Paying rent after breaking lease

I'm breaking my lease in VIC, and my agent has told me that I have to continue paying rent after I vacate. This is contrary to what is stated on TUV's website, particularly, "You should only pay rent up until the day that you vacate. Once the new tenants move in, you can then pay the landlord compensation for any lost rent."

Can anyone confirm that if I have to continue paying rent monthly or is TUV applicable?

P.S. I understand I'm liable for all rent until new tenants move in, or the original end date of my lease. I just want to know if paying in a lump sum when they find a new tenant is an option I can choose to take instead of paying as per usual.


  • +3 votes

    One is the tenant's union, one is a real estate agent - I know which one I would listen to.


    what is stated on TUV's website, particularly, "You should only pay rent up until the day that you vacate. Once the new tenants move in, you can then pay the landlord compensation for any lost rent."

    You're looking at assignment which requires the landlords consent. They do not have to consent.

    "this is not always the simplest option as you will need to get the landlord’s consent"

    This one is more applicable:

    "Breaking a lease on the grounds of hardship or by giving up possession…

    The costs you could be liable for include…rent until new tenants move in or until the end of the fixed term (whichever happens first)"

    • +2 votes

      Pretty sure OP is aware of what they are liable for, they are asking about continuing to pay the rent fortnightly or whatever once they vacate, or paying it as a lump sum at the end once a new tenant is found.


    Pretty sure you have to continue paying your rent as you normally do.

  • +2 votes

    IMHO you have chosen to give notice of your intention to breach the lease by vacating early.
    The landlord has accepted your (anticipatory) breach.
    That brings the lease to an end - however, it renders you liable for the landlord's losses that are not able to be mitigated.
    The result of this is that payments under the lease are no longer relevant - as the lease is over.
    You are, however, liable to compensate the landlord for lost rent until a new tenant is located. That loss will not crystalise until the new tenant is found.
    If you continue to pay regularly then you won't be liable for the lump sum, but in my view you have no obligation to pay on a regular basis.

    • +1 vote

      I don't think that there's any dispute that the landlord is terminating for breach. The loss "crystallises" immediately with each passing day but practically it is not going to cost OP anything more if they wait to pay until a new tenant is found, the agent is simply trying to ensure they recover the amount from OP.


    OP is there a fixed break fee under your lease?


    If you were in a fixed term lease and broke it early then you're liable for the rent until new tenants are found, or the lease term expires.

    • +1 vote

      OP understands they must continue paying. It’s more about when they pay. Do they continue paying fortnightly / monthly until that point, or do they pay a lump some when a new tenant is found/the lease expires (whichever happens first)?

  • +1 vote

    Ask yourself this, how can the landlord trust you to pay the full amount once they have found a new tenant? You are the one breaking your lease after all.

  • -1 vote

    You are liable for the rent until the end of the lease - which is legally binding. If the landlord agrees to finding a new tenant then all very good, BUT the landlord can legally leave the place vacant until the lease expires - and you will be liable for the rent.


    Those 2 sentences are saying basically the same thing. One says you keep paying rent the other says you compensate the landlord once the new tennants move in (ie pay rent for the time the place was empty plus other costs)

  • -1 vote

    Everybody stop talking.

    OP go to the real estate agent, show them what you have found and ask if you can pay in a lump sum when the a new tenant is found.

    The Agent is just trying to get you to keep paying as per usual as this means it is in the landlords favour as it'll be business as usual, and the real estate agent won't be getting a call everyday asking where the landlords money is and have they found a new tenant yet.

  • -2 votes

    " compensate the landlord once the new tennants move in"

    what if no new tennant ever moves in? because it was a mining town, and it is now abandoned, bulldozed.

    if you break a lease you pay rent as per when it is due, till the landlord finds a new tenant or the original lease date expires. surely this is common sense, why would you not expect to pay the rent until a tennant is found, id say this is an error in the wording.?


    From what I understand, if there is a break fee in the contract, tenant pays this as a fee separate to rent (usually 4 weeks if there's less than 50% of the fixed term remaining), and must also pay rent until they hand over the keys.

    If no break fee, tenant is liable for all rent up until the end of the contract, or up until a new tenant moves in, whichever is sooner + any costs incurred to market the property (agent fees, listing fees on domain/real estate)

    Landlord may not have agreed to rent to tenant if they had known the period would be significantly shorter and would have to go through the move in/move out, screening, bond, reference etc process again so soon.

    If the landlord agrees though, through assignment, the tenant/landlord/agent can find a replacement tenant who will take over the remainder of the fixed term lease (often this ends up being remainder of lease + new term; ie 2 months remaining + new 12 months = 14 months)


      Just re-read Op's question - I'd agree with TUV that you pay up until you hand over keys - likely the lost rent will result in a bond deduction if/when a new tenant moves in, but you will still be liable for anything exceeding that amount (and agent will likely pursue)

  • Top