Hi I would like to know what qualifies as "reasonable efforts to
rerent a property". I have paid for my lease in full although I moved
out 3 months before the lease ended. I have watched the paper for ads
and have seen ads  about 1 month out of the 3 months. The landlord put
out a small for rent sign on the house but the house is located on a
small dead end street. The only people who drive there are people who
already live there. I feel very frustrated that he didn't run very
many ads. I had given him 6 weeks notice before I moved out and he
didn't run any ad until I complained about it after I moved out. Can I
take him to small claims court? Do I have a prayer?

Susan

---

Clarification of Question by soyshine-ga on 09 Sep 2005 17:07 PDT

I live in Utah.

---

Clarification of Question by soyshine-ga on 09 Sep 2005 23:04 PDT

Hi- Thanks for all of your comments. My lease doesn't say anything
about what happens after the tenant moves out. On the Utah Government
website it says that a landlord is obligated to make "reasonable
efforts" to rerent the space. My only concern is regarding the
definition of reasonable. I guess you are right about it being
determined on a case by case basis. I just wonder if a judge would
side with me if I explained that of the 21 weeks that passed from when
I gave him my notice the ad was in the paper only 4 weeks. Is that
reasonable?

---

Request for Question Clarification by nenna-ga on 12 Sep 2005 14:50 PDT

Did you want him to re-rent the property and refund the 3 months you
have not lived there, or are you talking about after your lease was
up?

Nenna-GA

---

Clarification of Question by soyshine-ga on 12 Sep 2005 16:43 PDT

I would like to be compensated for the period of time that I did not
live there, was still under lease, paid for the rent, but he did not
advertise. He did advertise for a small period of time when I
complained but he quit after a few weeks.

You try reading the information here:

http://www.uls.state.ut.us/uls/flyers/RH052803.htm

I'd say you don't have a prayer.  Unless the law in Utah is really
strange, I don't see why the landlord would be required to make any
effort to find another tenent.  Were there some strange circumstances
that caused you to break the lease?    For example, was the place
unlivable or did they violate some part of your lease agreement?  If
not, you should be responsible for the remainder of the lease because
that's what a lease agreement is all about.

I agree.  Normally the tenant would place an ad to find a new tenant.
Sorry

Actually, a landlord would have to make reasonable efforts to get a
tenant in the place to mitigate his damages - as in trying to make up
for the money lost so that he wouldn't have to sue the person that
broke the lease for the full amount.  Since you've already paid him,
he isn't out anything.  He wouldn't bother suing for breach, I'm sure.
 Now, reasonable is always determined on a case by case basis.  If
he's placing ads and advertising the place for rent, I would say he's
covered.   Sometimes in the lease, even if you break the lease, you
would still have to pay for 2 months, and then any month that the unit
couldn't get rented (my last two leases said that).  If that's the
case, then under the terms of the lease, and following logically from
that, he would really only have to try to cover that last month.  What
did your lease say about the tenant breaking the lease?  That may help
the researcher answer the question better.

This person was not talking about being sued.  They were asking if
they could sue the landlord for not placing ads.

Yeah I know.  I was saying that since the landlord did place an ad if
would be hard to sue since they landlord is doing what he is supposed
to do.