For a sale, an open house similarly would be a bad idea. It also is unnecessary. I can't speak for the tenant's location, but where I live I think most properties do not sell through open houses, and if the tenant is vacating, it is particularly unnecessary. I think the landlord is likely to benefit by waiting to put the house on the market once it is vacant.You are right re: the quoted section, and I initially misunderstood "open house", not realizing it was open house for the purpose of selling real estate. I somehow thought "open house" in this context meant a blocked 5-7 hours during which landlord sequentially shows the house to prospective renters. My mistake, obviously.Nonsense. Open houses do not need to be and should not be scheduled while a tenant still lives in the property. This is done so that the landlord does not have to show to individual prospective tenants, violating the tenant's full use and enjoyment of the property for the benefit of the landlord. The tenant could consider informing the landlord that having an open house while the tenant lives there is denying them full use and enjoyment of the property, though making things adversarial can lead to other issues. I certainly would refuse to vacate the property for an open house if it were my tenancy, but don't know what is best for the OP. It perhaps comes down to whether in the OP's state landlord-tenant law supercedes the rental agreement if there is a conflict.Unfortunately, it’s part and parcel of renting a unique property (as opposed to one unit out of 50+ similar units).
Statistics: Posted by Northern Flicker — Sun Jun 02, 2024 11:26 pm — Replies 36 — Views 2596