month-to-month

[unbibium]

Is it just me, or have apartment complexes started to be a bit more demanding when it comes to lease agreements?

In 2000, when I went month-to-month, it cost me an extra $25 a month.  Piece of cake.

In 2001, I spent a little time on a month-to-month lease too.  That was an extra $50 a month.

In 2007, I'm paying for October outside of a lease agreement, and it's costing me an extra $100.  That's peanuts compared to what they'd charge me if I broke my lease.

I'm hearing reports that some apartments' month-to-month rates are $250 higher.

I suppose if we're taking this sort of abuse from our cell phone companies, why should landlords miss out?

Comments

[surferelf.livejournal.com]

The rental market might be tightening because of foreclosures due to the sub-prime lending mess. Or perhaps your landlord just expects that they will, which is pretty much the same thing.

When I rented, I was always askeert of breaking the lease, which resulted in me always having to move during the New Year's holiday. My wife says that I was a fool, because anyone can break the lease agreement without incurring a penalty by calling the rental office and saying, "Hello! I'm not going to pay you any more money. Would you like me to leave now?"

[pentomino.livejournal.com]

That's kind of brave, considering every apartment complex seems to be owned by a large multi-state corporation that would charge me anyway and send me to collections and it would at least frak up my credit.

Though after I've given my current landlord my keys, I'll ask them if that works.