Wonderful perspectives. Thanks again!
@Greg H. this is a TAR lease and all of the language I have quoted is evidently standard in that template. The lease TWICE states, in conspicuous text (once underlined and once in bold-face) that the Landlord has no duty to pay back the security deposit absent the Tenant providing a forwarding address. So pretty good argument that these conditions would stick under the principle of freedom of contract, regardless of whether the property code would generally lead to a different outcome unless this is deemed contrary to public policy for grown-ups to agree to this (doubt it but maybe tenants are selectively handled under the case law roughly like children in the sense that the average tenant may be deemed by the courts as essentially lacking the capacity to agree to modifications of the security deposit conditions that may disadvantage them).
Also, "Abandonment" is a defined term:
(3) "Abandonment" occurs when all of the following occur:
(a) all occupants have vacated the Property, in Landlord's reasonable judgment;
(b) Tenant is in breach of this lease by not timely paying rent; and
(c) Landlord has delivered written notice to Tenant, by affixing it to the inside of the main entry door or if the Landlord is prevented from entering the Property by affixing it to the outside of the main entry door, stating that Landlord considers the Property abandoned, and Tenant fails to respond to the affixed notice by the time required in the notice, which will not be less than 2 days from the date the notice is affixed to the main entry door.
But as is occasionally the case in this lease, terms are defined but then used in a de-capitalized manner earlier or before, which permits the legalistic argument that the de-capitalized use of the term is broader. For example, the lease also states in a random manner, tucked into the "Move-Out Conditions" clause:
Tenant may not abandon the property. (emphasis in original)
What does this mean? Who knows. The only way we could divine the impact would be by reference to case law. (Interestingly, all of these kinds of ambiguities in the TAR lease would tend to be resolved in favor of the Landlord in my view -- though just speculating. So perhaps tactical.)
To the other comments, the Tenant has clearly moved out as one can see by peering into a window. But she has left a critical mass of belongings there sufficient to give me pause.
I have no way whatsoever to contact her. She doesn't answer mail and never picks up her phone. Will just wait it out and hope nobody breaks in.
Thanks again!
