Question

Pauline Chasse has just signed a lease agreement with landlord, Wayne Godbrey to rent a house he owns in Delano. The lease states definite beginning (January 1, 2016) and ending (October 30, 2016) dates, and sets forth the rent amount and due dates and all additional property and personal information required in such a lease. Wayne hands a copy to Pauline, but she notices that he has not signed it. When she comments about this to him, he tells her that signatures are not necessary since the lease is for less than a year. Which of the following is true of this situation?a. Wayne is correct. Under the Statute of Frauds in California, leases of less than one year are not even required to be in writing, and therefore, signatures are not required.
b. Leases of less than one year are not required to be in writing. However, if a lease IS in writing, then it must be signed by the lessor (in this case, Wayne).
c. Leases of less than one year are not required to be in writing; but if there is a written lease, then it must be signed by both the lessee and lessor.
d. Because the property being leased is located in Northern California, a lease agreement is required to be both written and signed by the lessor if the lease period is for 6 months or more. Therefore, Wayne was incorrect and he must sign the lease. If he does NOT sign the lease, then it will remain valid, but will not be court-enforced, should Pauline default on any of the related provisions.

Answer 1

Answer:

The correct option is answer B

Explanation:

According to the California Principles of Real State, leases of less than one year are not required to be in writing. The consent of both parties is enough to bind themselves in the lease agreement. However, in order to keep things strictly legal and reassure certain aspects of the agreement, both parties may state it in written and sign it. If a lease IS in writing, then it must be signed by the lessor (in this case, Wayne).