I live in California. Regarding a written month to month rental agreement, does it require signatures from both LL and tenant in order to be considered valid?
I live in California. Regarding a written month to month rental agreement, does it require signatures from both LL and tenant in order to be considered valid?
The short answer is, if you signed it can be enforced against you.
I'll explain a little further. My current LL purchased the property July 2006 and dropped off a document that is extremely sketchy. Basically, it contains some language resembling an agreement, i.e. how much rent, when to pay, who to pay, basic rules etc. The document does not name me as the tenant and there is no signature page. He never signed it and I was never asked to sign anything. Some of the wording used, for example regarding the "Security Deposit" and "Tenant's failure to take possession" state, "on signing this agreement...." but like I said, nothing was ever signed by either of us. Apparently, this is what he deems a month to month lease agreement. I thought, at first, that it was just something stating who to pay the rent to going forward. Since I already had a lease with the previous owners ending May 2007, I didn't give it much thought. Does the document he handed to me have any bearing at all? If you need any further information, please let me know.
If you have a written lease with the former owner, as nothing new has been signed that should govern the landlord-tenant until it expires. If he's trying to impose new terms which will apply after that time, you will need to decide whether you want to abide by his new terms.
Thank you!