Suppose that a tenant, T, has been renting an apartment for several years in NJ. The initial term of the lease was for 1 year and then converted into a month to month tenancy after the first year.
The home was sold to a new owner, N and N moved to terminate the tenancy immediately after purchasing the home by sending out a Notice to Quit that terminated the tenancy after 1 month. Even though N terminated the tenancy, N continued to accept rent from T for two months after the termination date on the Notice to Quit.
T wants to dispute both the underlying grounds for termination as well as the validity of the Notice to Quit.
T's original lease from the previous owner, O contains an arbitration agreement. Can T legally force N to arbitrate both the underlying grounds for termination and the validity of the Notice via arbitration, not in court?
According to @ David Siegel, the arbitration agreement is binding on N just as it is on the original owner.
Can the new owner, N, argue that s/he isn't bound by the arbitration agreement since T is in a month to month tenancy and s/he moved to terminate the tenancy as soon as s/he purchased the home?
Whether or not N is bound by the arbitration agreement depends on two factors:
- analysis of the underlying contract - whether it is binding only during the first year or also during the month to month
Paragraph Term states that:
the term of this lease is for 1 year
the parties are bound to this lease for the entire initial term, and any additional term as per Section "Renewal"
Section Renewal states that:
After expiration of the term, this lease shall continue as a month to month tenancy until terminated by either party
Is the month to month tenancy considered an "additional term"?
- whether he is bound by the terms of the lease by law once he accepts rent
Can T legally force N to arbitrate the validity of the Notice to Quit & the underlying cause for eviction during the month to month tenancy?