Are my tenants entitled to stay beyond their lease period on a month-to-month basis or are they required to leave by the last day in their lease term?
<p>This is for the state of Colorado.</p>

<p>My current tenants' lease expires on 6/30/2016. I informed them on 4/20/2016 that I was planning to sell the house, but that the terms of their lease would not be affected unless they wanted to move out early, which I even offered them money for doing so.</p>

<p>Since then, they have been very difficult regarding granting me access to the property in order to assess/plan renovations before listing it. They have also asked to use their security deposit as last month's rent to ease some of the financial strain of moving. Although I fully recognize this strain and can empathize 100%, I denied this request as I am aware of quite a bit of damage and unauthorized modifications that will require that security deposit to repair.</p>

<p>I have tried to contact them to see how the new-house-hunting was coming along and mostly to get a good sense that they will in fact be moving out on or before 6/30. Responses have been very vague and from the latest one, it does not sound like they have found a place yet and are planning to be out at the end of their lease.</p>

<p>Here is the language from the lease regarding the matter:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>NOTICE TO QUIT AND HOLDOVER. At least 30 days prior to the expiration
  of the Agreement Term, Tenant shall provide Landlord with written
  notice of Tenant’s intention to vacate the Premises by the end of the
  Agreement Term. If such notice is not timely given, Tenant shall be
  liable for the rent due for the following month, if the Premises is
  not rented to another tenant. If Tenant continues in possession of the
  Premises after the expiration of the Agreement Term, Tenant shall be
  deemed a holdover tenant and the tenancy shall be month-to-month.
  During such holdover tenancy, the monthly rent shall be $3500 and all
  other terms and conditions of this Agreement shall remain in effect,
  and Tenant must provide Landlord with 30 days’ written notice of
  Tenant’s intention to vacate the Premises. Landlord may terminate a
  month-to-month tenancy by providing 30 days’ written notice to Tenant.</p>
</blockquote>

<p><br>
<strong>Edit</strong><br>
And here's how the term of the lease is defined:</p>

<blockquote>
  <ol start="4">
  <li>AGREEMENT TERM. The term of the Agreement begins on 07-01-2015, and it ends at 11:59 p.m. on 06-30-2016 (“Agreement Term”).
  
  <hr></li>
  </ol>
</blockquote>

<p>A couple questions:</p>

<ol>
<li>was the notice I gave on 4/20/2016 sufficient for informing them that they would not be given the option to renew their lease and that they may not stay on a month-to-month basis either? or can they get away with claiming they were not given proper notice and and stay an extra month, requiring me to give 30 days notice to terminate their month-to-month stay?</li>
<li>the rental market here is seriously booming... and the "hot" season for selling is all but completely wound down for the year. I am having serious thoughts about aborting the plan to list the house for sale and continue renting. Even if I do continue to rent, I do not want to rent to the current tenants, as they have been quite deceitful/dishonest, broken many of the "house rules" and have not kept the house in an acceptable state of repair. Will this cause a problem since the reason I gave for them having to move out was my intention to sell the house? or am I free to change my mind at will?</li>
</ol>

<p>Thank you all in advance for any wisdom/insight you may have to share.</p>

<p>Saying that you intend to sell the house (and offering an out for early termination) is not the same as providing written notice that the tenant must leave. The clause you cite says that you "may terminate a month-to-month tenancy by providing 30 days’ written notice to Tenant", so the question is whether you did that. At the end of the lease period, the tenant may remain even if the lease is not renewed, and they become holdover tenants. You can subsequently boot them out, after 30 day's notice (plus legal processing time, if it comes to that). However regardless of what the lease says, you have to obey Colorado law, so note <a href="http://www.landlord.com/statutes_colorado.htm" rel="nofollow">Colo. Rev. Stat. §13-40-107(1)</a> which says</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>(1) A tenancy may be terminated by notice in writing, served not less
  than the respective period fixed before the end of the applicable
  tenancy, as follows:  (a) A tenancy for one year or longer, three
  months</p>
</blockquote>

<p>104(c-e) defines "unlawful detention" as applicable to tenants; you have to state your legal basis, sign it, and deliver it to the tenant.</p>

<p>The question then is whether you served them a proper demand per section 104, in writing per 106, served in a timely fashion per 107 and manner per 108. If so, they should leave when the lease is up, and if they don't, then there is the whole eviction process. Serving notice according to the law is quite important. </p>

<p>[Addendum]</p>

<p>Pursuant to §13-40-107(4), if the lease terminates at a specific time (i.e. it actually says "expires June 30, 2016" or something like that), no notice to quit is required.</p>

<p>Having located a relevant case, <a href="https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1199743/first-interstate-bank-v-tanktech-inc/" rel="nofollow">First Interstate Bank v. Tanktech, Inc., 864 P.2d 116</a> says that "The operation of the holdover tenancy doctrine in Colorado is well established. A holdover tenant is one who continues in possession of the premises beyond the term of the lease...Once a lease expires and the tenant remains in possession of the premises, the landlord may elect to treat the tenant as a trespasser, or may waive the wrong of holding over and continue the tenancy. In the latter case, and in the absence of a new agreement, the law implies a new contract between the parties based upon the same terms and conditions as the expired lease. It is also true that the <strong>acceptance of rent by a landlord upon expiration of the lease is sufficient to create a holdover tenancy</strong>." (emphasis added, citations omitted). The court also note in this case that the landlord failed to repudiate the prior lease, suggesting that explicit repudiation is a good idea.</p>

residential-lease landlord