[WSBARP] UDs and Eviction Notice

Sat Aug 15 11:02:48 PDT 2015

I specifically state in my leases that when the original term is up or any renewal term then tenant agrees to vacate upon termination and if tenant doesn't then tenant pays prorata amount of lease payment until vacated.  I put no holdover language in the lease.

This transmission contains confidential attorney-client communications and may not be disclosed to any person but the intended recipient(s).  If this matter is transmitted to you in error, please notify the sender immediately.

Bryce H. Dille
Campbell, Dille, Barnett & Smith,  PLLC
P.O. Box 488
Puyallup, WA  98371
Voice:  253.848.3513
Fax: 253.845.4941
bryced at cdb-law.com<mailto:bryced at cdb-law.com>

Business Entity Creation and Management
Business, Government and Tax Law
Real Estate and Land Use, Residential, Commercial and Condominium Development
Real Estate and Commercial Transactions & Closings, Including Performing Services as IRS Section 1031 Exchange Facilitator
Estate Planning, including Wills and Trusts, and Probate Administration
Representation Homeowners/Condominium Association Real Estate Developments
Real Property Foreclosures and Forfeitures

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com [mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of Paul
Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2015 10:46 AM
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] UDs and Eviction Notice

That is what I have done in the past and will continue to do now so I consider this mostly an intellectual discussion.     That said, it adds an extra consideration to drafting leases.  It is my understanding that attorneys, myself included, add the "rent for hold-over period" so we can charge rent while the T is holding over.  But that seems to put the client in a catch-22 situation, because adding that language automatically kicks the lease into a rolling month-to-month lease and prevents the LL from evicting the T under RCW 59.12.030(1) (i.e., the expiration the term of the lease.)  Regarding not giving notice, while I might not win in front of a judge who doesn't want to follow the law, I certainly can make a straight face argument that the T knew it was a year lease, signed a year lease, should be expected to move out at the end of a year, and LL shouldn't be obligated to give the T a notice to move out after a year for a one year lease.

Additional, it seems counterintuitive to me to give a 3-day pay or quit notice to a T under these circumstances (the year is up and LL hasn't accepted rent for the next month) when the LL doesn't want the T to "pay."  The LL only wants the T to "quit."

And some of you might think that a LL should give a 20 day notice prior to the end of the one-year lease but any time prior to the end of the lease is still under the original term of the lease and not under the month-to-month terms of the lease yet. So, the twenty-day notice should be ineffective because the parties were not operating under the terms of the month-to-month lease at the time the notice was given.
________________________________
From: mfry at lyon-law.com<mailto:mfry at lyon-law.com>
To: wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 23:24:54 +0000
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] UDs and Eviction Notice
Paul:
That is an auto renewal provision and pretty common.  You have a month to month.  Serve the 3-day for rent (9 months wow!) and the 20-day for end of Sept as it is too late for August.  I always put in bold when serving multiple notices that Landlord has the right to proceed with an eviction under any of the notices given.

Marcus J. Fry
Lyon, Weigand & Gustafson, P.S.
Adoption Attorney*
P.O. Box 1689
Yakima, Washington  98907
Telephone:  (509) 248-7220
Facsimile:  (509) 575-1883

NOTICES:
 *Adoption Attorney reflects election as a Fellow of the American Academy of Adoption Attorneys, an invitation based organization of 300+ attorneys nationwide, under its criteria of experience, ethics and peer recommendation. Washington's Supreme Court has not yet developed or recognized a credentialing process for specialties, and certification/fellowship is not required to practice law in this state.
Confidentiality: This e-mail transmission may contain information which is protected by attorney-client, work product and/or other privileges.  If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, or taking of any action in reliance on the contents, is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this transmission in error, please contact us immediately and return the e-mail to us by choosing Reply (or the corresponding function on your e-mail system) and then deleting the e-mail.

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> [mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of Tom J. Westbrook
Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 4:22 PM
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] UDs and Eviction Notice

Hi Paul,

I can't imagine any jurist letting you off without some notice to vacate - no matter what the statute or lease says. Give notice before you start the ULD. You don't want to be arguing it later when you can prevent the argument now. My 2 cents.

Sincerely,

Tom

Thomas J. Westbrook
Attorney at Law

[cid:image001.jpg at 01CFC835.0D3988D0]

Rodgers, Kee & Card, P.S.
324 West Bay Drive NW, Suite 201
Olympia, Washington  98502

Phone: 360-352-8311
Facsimile: 360-352-8501
Email: tjw at buddbaylaw.com<mailto:tjw at buddbaylaw.com>
Skype: thomas.westbrook
www.buddbaylaw.com<http://www.buddbaylaw.com>

The information contained in this email and attachment(s) are for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain private, privileged and/or confidential information.  If you are not the addressee, you are strictly prohibited from reading, photocopying, distributing or otherwise using this email or its contents in any way. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone at 360-352-8311 or by e-mail to reception at buddbaylaw.com<mailto:reception at buddbaylaw.com>, and destroy the original message from your electronic files.

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> [mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of Paul Neumiller
Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 2:41 PM
To: wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: [WSBARP] UDs and Eviction Notice

Dear UD Gurus, RCW 59.12.030(1) says that no eviction notice is necessary at the end of the term of the lease.  And, RCW 59.12.030(2) says that you have to give a twenty day notice for a month-to-month lease.  Most residential leases (at least the one I'm reviewing) are for a set period (i.e. one year) with a provision that if the T holds over, the lease converts to a month-to-month lease.  End of lease was July 31 and LL wants T out but LL hasn't given T any kind of written notice, yet.

OK, so under this type of lease language, is my client ok with giving no notice because the lease expired and the LL hasn't accepted any additional rent payments or must LL give T the twenty day notice because the lease has automatically converted to a month-to-month lease?  (Actually, T is about 9 months behind in rent so I am going to give a 3-day notice just to cover all of my bases but I thought that maybe I don't need to even give the 3-day notice because the lease just expired anyway) Any thoughts or case law out there?

_______________________________________________ WSBARP mailing list WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20150815/0133c1f4/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2633 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20150815/0133c1f4/image001.jpg>