Quick Reference: Chapter 24 Rules Every Montana Manager Should Know

A property manager takes over a Montana portfolio and inherits a lease template. It waives statutory remedies, limits the landlord's liability for negligence, and makes an email address a mandatory condition of entering into the rental agreement.

Three clauses, three problems. Under Section 70-24-202 each raises a problem. Under Section 70-24-403(1) each is unenforceable. And under Section 70-24-403(2), if the manager purposefully uses an agreement containing provisions known to be prohibited, the tenant may recover actual damages plus an amount up to three months' periodic rent.

The statute does not make that additional recovery automatic. It requires purposeful use of an agreement containing provisions the party knows are prohibited.

That is the through-line of Montana's Residential Landlord and Tenant Act of 1977 for a property manager: the chapter attaches a potentially significant monetary remedy to the purposeful use of prohibited lease provisions. The template, the entry notice and the timing of a rent increase are where Chapter 24 does its work, and all three are decided before any dispute begins.

This guide covers the four prohibited lease clauses and what they cost, the access rules including a 2021 change that helps managers, the retaliation presumption and its three exceptions, and where the chapter's other duties sit.

Four Clauses a Montana Lease May Not Contain

Section 70-24-202 is short and absolute. A rental agreement may not provide that a party:

• (1) agrees to waive or forego rights or remedies under this chapter;

• (2) authorizes any person to confess judgment on a claim arising out of the rental agreement;

• (3) agrees to the exculpation or limitation of liability resulting from the other party's purposeful misconduct or negligence, or to indemnify the other party for that liability or the costs or attorney fees connected with it; or

• (4) must provide an electronic mail address as a condition of entering into the agreement.

Three features of that list are worth pausing on.

• Paragraph (3) reaches negligence, not just intentional conduct. A limitation-of-liability clause drafted to cover ordinary negligence is within the prohibition, and so is an indemnity running the other way. The paragraph also expressly reaches costs and attorney fees connected with that liability, so a fee-shifting clause tied to an exculpated liability is caught alongside it.

• Paragraph (4) is unusual and recent. Added by Chapter 290, Laws of 2017, it means a Montana lease cannot make an email address mandatory. The subsection then supplies the lawful alternative: a party may voluntarily provide an email address if the agreement contains a provision allowing a party to elect to receive notice by electronic mail.

  Read that carefully, because it is a drafting instruction rather than a prohibition on electronic notice. The provision does not prohibit electronic notice: it permits a party to voluntarily provide an email address where the rental agreement allows the party to elect to receive notice by electronic mail. A landlord should not use an application or leasing workflow to make an email address a mandatory condition of entering into the rental agreement.

• And paragraph (1) is broader than it looks. "Rights or remedies under this chapter" covers the whole of Chapter 24, including the maintenance obligations, the tenant remedies and the access rules. A general waiver clause, or a clause purporting to make the tenant accept the premises "as is" in place of the statutory duties, runs into it.

What a Prohibited Clause Actually Costs

Section 70-24-403 supplies the consequence, and it operates in two stages.

First, the clause fails. "A provision prohibited by 70-24-202 that is included in a rental agreement is unenforceable." That is automatic and requires no finding about the landlord's state of mind.

Then the damages provision. "If a party purposefully uses a rental agreement containing provisions known by the party to be prohibited, the other party may recover, in addition to the other party's actual damages, an amount up to 3 months' periodic rent."

Four points matter operationally.

• The trigger is knowledge plus purposeful use. A clause included through oversight is unenforceable but does not automatically engage subsection (2). A template kept in service after the problem has been identified is a different matter.

• The award is a ceiling, not a fixed sum. "Up to 3 months' periodic rent" is a maximum.

• Actual damages sit on top. The three months is "in addition to."

• It runs both ways. The section says "a party" and "the other party." It is not drafted as a tenant-only remedy.

For a manager, the practical consequence is that a template review is a high-value exercise in Montana and a fast one. Four clauses, checked once, across every agreement in circulation. Keeping the current approved template and its version history in contracts and renewals is what stops a superseded lease being issued after the problem is known, and our guidance on lease management covers building terms that hold up.

One neighbouring provision to know. Section 70-24-404 gives a court discretion to refuse enforcement on grounds of unconscionability, which operates independently of the Section 70-24-202 list. A clause outside the four categories is not automatically safe.

Access: 24 Hours, and a 2021 Change That Helps

Section 70-24-312 governs entry, and it is more favourable to managers than its reputation suggests.

The tenant's obligation comes first. Under subsection (1), a tenant may not unreasonably withhold consent to the landlord or the landlord's agent entering to inspect the premises, make necessary or agreed repairs, decorations, alterations or improvements, supply necessary or agreed services, or exhibit the unit to prospective or actual purchasers, mortgagees, tenants, workers or contractors.

Note how wide that purpose list is. Showing a unit to a prospective tenant or a contractor is an enumerated purpose, not a favour.

The notice rule. Under subsection (3)(a), a landlord may not abuse the right of access or use it to harass the tenant. Except in an emergency or unless it is impracticable to do so, the landlord shall give at least 24 hours' notice of the intent to enter and may enter only at reasonable times.

And here is a provision worth knowing. Subsection (3)(b), added by Chapter 536, Laws of 2021, provides that in addition to the general notice rules in Section 70-24-108, a tenant has notice of the intent to enter if the landlord conspicuously posts the landlord's intent to enter on the main entry door of the dwelling unit.

That is a practical route for a manager who cannot reach a tenant by phone or post. The posting has to be conspicuous and on the main entry door, and the 24 hours still runs.

Entry without advance notice is limited, but there are two routes. A landlord may enter without the tenant's consent in an emergency under subsection (2). Subsection (3)(a) separately permits entry without the usual advance notice where giving notice is impracticable. Outside those circumstances, subsection (4) limits access to a court order, the situations permitted by Sections 70-24-425 and 70-24-426(2), or abandonment or surrender of the premises.

And the lock rule cuts the manager's way. Under subsection (5), a tenant may not remove a lock or replace or add a lock not supplied by the landlord without the landlord's written permission. Where a tenant does so, the tenant shall provide the landlord with a key to ensure the landlord's right of access under the chapter.

Two remedies sit behind this. Section 70-24-410 gives the tenant remedies for unlawful or unreasonable entry by the landlord, and Section 70-24-424 gives the landlord remedies for refusal of access. Both are worth knowing before an access dispute escalates.

Recording every access notice - what was sent, when, by what method, and for what purpose - is what makes a Section 70-24-312 position defensible. 

Unauthorized Occupants: Section 70-24-113

Chapter 24 contains a provision that sits outside the ordinary landlord-tenant framework and is directly useful to managers. Section 70-24-113 was enacted by Chapter 536, Laws of 2021 and amended by Chapter 179, Laws of 2025.

The rule. "An unauthorized person or trespasser has no legal right to occupy, enter, or trespass on a premises. A person who cannot produce authorization allowing the person to occupy a premises is an unauthorized person or trespasser for the purpose of this section and may be removed from the premises immediately by law enforcement."

What counts as authorization. Under subsection (2), authorization includes:

• (a) a written rental agreement entitling the person to occupy the premises;

• (b) written or verbal authorization from the landlord; or

• (c) written or verbal authorization from a tenant if the person is a guest of the tenant.

Verbal authorization has a verification requirement. Under subsection (3), verbal authorization is valid only if it is verified by the individual or entity entitled to give it under (2)(b) or (2)(c). A claimed verbal permission that the landlord or tenant does not confirm does not establish authorization.

Two powers, and one exposure. Under subsection (4), a property owner or authorised agent may request law enforcement to remove an unauthorized person or trespasser. Under subsection (5), the owner may request law enforcement to stand by to keep the peace while changing locks and removing personal property belonging to the unlawful occupant.

But under subsection (6), an owner or agent who knowingly provides false information in such a request shall indemnify the law enforcement agency and its agents for damages awarded against them for good faith conduct based on the request.

The manager's takeaway. An alleged unauthorized occupant should not be routed automatically into a conventional tenant dispute, and equally should not be reported to law enforcement on a thin record. What decides it is the authorization trail: the lease, any owner authorisation, any tenant authorisation and the guest relationship it rests on, and whether that authorisation has ended. Because subsection (6) attaches indemnification to knowingly false information, the file behind the request matters as much as the request.

Retaliation: The Six-Month Presumption

Section 70-24-431 can convert a routine rent increase into a contested claim, and its mechanics reward attention.

Three protected acts. A landlord may not retaliate by increasing rent, by decreasing services, or by bringing or threatening to bring an action for possession after the tenant:

• (a) has complained to a governmental agency charged with enforcement of a building or housing code, of a violation applicable to the premises materially affecting health and safety;

• (b) has complained to the landlord in writing of a violation under Section 70-24-303, the landlord's maintenance obligations; or

• (c) has organised or become a member of a tenant's union or similar organisation.

The consequence. Under subsection (2), a landlord acting in violation exposes itself to the remedies in Section 70-24-411 - the unlawful ouster and diminution of services provision - and the tenant has a defence in any retaliatory action for possession.

Then the presumption, and its precise wording matters. Under subsection (3), evidence of a complaint within 6 months before the alleged act of retaliation creates a rebuttable presumption that the conduct was retaliatory.

The section defines the term, which is unusual and useful: "the trier of fact is required to find the existence of the fact presumed unless and until evidence is introduced that would support a finding of its nonexistence." That is a mandatory finding until rebutted, not a mere inference.

But the presumption has a built-in limit. It does not arise if the tenant made the complaint after notice of a proposed rent increase or diminution of services. Sequence decides it: a complaint that follows the increase notice does not generate the presumption.

And three exceptions preserve the landlord's action. Under subsection (4), subsections (1) to (3) do not prevent an action for possession if:

• (a) the code violation was caused primarily by lack of reasonable care by the tenant, a family member, or another person on the premises with the tenant's consent;

• (b) the tenant is in default in rent; or

• (c) compliance with the code requires alteration, remodeling or demolition that would effectively deprive the tenant of use of the unit.

One limit on those exceptions. Under subsection (5), maintaining an action under subsection (4) does not release the landlord from liability under Section 70-24-405(2).

For a manager, subsection (3) turns the order of events into the decisive fact. The date a written complaint arrived, and the date a rent increase notice went out, need to be recorded as separate, timestamped entries. Keeping tenant correspondence against the tenancy record through the tenant portal, and the rent position in collecting rent and payments, is what makes that sequence provable rather than arguable.

Where the Rest of Chapter 24 Fits

This article focuses on the Chapter 24 provisions most relevant to lease drafting, access, unauthorized occupants and retaliation. The chapter also contains separate maintenance, termination, possession and specialised housing provisions that are better handled in dedicated guides.

Chapter 24 runs across four parts, and a manager should know the shape of it even where the detail sits elsewhere.

• Part 1, General Provisions, covers the short title, purposes, general definitions, exclusions from application of the chapter at Section 70-24-104, supplementary principles, territorial application, what constitutes notice at Section 70-24-108 and an obligation of good faith at Section 70-24-109. It also carries five provisions managers should not overlook: no firearm prohibition allowed at Section 70-24-110, notice of no contact at Section 70-24-111, application of the security deposit laws at Section 70-24-112, which makes Chapters 24 and 25 cohesive and requires them to be read in conjunction, removal of an unauthorized person or trespasser at Section 70-24-113, and emotional support animals and documentation at Section 70-24-114.

• Part 2, Rental Agreements, contains the terms and conditions provision at Section 70-24-201, the prohibited provisions above, an agreement not to permit receipt of rent free of obligation at Section 70-24-203, and the effect of an unsigned or undelivered rental agreement at Section 70-24-204.

• Part 3, Rights and Duties, opens with the duty to disclose the name of the person responsible at Section 70-24-301 and the landlord's obligation to deliver possession at Section 70-24-302. It carries the maintenance duties at Section 70-24-303, transfer of premises at Sections 70-24-304 and 305, authority to adopt rules at Section 70-24-311, access at Section 70-24-312, resident associations and meetings at Section 70-24-314, and the tenant's duties at Sections 70-24-321 and 322.

• Part 4, Remedies, holds the tenant remedies at Sections 70-24-405 through 411, the landlord remedies at Sections 70-24-421 through 430, retaliation at Section 70-24-431, termination by landlord or tenant at Section 70-24-441, and attorney fees and costs at Section 70-24-442.

One further current-law flag. Section 70-24-114 addresses emotional support animals and documentation. Reasonable-accommodation requests involving assistance animals also engage federal and state fair housing law, so check the current text of the section alongside those requirements rather than treating it as a standalone rule.

And the deposit chapter is not a separate silo. Section 70-24-112, enacted in 2021, provides that the provisions of Chapter 24 "are cohesive with the provisions of Title 70, chapter 25, and the two chapters must be read in conjunction" when considering the rights and duties of landlords and tenants and the availability of remedies and judicial relief. A deposit question is not answered by reading Chapter 25 alone.

Two cross-references for a portfolio manager. The maintenance duties and the tenant remedies that follow from them are covered in our guide to Montana landlord repair obligations. Security deposits are addressed in Title 70, chapter 25, read in conjunction with this chapter, and are covered in our guide to Montana security deposit laws.

Common Montana Compliance Mistakes Property Managers Make

1. Making an email address a mandatory condition of entering into the rental agreement.
Section 70-24-202(4) prohibits a rental agreement from providing that a party must supply an email address as a condition of entering into it.

2. Offering electronic notice without an election clause.
The same subsection permits a voluntarily supplied address only where the agreement contains a provision allowing a party to elect to receive notice by email.

3. Keeping a template in circulation after a prohibited clause is identified.
Section 70-24-403(2) attaches actual damages plus up to 3 months' periodic rent to the purposeful use of an agreement with provisions known to be prohibited.

4. Drafting a limitation-of-liability clause covering negligence.
Section 70-24-202(3) reaches exculpation or limitation of liability for purposeful misconduct or negligence, and indemnity for it.

5. Assuming a clause outside the four categories is safe.
Section 70-24-404 gives a court discretion to refuse enforcement of an unconscionable provision.

6. Entering on less than 24 hours' notice outside an emergency.
Section 70-24-312(3)(a) requires at least 24 hours' notice except in an emergency or where notice is impracticable.

7. Not using the door-posting route when a tenant is unreachable.
Under Section 70-24-312(3)(b), conspicuously posting the intent to enter on the main entry door gives the tenant notice.

8. Letting a tenant change the locks without a key.
Section 70-24-312(5) requires written permission and, where a lock is added or replaced, provision of a key to the landlord.

9. Issuing a rent increase within six months of a written repair complaint without recording the sequence.
Section 70-24-431(3) creates a rebuttable presumption of retaliation, and the section defines that as a finding the trier of fact must make until rebutted.

10. Overlooking that a rent default defeats the presumption.
Section 70-24-431(4)(b) preserves an action for possession where the tenant is in default in rent.

11. Treating an unauthorized occupant exactly like a tenant.
Section 70-24-113 lets a property owner or authorised agent request law enforcement to remove a person who cannot produce authorization, and defines what authorization means.

12. Requesting a law enforcement removal on a thin record.
Section 70-24-113(6) requires an owner or agent who knowingly provides false information in such a request to indemnify the law enforcement agency for damages awarded against it for good faith conduct.

13. Treating Chapter 24 as containing no specialised accommodation rules.
Section 70-24-114 addresses emotional support animals and documentation, alongside applicable federal and state fair housing requirements.

Building a Defensible Montana Compliance Workflow

Montana's exposure in Chapter 24 is concentrated in documents and dates rather than in judgment calls. Four records carry the weight.

• The lease template and its version history. Section 70-24-403(2) turns on purposeful use of provisions known to be prohibited, which makes the date a template was corrected, and the date it replaced the old one across the portfolio, directly relevant. Holding the approved version in contracts and renewals is what evidences that.

• The access notice log. Date, time, method, purpose, and whether the door-posting route was used. Tied to the work order that prompted it through service request and task management.

• The complaint and rent-increase sequence. Because Section 70-24-431(3) turns on which came first, both dates need to exist as records rather than recollections. A complete tenant record connecting communications with the rent ledger is what makes the order provable.

• The condition and repair trail. A written complaint under Section 70-24-303 is a protected act under Section 70-24-431(1)(b), so the repair history and the retaliation analysis draw on the same file. RIOO's move-in and move-out management holds the condition record either side of the tenancy.

Conclusion

Montana's Residential Landlord and Tenant Act of 1977 will look familiar to any manager who has worked under a URLTA-derived statute. The duties, the remedies and the structure follow the pattern.

What is distinctive is where the chapter attaches money.

Four prohibited lease clauses, one of which - the email address requirement - catches modern online application workflows. Unenforceability automatically, and up to three months' periodic rent where an agreement with known prohibited provisions is purposefully used. A rebuttable presumption of retaliation on a written complaint within six months, defined in the statute as a finding the court must make until rebutted.

Set against that, the chapter gives managers four genuine tools: a wide list of permitted access purposes, a door-posting route to give notice where a tenant is unreachable, a rent default exception that preserves an action for possession even inside the retaliation window, and a law enforcement removal route for unauthorized occupants under Section 70-24-113.

The chapter also contains newer provisions addressing unauthorized persons and trespassers and emotional support animal documentation, alongside the earlier access and lease-provision rules discussed above.

For teams managing Montana portfolios in Billings, Missoula, Bozeman, Great Falls, Helena or anywhere in the state, the operating priority is short. Audit the lease template against the four clauses in Section 70-24-202, and record when the corrected version went into circulation. Diary 24 hours on every access notice and use the door-posting route when contact fails. Log written complaints and rent increase notices as separate dated entries, because Section 70-24-431(3) turns on which came first. And remember that security deposits are addressed in Title 70, chapter 25 and, under Section 70-24-112, must be read together with Chapter 24.

This blog is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Chapter 24 has been amended over time, including provisions added or amended in 2017, 2021 and 2025. Security deposits are governed by Title 70, chapter 25 rather than the core provisions discussed here. Local ordinances may impose additional requirements, and individual circumstances differ. Confirm the current text with the Montana Legislature and consult a licensed Montana attorney on a specific matter.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q1. What lease clauses are prohibited in Montana?
Under Section 70-24-202, a rental agreement may not provide that a party waives or foregoes rights or remedies under the chapter, authorises confession of judgment, agrees to exculpation or limitation of liability for the other party's purposeful misconduct or negligence or indemnifies for it, or must provide an email address as a condition of entering into the agreement.

Q2. Can a Montana landlord require a tenant's email address?
Not as a condition of entering into the rental agreement. Section 70-24-202(4) prohibits that, but permits a party to provide an address voluntarily where the agreement contains a provision allowing a party to elect to receive notice by electronic mail.

Q3. What happens if a Montana lease contains a prohibited clause?
Under Section 70-24-403(1) the provision is unenforceable. Under subsection (2), if a party purposefully uses an agreement containing provisions known to be prohibited, the other party may recover actual damages plus up to 3 months' periodic rent.

Q4. How much notice must a Montana landlord give before entering?
At least 24 hours' notice of the intent to enter, and entry only at reasonable times, except in an emergency or where giving notice is impracticable, under Section 70-24-312(3)(a).

Q5. Can a Montana landlord give entry notice by posting on the door?
Yes. Under Section 70-24-312(3)(b), a tenant has notice of the intent to enter if the landlord conspicuously posts the intent to enter on the main entry door of the dwelling unit.

Q6. When can a Montana landlord enter without advance notice?
In an emergency under Section 70-24-312(2), and under subsection (3)(a) where giving notice is impracticable. Outside those situations, subsection (4) limits access to a court order, the circumstances permitted by Sections 70-24-425 and 70-24-426(2), or abandonment or surrender of the premises.

Q7. Can a Montana tenant change the locks?
Not without written permission. Under Section 70-24-312(5), a tenant may not remove, replace or add a lock not supplied by the landlord without the landlord's written permission, and must provide the landlord with a key.

Q8. What counts as retaliation in Montana?
Under Section 70-24-431(1), increasing rent, decreasing services, or bringing or threatening an action for possession after the tenant complained to a code enforcement agency about a violation materially affecting health and safety, complained to the landlord in writing of a Section 70-24-303 violation, or organised or joined a tenant's union.

Q9. How does the Montana retaliation presumption work?
Under Section 70-24-431(3), a complaint within 6 months before the alleged retaliation creates a rebuttable presumption, which the section defines as a finding the trier of fact must make unless and until evidence supporting nonexistence is introduced. The presumption does not arise if the complaint came after notice of a proposed rent increase or diminution of services.

Q10. What can a Montana landlord do about an unauthorized occupant?
Under Section 70-24-113, a person who cannot produce authorization may be treated as an unauthorized person or trespasser under the section, and a property owner or authorised agent may request law enforcement to remove the person. Authorization can include a written rental agreement, written or verbal authorisation from the landlord, or written or verbal authorisation from a tenant where the person is the tenant's guest, and verbal authorisation must be verified. An owner or agent who knowingly provides false information in a removal request must indemnify the law enforcement agency and its agents for damages arising from their good faith conduct based on the request.

Q11. Can a Montana landlord still evict during the retaliation window?
Yes, in three situations under Section 70-24-431(4): where the code violation was caused primarily by lack of reasonable care by the tenant or someone on the premises with the tenant's consent, where the tenant is in default in rent, or where compliance would require alteration, remodeling or demolition depriving the tenant of use of the unit.