I need to break my lease (for a job) which renews in May (I verbally renewed last month). I put down a security deposit + first and last month rent when I moved in. My lease does not state anything about rules or penalties resulting from breaking a lease - can they keep all the deposits I put down? Thanks.

While I cannot advise you because of unfamiliarity with your state's laws, there might be some similarities to Arizona's, which is where I run a program helping people lawfully to terminate their leases.

First and foremost, one would consider whether a verbal renewal carries any weight in your state. Most leases I have seen, including many from national companies, have clauses that govern what happens at the end of the lease. They truly run the gamut, some saying that the tenancy automatically becomes a month-to-month unless either party gives written notice to not renew 30 or more days prior to the contract's natural expiration. Others say the lease automatically renews along the same terms and conditions as the original, unless the parties give written notice otherwise. Still, others are silent on the matter, which, in Arizona, means that the contract ends upon expiration, with the expectation that the tenant is expected to vacate at that time, unless the parties arrange otherwise. So, you should carefully examine the lease and your state's laws.

A secondary factor you already alluded to, which is whether or not a there is a 'liquidated damage' clause in the lease that is assessed in lieu of actual potential damages (e.g. lost rent) that could be hard to calculate. It is contrary to public policy to assess both liquidated and actual damages. So, if the lease were lawfully construed to have been renewed, then, absent the assessment of liquidated damages, a landlord can make the case that he has suffered actual damages, and come against a tenant for those damages.

Assuming that the landlord could potentially make legitimate claims against you, several factors might come into play.

In Arizona, there is a duty to mitigate damages. This could mean that a landlord has the obligation to try to relet the premises, and if it is demonstrated that he has not done so, then the argument could be made that he has no legitimate claims for ongoing rent. One scheme is to send a friend or associate to see if the landlord is willing to show the apartment to prospective renters after the tenant has left. If not, then it can be argued that the landlord is augmenting, rather than mitigating, his damages, and thereby waived the right to claim those damages.

In Arizona, a landlord has a duty to return a deposit, including prepaid rent, within 14 business days of the tenant terminating, vacating and demanding the deposit back. If the landlord does not reply in that timeframe, he has waived the right to claim those monies, and the tenant has the right to the return of the deposit and prepaid rent monies, plus damages for wrongful withholding. Even if he does reply, there are numerous arguments that can be made to refute what is claimed, and each state's laws will likely vary in this regard. Again, as to Arizona, absent any liquidated damage clause, a landlord can only claim what he has actually suffered.

If it is necessary to "break a lease," an approach that we take is to allege landlord violations. These can range from physical problems with the dwelling, to contractual illegalities, to other illegalities that render the premises unfit or illegal for habitation. This runs counter to the idea of telling a landlord that one must leave for personal reasons, such as new job or marriage or divorce or medical or buying a house. In fact, if we find it necessary to help tenants terminate, we always dissuade them from citing personal motivations. This is because if the landlord declines to cooperate, he then has knowledge and/or evidence that could validate his argument that complaints later lodged by the tenant are disingenuous. In other words, the tenant would likely get nowhere with making complaints about the landlord or dwelling conditions, should that become necessary. So, a tenant should only negotiate if he is willing to abide by a failure to secure the landlord's accommodation.

You may want to check out our website, http://www.arizonatenants.com for other factors that often arise when people break their leases. Particularly, peruse the articles in our Tenant Library section, because we have an article addressing security deposits, and another addressing how to refute landlord claims. Although there are undoubtedly discrepancies between Arizona law and your state's, there may be a good deal of common ground, because Arizona's state landlord-tenant act is based on the uniform landlord-tenant language adopted by many other states. So a lot of the topics we cover may apply to people outside Arizona. In any case, certainly it will raise issues for you to examine.

I hope this information has been helpful.

Possibly and they could sue you for the lease period, so I suggest taking the lease to a local attorney for review on how to break the lease. I suggest expplaining the situation to the landlord, asking for a mutual release and letting them retain the security deposit, but return the first and last month's rent.