• Zagorath@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    Where I live, there are two types of leases. Periodic and fixed-term. Fixed-term is where you sign a lease saying you can stay for 6 months or 12 months. Theoretically longer, but those are the normal lengths. Periodic leases are indefinite, but can be broken with some notice.

    That term would not be available in the middle of fixed-term leases, only on periodic. Where I live, our state government passed laws preventing “no grounds evictions”, but they allowed a number of exceptions for what counts as “grounds”, and one of those causes is “end of fixed-term lease”. The main difference between my current state laws and the proposal above is to specifically outlaw that grounds. In fact, what’s commonplace right now where I live is that you get your 6 month lease, and at the same time you get a “notice to vacate” (an eviction notice, effectively) dated 6 months from now. And if, after 4-ish months, both you and the landlord want you to stay, they cancel the notice to vacate and get you a new lease to sign. My main intent here is to outlaw this practice.

    I think allowing this use in some form is important because I’ve seen cases where it comes up. People move elsewhere for a period of time that’s long enough that it would be a bad idea (both for their personal finances and for supply of housing) to leave it empty, but not long enough that they want to sell. Think 2–5 years or so. I want to make sure that these people are as strongly incentivised to rent out their place as possible, which means removing obstacles such as “you might not be able to move back in once you return if you do rent it”.

    (Also, cousins are not immediate family members.)

    • Confused_Emus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      Ok, that makes more sense. Periodic I think would be the same as what I’ve heard called “month-to-month,” which does make sense to be a more tentative arrangement. I gotcha now.

      • Zagorath@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Yeah month-to-month is another name for the same thing. Generally, you fall back onto a periodic lease if your fixed-term lease expires and you aren’t given another fixed-term lease to sign. With our current laws where I am, a period lease is actually incredibly secure, thanks to the relatively recent “no grounds evictions” ban. The two types of leases have the same “grounds” apply to each, except that “end of fixed-term lease” is one which obviously doesn’t apply to a periodic lease. So the current situation is that you get that immediate day-one “notice to vacate” because landlords desperately want to avoid you ending up on a periodic lease where you’re better protected.

        My changes were basically “hey, fixed-term leases shouldn’t be less secure than periodic leases are”.