Is there a specific place in ORC or similar forum that I might copy to show them they owe- that their reason to be excused from their lease isn’t valid? I realize they may be playing dumb in hopes I’ll question myself or let it go. If I could show them specifically and say “see? Here it is.” Then they might believe I am correct and believe I don’t intend to let it go.

A: We have reprinted the section of the Ohio Revised Code governing landlord tenant law at this link. I can’t find a specific provision governing your situation; however, your situation would be governed by the lease. I assume that there was nothing in the lease giving the tenants an out if you don’t accept HUD. I’ve never heard of such a thing. It sounds like the tenants are just trying to get out of their obligation to pay rent because, according to them, you owe it to them. Happily for you, you found new tenants within a short amount of time. You can pursue the tenants in court for the extra $400 if you so choose but it may not be worth your time, effort and money to do so.

If you do decide to pursue your tenants in court, we offer a guide to getting and collecting upon judgments in Ohio at this link.

A.  In Ohio, the answer is that it depends.  There is case law out of Ohio’s Tenth District Court of Appeals that if not all of the tenants listed in the lease signs the lease, then this is grounds to get out before the date of possession.  In one case there were two tenants who were going to rent a garage to start a repair business.  When it came time to sign the lease, only one tenant signed it, and the other tenant refused.  When the landlord tried to hold the one tenant who did sign to the lease agreement, the court held that both tenants had to sign to bind either one.

But if you have taken possession even though not everyone has signed, a court may find that this is an implied or oral lease different from the written lease.

The answer also may be different if not all of your co-signers signed the lease.  The tenant wanting to get out of the lease will argue that there is no difference between tenants who were supposed to sign (as in the case above) and co-signers, since each has duties that the other parties were in theory depending upon.  But a court might buy the idea that co signers and tenants are wholly different, and that the failure of a co-signer to sign does not prejudice the other tenants with co-signers since there is still sufficient security.  I’m not really sure how that one would come out.  All I can do is present the likely arguments and leave it up to the judge.

Check out our Guidebook on how to get out of your lease.