent. Also as a liquid damage (estimated damage) the amount won't hold up in court because there is no proof of damage if the unit was rerented.

And my PP calling you an idiot is further reinforced. It is a termination fee, not rent and not accelerated damages. Rent is rent, damages are damages, security deposit is a security deposit, app fees are app fees and termination clauses and fees are termination clauses and fees. There are laws bit UCC and VRLTRA that govern these things.

Suck it up. You're trying to have your cake and eat it too. Basically this post is "I'm not trustworthy and not willing to live up to my word or binding signature. Please someone tell me it's okthT I'm a terrible human being that wants to screw someone else over."

Not OP, but wow, you and I have very different moral codes. You did catch that this is a big commercial landlord right? Do you think that company got to be so big by having a strict moral code of, "Well we signed a contract, so we better abide by it" / "paying all our debts is the most important thing"?

I do not understand people who think that it is morally important to pay their debts to big corporations and failure to do so is immoral, when those same big corporations have no qualms with avoiding paying their debts whenever possible under law.