State Specific Question About: NEW JERSEY (NJ)

To suggest an oral agreement is always “useless” is not accurate, under certain fact patterns an oral agreement may be enforceable in NJ courts,

Generally speaking probably not, but there are exceptions to the law, in which a certain fact pattern could result in a lawful oral agreement

Additional info would be helpful to answer the question

Rick,

Thanks for the info regarding oral agreements. This issue has to do with representations before lease was signed and subsequent discussions between landlord and tenant. I'm not looking to get out of any commitments but my tenant who is an attorney is trying to interpret our discussions in a way that is favorable to him. For example he believes I committed to providing snow removal whereas that responsibility is clearly listed under tenant responsibilities in our lease.

He also believes he's entitled to all the storage space in the house even though he knew I would make space for him but have some of the storage area for my things.

Hi Andrew...

You'd want to read your agreement or add a statement, under an atty's direction such as

AGREEMENT: Final and complete. (Zipper clause)

a. This agreement, and any addendum's, supersede and replace any and all expressed, oral or written documents, papers or agreements, discussions, or conversations, heretofore made or existing witnessed or recorded, by and between the parties or their representatives of any sort.

There are legal principles at play here, but state to state rules may vary.

My intuition is that NJ requires certain significant terms of a lease to be in writing and that this might include the storage/use of space issue. This issue goes to the question of what the lease actually covers/what the tenant is paying for. If it's in writing, that's going to predominate over an oral agreement unless there is a "course of dealing" over time that establishes a different use. My sense is, your guy hasn't been here that long, so it's not like you have a ten yr old lease but the guy has been using certain storage space for 5 yrs now.

The general legal principles at play here at called the Four Corners Rule and the Parole Evidence Rule. What these basically say, in sum, is that where there is a written contract, it's tough to overcome the terms of the written agreement unless there are specific public policy or other reasons. (Judges interpret this differently depending on their own views and the context.)

It's fairly obvious why real estate transactions (buy/sell/lease) need to be in writing and why a judge would much prefer to enforce a written contract. It incentivizes LL/T's to put time into the deal up front, to condense their discussion to writing, and to handle significant issues with transparency. Yes, whether or not a tenant can use all of a house or is prohibited from using certain parts is significant. A T's right to use a property as described in a written lease is nearly sacrosanct as a legal matter. It's up there with the LL's duty to provide habitable conditions. It's really one of the few settled issues of LL/T law.

My guess is he's responsible for snow removal, unless it says otherwise in the lease or NJ Law requires you to remove it (ask him what statute?). You would lose on the storage issue unless your lease states otherwise _or_ you can overcome the legal doctrines listed above (e.g. parole evidence) and show that he was aware of your storage needs in a separate written statement, like an email. Even then, bc the contract normally is paramount, I think you lose on storage.

If I were you, I'd plan on moving your things at least for now, unless you had that in your lease. But I would push back on snow removal unless there really is a county or state law. Look at this as a compromise, learn from it, and move on. In the future, anything important enough and foreseeable enough should be put into the lease up front. No, you can't predict everything (hurricanes), but to me if you want to prohibit a tenant leasing your property from using all the space, that absolutely needs to be in writing, in the lease. Good luck.

Everything we agree upon between tenant and landlord is in writing. That way there is no misunderstandings and legal.

Just so everyone knows, when you have a detailed signed rental agreement and then have an issue said to be addressed via an "oral" agreement, a judge is supposed to rely on the original terms in the signed written agreement -- unless both parties stipulate (agree) there was a binding oral item added and agreed upon.

If you have a written lease with this tenant, then you are not talking about an oral agreement, but about either (1) the effect of oral promises that were not contained in the lease or (2) oral modification of the written lease.

You need to carefully review your lease to see what kind of provisions there might be that implicate these two situations.