Me. Rev. Stat. » Title 14
Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 6030 (2026)

Unfair agreements

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
1.  Illegal waiver of rights.  It is an unfair and deceptive trade practice in violation of Title 5, section 207 for a landlord to require a tenant to enter into a lease or tenancy at will agreement for a dwelling unit, as defined in section 6021, in which the tenant agrees to a provision that has the effect of waiving a tenant right established in chapter 709, this chapter or chapter 710‑A. This subsection does not apply when the law specifically allows the tenant to waive a statutory right during negotiations with the landlord.  
[PL 2009, c. 566, §16 (AMD).]
2.  Unenforceable provisions.  The following lease or tenancy at will agreement or rule provisions for a dwelling unit, as defined in section 6021, are specifically declared to be unenforceable and in violation of Title 5, section 207:  
A. Any provision that absolves the landlord from liability for the negligence of the landlord or the landlord's agent;   [PL 1991, c. 361, §2 (NEW); PL 1991, c. 361, §3 (AFF).]
B. Any provision that requires the tenant to pay the landlord's legal fees in enforcing the lease or tenancy at will agreement;   [PL 2009, c. 566, §16 (AMD).]
C. Any provision that requires the tenant to give a lien upon the tenant's property for the amount of any rent or other sums due the landlord;   [PL 2023, c. 594, §9 (AMD); PL 2023, c. 594, §13 (AFF).]
D. Any provision that requires the tenant to acknowledge that the provisions of the lease or tenancy at will agreement, including tenant rules, are fair and reasonable;   [PL 2023, c. 594, §9 (AMD); PL 2023, c. 594, §13 (AFF).]
E. Any provision that requires the tenant to pay a fee, penalty or other charge for the act of discontinuing tenancy, unless the fee, penalty or other charge is:  
(1) To recover reasonable expenses related to securing another tenant in circumstances in which the initial tenant has breached provisions of the lease or tenancy at will agreement related to notice required before discontinuing tenancy;  
(2) To collect unpaid rent due the landlord by the tenant; or  
(3) To recover reasonable expenses incurred in the repair of damage to a dwelling unit caused by the tenant.  
Retention of a security deposit or any portion of a security deposit for reasons permitted under section 6033 does not constitute a fee, penalty or other charge for the act of discontinuing tenancy; and   [PL 2023, c. 594, §9 (NEW); PL 2023, c. 594, §13 (AFF).]
F. Any provision that requires the tenant to pay an optional recurring fee in violation of section 6030‑I or 6030‑J or a mandatory recurring fee in violation of section 6030‑J.   [PL 2023, c. 594, §9 (NEW); PL 2023, c. 594, §13 (AFF).]
[PL 2023, c. 594, §9 (AMD); PL 2023, c. 594, §13 (AFF).]
3.  Exception.  Notwithstanding subsection 2, paragraph B, a lease or tenancy at will agreement or rule provision that provides for the award of attorney's fees to the prevailing party after a contested hearing to enforce the lease or tenancy at will agreement in cases of wanton disregard of the terms of the lease or tenancy at will agreement is not in violation of Title 5, section 207 and is enforceable.  
[PL 2009, c. 566, §16 (AMD).]
4.  Total price disclosure.  A lease or tenancy at will agreement is unenforceable if the landlord does not receive a signed copy of the total price disclosure as required by section 6030‑J.  
[PL 2023, c. 594, §10 (NEW); PL 2023, c. 594, §13 (AFF).]
SECTION HISTORY
PL 1991, c. 361, §2 (NEW). PL 1991, c. 361, §3 (AFF). PL 1991, c. 704 (AMD). PL 2009, c. 566, §16 (AMD). PL 2023, c. 594, §9 (AMD). PL 2023, c. 594, §13 (AFF).
The Revisor's Office cannot provide legal advice or interpretation of Maine law to the public.
If you need legal advice, please consult a qualified attorney.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1995–2023 · leading case: State v. DeCoster, 653 A.2d 891 (Me. 1995).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. DeCoster, 653 A.2d 891 (Me. 1995). · cites it 2× “This conclusion is confirmed by 14 M.R.S.A. § 6030 (1980 & Supp. 1993), which expressly states that specific leasing practices are unfair and deceptive practices under the UTPA.”
Harris v. Soley, 2000 ME 150 (Me. 2000). “1999) (providing for double damages when landlord wrongfully retains security deposit); 14 M.R.S.A. § 6030 (Supp.1999) (providing it is an unfair trade practice for a landlord to require a tenant to waive rights with respect to process and security deposits, and declaring…”
Jennifer Roussel v. Sheldon Ashby, 2015 ME 43 (Me. 2015). “§ 6033 (2014); and (5) unfair and deceptive trade practices pursuant to 14 M.R.S. § 6030 (2014). In September 2009 the District Court (Powers, J.”
Douglas v. Lalumiere (D. Me. 2021). · cites it 2× “Specifically, the Complaint alleges that, pursuant to Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 6030 (West 2021), “[i]t is an unfair and deceptive trade practice in violation of [Me.”
Shavirov v. Home Props. WMF I (Me. Super. Ct 2008). · cites it 2× “14 M.R.S. § 6030 (2008). II. Alleged Unfair or Deceptive Acts Home Properties seeks dismissal of the action asserting that only per se violations as listed in 14 M.”
Douglas v. Lalumiere (D. Me. 2021). “As such, Fowler does not have a claim against them under Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 6030 because they were not his landlords and they did not enter into a lease or tenancy-at-will agreement with him.”
Douglas v. Lalumiere (D. Me. 2022). “More specifically, the Complaint invokes the rule from 14 M.R.S.A. § 6030 (West 2022) that “[i]t is an unfair and deceptive trade practice .”
Kapinga v. Terrace Pond LLC (D. Me. 2023). “As a threshold matter, the Defendants argue that the proposed UTPA claim is futile because the Maine legislature defined the universe of unfair and deceptive trade practices by landlords in enacting 14 M.R.S.A. § 6030 (Westlaw). See MTA Opposition at 4.”
Blount v. Proctor (Me. Super. Ct 2004). “Title 14 M.R.S.A. § 6030(2)(B) forecloses the enforcement of any rental agreement that requires a tenant to pay the landlord’s legal fees associated with the enforcement of that agreement.”
Paz v. Home Props. WMF I LLC (Me. Super. Ct 2008). “See 14 M.R.S. § 6030(1). Similarly, Paz may be able to show that the lease provisions had the effect of waiving his right to be responsible for only the actual rent lost by the landlord after the latter made reasonable efforts to mitigate? Second, even if Paz is not able to take…”
Robishaw v. Wells Fargo Bank (Me. Super. Ct 2010). “Punitive Damages Robishaw's argument that he is entitled to punitive damages is based on the theory that violations of 14 M.R.S. § 6030 (unfair rental contracts) are declared to be unfair trade practices, and Robishaw argues this entitles him to a punitive damage remedy under 5…”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 6030(1) — 1 case
Paz v. Home Props. WMF I LLC (Me. Super. Ct 2008). “See 14 M.R.S. § 6030(1). Similarly, Paz may be able to show that the lease provisions had the effect of waiving his right to be responsible for only the actual rent lost by the landlord after the latter made reasonable efforts to mitigate? Second, even if Paz is not able to take…”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 6030(2)(B) — 1 case
Blount v. Proctor (Me. Super. Ct 2004). “Title 14 M.R.S.A. § 6030(2)(B) forecloses the enforcement of any rental agreement that requires a tenant to pay the landlord’s legal fees associated with the enforcement of that agreement.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.