What must a Montana landlord disclose to a tenant, and what must the lease say?

No statute requires a residential lease to be in writing beyond the statute of frauds, so an oral tenancy is lawful. No statute requires the landlord to give the tenant a copy of the lease.

No Montana statute requires a residential rental agreement to be in writing, and a rental agreement is defined to include agreements written or oral together with the landlord's valid rules. Nothing requires the landlord to give the tenant a copy of the signed lease. What Montana has instead is a cure-by-conduct rule: if the landlord does not sign and deliver a written agreement the tenant has already signed, the landlord's acceptance of rent without reservation gives it the same effect as if the landlord had signed; if the tenant does not sign one the landlord has signed and delivered, the tenant's acceptance of possession and payment of rent does the same. An agreement given effect that way is good for only one year even if it states a longer term. A lease for longer than one year must be written and subscribed to be enforceable. There is no language or translation duty, no plain-language act for leases and no type-size rule; the only plain-language command in the chapter applies to the notification of the abandoned-property rules at the end of a tenancy.

Statute of frauds: An agreement for the leasing of real property for a longer period than one year is invalid unless the agreement, or a note or memorandum of it, is in writing and subscribed by the party to be charged or that party's agent, and where an agent signs, the agent's authority must itself be in writing and subscribed (section 28-2-903, subsection 1, paragraph d). A separate limb catches any agreement that by its terms cannot be performed within a year, and evidence of such an agreement is not admissible without the writing or secondary evidence of its contents.

Electronic leases and signatures: Montana's electronic transactions act (Title 30, chapter 18) covers residential leases: it applies to electronic records and signatures relating to a transaction, and excludes only wills, codicils and testamentary trusts, most of the commercial code and the elections title. It applies only between parties who have each agreed to conduct the transaction electronically, judged from the context and the parties' conduct, and a party who agrees may still refuse to handle other transactions electronically, a right that cannot be waived by agreement. Landlord-tenant law adds a rule of its own: a lease may not require a party to provide an email address as a condition of entering into the agreement, though a party may volunteer one where the agreement contains a provision letting a party elect to receive notice by email. Statutory notice by email works only where the address was given in the rental agreement, and it is complete when a read receipt or a reply that is not automatically generated comes back.

Yes — a statute requires the landlord to disclose the owner's or managing agent's identity to the tenant, in the lease or in a separate writing.

A landlord, or a person authorized to enter into a rental agreement for the landlord, must disclose to the tenant in writing at or before the tenancy begins the name and address of the person authorized to manage the premises and the name and address of the owner or of a person authorized to act for the owner for service of process and for receiving notices and demands. The information must be kept current and in writing, and the duty is enforceable against any successor landlord, owner or manager. No telephone number is required, no form or location is prescribed, and there is no posting alternative; any writing will do, including a term of the lease. No unit count or owner type is carved out. The consequence of not complying is the strongest version of this rule in the country: the person who failed becomes the agent of each person who is a landlord, not only for service of process and for receiving notices and demands, but for performing the landlord's obligations under the act and the rental agreement, and for spending or making available for that purpose all rent collected from the premises. Montana has no statewide landlord or rental registration, and a local government with self-government powers is expressly denied any power to license landlords. On a sale, written notice to the tenant of the conveyance is what releases the seller from liability for later events, and written notice that a manager's management has ended does the same for the manager, so those notices are the transferor's release rather than a duty owed to the tenant; the duty to keep the identity information current carries the tenant's side of it.

No.

Montana prescribes no tenant-rights statement, no summary of the act, no handbook, no agency form and no notice telling the tenant where the act can be read, and no state agency has rulemaking power over residential leases that could create one. Nor is there a list of subjects a lease must cover: the act supplies default terms that apply only where the rental agreement says nothing, covering rent, where and when rent is payable, the length of the tenancy and a cap of one month's rent on damages where either party ends the agreement early without cause. The only statutory disclosure wording in Montana law is the optional mold statement listed here, which buys an immunity rather than satisfying a duty, and the radon statement, which is a seller's text and never reaches a lease. One document a landlord must hand over is the landlord's own: any rule a landlord adopts must be in writing and must be given to each tenant living on the premises and to each new tenant on arrival, and a rule binds a tenant only if the tenant had notice of it when entering the agreement or when it was adopted. A later rule that substantially modifies the tenant's bargain does not take effect until seven days after written notice in a week-to-week tenancy or thirty days in a month-to-month one. That is a landlord-written document with a delivery duty, not a state-prescribed one.

Yes, where a security deposit is taken.

Anyone renting residential property who requires a security deposit must give each tenant, in conjunction with executing the lease or creating the tenancy, a separate written statement of the present condition of the premises. It has to be separate, so it cannot be folded into the lease body, and it must carry a clear and concise statement of the condition known to the landlord or the landlord's agent or which should have been known on reasonable inspection, a statement if the premises have never been let before, and the signature of the landlord or the agent. There is no walk-through, no requirement that the tenant sign, no chance to add items and no duplicate-copies rule. A second duty rides on the same section and is unusual: on the tenant's written request, the landlord must give a copy of the written list of damage and cleaning charges given to the immediately preceding tenant, so an incoming tenant can see what the last tenant was charged. Failing either limb costs the landlord the money: a landlord who does not give the condition statement, or who does not produce the prior tenant's charge list on written request, is barred from recovering any sum for damage to or cleaning of the premises unless the landlord establishes by clear and convincing evidence that the damage happened during this tenancy and was caused by the tenant or the tenant's family, licensees or invitees. Where no deposit is taken, none of this applies.

When and who signs: In conjunction with the execution of the lease or the creation of the tenancy. The statute sets no day count, and the statement is signed by the landlord or the landlord's agent; the tenant does not have to sign it. Consequence under the section: the landlord's right to keep any part of the deposit is limited or lost, as the section states.

Deposit notice at signing: Montana prescribes no signing-time notice of where or how a deposit is held. The only other deposit writing is the list of damage and cleaning charges at the end of the tenancy, due within thirty days of termination or of surrender and acceptance, whichever comes first; one related move-in point belongs to the deposits page, that a cleaning charge for cyclical normal maintenance may be imposed only if the landlord noted it when the tenant took the space.

Two in-force state hazard disclosures: mold (before signing and at signing) and methamphetamine (before signing). No state duty exists for lead, bed bugs, radon, asbestos, or any other hazard.

Every state duty and every stated absence, hazard by hazard:

Lead (state add-on to the federal rule) — no state duty. Montana adds nothing of its own to the federal lead-paint rule: no state disclosure, notice, registration, inspection or certificate runs from a landlord to a tenant, and no Montana statute refers to or extends the federal rule. Neither the landlord-tenant act nor the deposit chapter mentions lead at all, and across the health, environmental and property titles the only lead provisions are a food-and-drug section and the designation of a lead person on an environmental cleanup crew. Testing and treatment for lead-based paint appear once in state law, as an item on the seller's disclosure statement, which does not reach an ordinary tenancy.

Mold — in force — a state duty, before signing and at signing (a statute). Montana has had a landlord-facing mold disclosure since 2003, and it sits in the property title rather than the landlord-tenant act, which is why it is so often missed. Whenever a landlord or an agent of one knows that a building has mold present, the landlord must disclose the presence of the mold to the renter before or upon entering into the contract to rent or lease. A second limb covers testing: where the landlord knows the building has been tested for mold, the landlord must tell the tenant that testing has occurred, provide a copy of the results if they are available to the landlord, and provide evidence of any later mitigation or treatment. Mold is defined broadly, as any mold, fungus, mildew or spores. Furnishing results or evidence of treatment is not a promise, warranty or representation of any kind, and a tenant who pays for testing may receive those results and must give the landlord a copy. The section states no penalty, and nothing in it lets a tenant rescind. What a complying landlord gets instead is protection: a landlord who gives the optional statutory mold statement and complies with the disclosure duty is not liable in any action based on the presence of or propensity for mold in the building, so failing to disclose costs that immunity and leaves the landlord exposed to an ordinary claim. The statute also prints an optional disclosure statement a landlord, seller, agent or property manager may use on a document executed before or with an offer to rent, which earns a safe harbor; using it is not required. Knowledge standard: The landlord's or the agent's knowledge that the building has mold present, and separately the landlord's knowledge that the building has been tested for mold. Threshold: The property must be habitable real property, meaning real property including a building affixed to land that is designed to be primarily occupied by humans, either as a dwelling or as a place of business. No unit count or building age applies.

Bed bugs — no state duty. Montana has no bed-bug law of any kind reaching a rental. The words do not appear in the landlord-tenant act, the deposit chapter or the catchlines of the health, property and environmental titles: there is no infestation disclosure, no notice tied to an adjacent unit and no duty fired by an event during the tenancy. An infestation is handled through the landlord's ordinary repair and habitability duties.

Radon — no state duty. Montana has a radon disclosure and it is for buyers only. The Montana Radon Control Act requires a radon disclosure statement on at least one document, form or application executed before or at the same time as an offer for the purchase and sale of habitable real property, given by the seller or the seller's agent to the buyer, who acknowledges it by signing a copy; the statement warns in capitals that radon is a naturally occurring radioactive gas that may present health risks over time, that levels exceeding federal guidelines have been found in buildings in Montana, and that more information is available from the county or state public health unit. A second limb makes a seller who knows the building has been tested tell the buyer before entering into the purchase contract. The words landlord, rent and lease appear nowhere in that section, in deliberate contrast with the mold act, which names the landlord and speaks of renting and leasing throughout. The rest of the radon act is a proficiency-listing scheme for testers, a confidentiality rule for data reported to the state, a public-education program and an account.

Methamphetamine — in force — a state duty, before signing, in writing (a statute). An owner of habitable property that the owner knows was used as a clandestine methamphetamine or fentanyl drug lab, or was contaminated from consumption of either drug, must notify any subsequent occupant in writing of that fact if the property has not been remediated to the state decontamination standard by a certified contractor. The notice must come before agreement to a lease. No wording is prescribed and there is no state form. An owner who has remediated may instead give notice that documentation has gone to the state showing the property meets the standard, or that a certified contractor has documented that it meets the standard without decontamination. Since October 1, 2025 the duty covers fentanyl as well as methamphetamine, and contamination from consumption as well as manufacture. The section states no penalty for failing to notify; the fines in the part fall on people who hold themselves out as certified contractors without certification. What the owner loses by staying silent is the immunity: where the state has confirmed the decontamination standard is met and notice has been given, the owner and the owner's agent are not liable in an action brought by a person who received the notice based on the presence of methamphetamine in the property. The statute's own wording is asymmetric there, since the duty covers fentanyl but the immunity is written only about methamphetamine. Knowledge standard: Property known by the owner to have been used as a clandestine methamphetamine or fentanyl drug lab, or to have been contaminated from consumption of methamphetamine or fentanyl, where it has not been remediated to the state standard by a certified contractor. Threshold: Habitable property, meaning a building or structure used as a clandestine methamphetamine or fentanyl drug lab, or contaminated with hazardous chemical residues from consumption of either, that is intended to be primarily occupied by people as a dwelling or a business, including a storage facility or mobile home, or that may be sold, leased or rented for any length of time. Water systems, sewer systems and land or water outside the building are excluded.

Asbestos — no state duty. No Montana statute or rule requires an asbestos disclosure to a tenant. The old asbestos chapter in the health title, covering building construction and demolition, is repealed; what remains is a permitting and accreditation program for abatement work in the environmental title, covering permits, facility review, accreditation, records, penalties and cleanup orders, none of which asks a landlord to tell a tenant anything. Asbestos testing or treatment appears once as an item on the seller's disclosure statement, which does not reach an ordinary tenancy.

Other hazard notices (bed-bug, pesticide, ordnance, pool, detectors) — no state duty. Montana requires no other hazard notice at signing: no pesticide-application notice, no military ordnance or noise-zone notice, no pool-safety notice and no utility-history disclosure. Two neighboring duties are acts rather than notices. The landlord must install an approved carbon monoxide detector and an approved smoke detector under the relevant state agencies' rules and, on the commencement of a rental agreement, must verify that both are in good working order, with the tenant keeping them in working order during the tenancy; nothing has to be written down or acknowledged, and the landlord is not liable for damages caused by a detector's failure. The other is the written determination a landlord must issue after receiving supplemental information on a request to keep an assistance animal, which belongs to the accommodation process rather than to signing-time disclosure.

No.

Montana requires no flood disclosure to a tenant, and the word flood appears nowhere in the landlord-tenant act or the deposit chapter. On the sales side there is no flood statute either, only a general duty: in any transfer of residential real property the seller must give the buyer a disclosure statement setting out adverse material facts about the property of which the seller has actual knowledge, before or at the same time as the contract is executed. Its enumerated minimum contents come closest to flooding with a question about problems with settling, soil, standing water or drainage on the property or in the immediate area, and a question about whether any part has been tested or treated for asbestos, radon gas, lead-based paint, mold, methamphetamine, fuel or chemical storage tanks or contaminated soil or water. The definitions keep it away from an ordinary tenancy: a transfer is a sale, conveyance, exchange or option to purchase, and the contract it attaches to is a purchase contract or a lease with an option to purchase. The property covered is one to four dwelling units or an individually owned unit, the buyer's remedy is three days to rescind where the statement arrives after execution, and six kinds of transaction are exempt. The state's floodplain program is a land-use permitting scheme and touches no lease.

Yes — the facts the rule names need not be disclosed.

Montana has no stigmatized-property statute: nothing says a death, a felony or an occupant's illness need not or may not be disclosed. It does have one no-duty rule, and it names landlords. The state keeps a list of properties reported as contaminated by methamphetamine or fentanyl, and once a property has been removed from that list, a property owner, landlord or real estate agent is not required to report or otherwise disclose the past contamination. Two related rules bind the state rather than the landlord: the department may not put volunteer properties, meaning those whose owners came forward and met the decontamination standard without a law-enforcement report, on a publicly accessible website, and radon data reported to the department may not be released to anyone but the owner or occupant of the property. None of the three forbids a landlord from disclosing anything.

Yes — the statute lists the lease provisions that are void or prohibited.

Four prohibited provisions sit in one section of the landlord-tenant act, and three more are spread across the code, so the roster is partly distributed. The four are unusual in being symmetrical: the section says a rental agreement may not provide that a party does these things, not that the tenant does, so a clause favoring the tenant at the landlord's expense is caught as well. The exculpation item is also wider than most: it reaches indemnity clauses and the shifting of costs or attorney fees connected with the liability, and it is keyed to the other party's purposeful misconduct or negligence rather than to liability in general. Beyond the roster, a court may refuse to enforce an unconscionable rental agreement or provision, or an unconscionable settlement waiving a claim under the act, and may instead limit its application; that power may not be used against a term simply because it allocates the tenant's duty to maintain the unit or the landlord's duty to maintain the premises, and if unconscionability is raised the parties must get a reasonable chance to present evidence about the setting, purpose and effect of the agreement. There is no cure window anywhere in the chapter.

Using a prohibited clause carries a statutory sanction; the statute's own measure follows.

Sanction as the statute states it: A prohibited provision included in a rental agreement is unenforceable. Beyond that, if a party purposefully uses a rental agreement containing provisions known by that party to be prohibited, the other party may recover actual damages plus an amount up to three months' periodic rent. Two things must be shown, purposeful use and knowledge that the provision is prohibited, but no attempt to enforce the clause is needed, and the remedy runs in either direction.

The listed provisions:

• A provision by which a party agrees to waive or forgo rights or remedies under the Residential Landlord and Tenant Act.

• A provision authorizing any person to confess judgment on a claim arising out of the rental agreement.

• A provision by which a party agrees to the exculpation or limitation of liability resulting from the other party's purposeful misconduct or negligence, or agrees to indemnify the other party for that liability or for the costs or attorney fees connected with it.

• A provision requiring a party to provide an electronic mail address as a condition of entering into the agreement; a party may still volunteer an address where the agreement lets a party elect to receive notice by electronic mail.

• A provision by which a landlord or a hotel or motel operator prevents a tenant or a tenant's guest from possessing on the premises a firearm the tenant or guest may lawfully possess; discharge on the premises may be prohibited except in self-defense (section 70-24-110).

• A provision permitting the receipt of rent free of the obligation to comply with the landlord's maintenance duties (section 70-24-203).

• Any provision of a leasehold agreement, oral or written, contrary to the security-deposit chapter, and any attempted waiver of that chapter by the tenant (section 70-25-103).

Attorney fees go to the prevailing party by statute, whatever the lease says.

In an action on a rental agreement or arising under the landlord-tenant act, reasonable attorney fees, together with costs and necessary disbursements, may be awarded to the prevailing party notwithstanding an agreement to the contrary, and the prevailing party is the one in whose favor final judgment is rendered. So the award is discretionary as to whether it is made but fixed as to who can receive it, and no lease term can send the fees the other way: a one-way clause in the landlord's favor simply does not control. A related rule voids a clause that shifts the costs or attorney fees connected with liability for a party's own purposeful misconduct or negligence.