If an unmarried couple wants to rent our home….
Question 1
If an unmarried couple wants to rent our home can we asked that only the man who has a job sign the lease agreement. We don’t want the unemployed lady friend to have her name on the lease in case the boyfriend leaves as she has no income. If her name isn’t on the lease and he leaves her we could then ask her to leave, but if her name is on the lease then it would be difficult to ask her to leave and she has no means to pay the rent. Also can we refuse to rent to unmarried couples?
Answer 1
In my opinion, there is almost never a reason to not have every adult occupant sign a lease. However, there are numerous reasons why every adult should be required to sign, some of which are discussed herein.
Federal, state, and local fair housing laws protect against housing discrimination. Some states do allow a landlord to use unmarried status as criteria for refusing an application. You will need to research your state and local fair housing laws to determine if there is an applicable law protecting unmarried couples from housing discrimination. If allowed by law and your rental standards you must be sure to apply your standards to all applicants. Each and every applicant must be screened using the same rental criteria, in the same manner, every time.
At a minimum, landlords should require that each applicant (who can be held liable on a lease agreement) should:
- Be of legal age (18, 19, or 21, depending on state) or an emancipated minor,
- Complete and sign a rental application,
- Sign an authorization of release of personal information form for credit reports, employment, rental history, eviction report, and criminal history, and
- Present at least two forms of personal identification, with at least one being a government-issued photo ID.
Every occupant, age of maturity or emancipated (including spouses), should be named on the lease agreement. In the event one occupant defaults, you have recourse against the other tenant. The fact that one tenant has no income at the time of application does not mean he/she cannot be collected from in the future – even if completely penniless at the time of application, he/she may later be employed, win the lottery, inherit a fortune, or marry someone of significant financial status. Judgments against a person who had no income or assets at the time the judgment was obtained can be collectable for many years later and in other states. Furthermore, if the person seeks credit at a later date (including when applying to rent elsewhere) provides leverage for payment because credit grantors sometimes require payment of judgments as a condition of granting credit.
If you do not have her sign the lease and the boyfriend leaves you can certainly “ask” the lady to leave, but if she refuses you will have to legally evict her or any other person who has moved in, potentially costing you the same time, money, and stress as if she had been a wife. This is one reason why eviction complaints should usually include “John Does” as defendants. Having the unemployed person(s) sign the lease assures the ability to obtain a judgment against that person.
In general, the more people who can potentially be held liable for rent and damages the better the chance the landlord will eventually collect what’s owed. Furthermore, assuming that the lease agreement is correctly written to make each signer jointly and severally liable, the landlord need not try to collect from each one who signed the lease, but may pick the one who has the deepest pocket at that time or the one who is easiest to find.
Again, landlords must understand that an applicant’s current financial status is not always his/her status at some later date. Those long employed at high salaries may be unemployed next month. And, as previously stated, those who are currently unemployed and have no assets may be wealthy next month.
* * * * * *
Qustion 2
I went to the magistrate, filed a Landlord/Tenant complaint to remove a tenant, and had the hearing at which time I received possession of the property. The tenant filed an appeal at the court house. At that time she owed $126.50 for the cost
incurred for the judgment and on the day of her appeal the rent was due in the amount of $500. She only paid for the appeal of $68.50 and nothing else. It has been 10 days since she filed and she has no money to pay anything until July. I
claim she is in default I and should be able to get possession without filing another appeal. The Prothonatary’s office will not speak to me and I think they screwed up by not getting any money from the tenant. I have only 9 days to an appeal
according to the Notice. This is in Pennsylvania. Can you give me some guidance on this?
Answer 2
An appeal usually prevents the tenant from being evicted as long as all rules governing the appeal process are followed. One of the most important rules in most jurisdictions, unless the judge grants a waiver, is that the tenant begin depositing all monthly rent into an escrow with the court at the time the appeal is filed. Failure to open the escrow account or deposit the money in full and on time can lead to dismissal of the appeal and eviction of the tenant.
You didn’t say whether this was a requirement for your case or, if so, whether the tenant deposited the funds into the escrow account. Different jurisdictions within PA and even different judges within a particular court may have different interpretations of the statutes and procedures. Furthermore, judges sometimes let their emotions interfere with enforcing the law.
Because failure to properly follow the court’s rules related to eviction can significantly extend the eviction period, it is often more cost effective to hire an attorney who specializes in evictions on behalf of landlords, preferably with intimate knowledge regarding the particular court of jurisdiction. A competent attorney can also help maximize the amount of any judgment obtained against the tenant.
It is often best to obtain a money judgment even if the tenant leaves before completion of the eviction process because (1) judgments are good for 5 years or more in most states, (2) judgments can be renewed for addition periods, (3) interest is added to a money judgment – often at a higher rate than available from most other investments, (4) the judgment can be collected in any other state that the defendant might move to, and (5) judgments are sometimes paid off because the debtor needs to remove the item from their credit record in order to obtain a loan or rent another property.
* * * * * *
Question 3
In the state of PA, is it permitted to make some apartment units non-smoking?
Answer 3
Obviously, I’m not familiar with every law at every level of government in the country, so I can’t state that a particular rental property location is not subject to some weird local ordinance related to prohibition of non-smoking rules. However, I’d probably bet a lot of money against there being one.
Nationwide the trend has for many years been to limit smoking. Many states have passed laws and many local governments have passed even more restrictive ordinances against smoking in public places. Some jurisdictions even prohibit smoking in bars. In a recent report the CDC estimated that roughly 47.8 per cent of residents are now covered by comprehensive state or local indoor smoking bans.
There has in recent years been increasing action against smoking by owners and managers of properties. Management companies that manage tens of thousands of apartments and condos have gone smoke-free in the past five years, including those managed by the owners and those managed by management companies. Some municipalities are passing ordinances related to smoking prohibitions, not only in public places, but also in multi-unit housing.
Most basically, there is no federal law that prevents landlords and property managers from regulating smoking on the premises, whether inside individual units or outside in common and private use areas. I doubt that there is any state law regarding the issue. This is because (1) there is no constitutional right to smoke and (2) smoking is not protected by Fair Housing laws – e.g., HUD does not prohibit non-smoking policies in affordable housing. In fact, in 2009 HUD released a memo that encourages public housing authorities (PHAs) to implement non-smoking policies. A number of PHAs around the country have adopted non-smoking policies.
It is my opinion that landlords should specifically prohibit smoking in their units and within common areas rather than discriminate against smokers per se because it is the act of smoking in the unit that is important to the owner and the secondhand smoke in common areas that is important to other tenants rather than the fact that a tenant is a smoker. Most, perhaps all experts feel that owners have the right to protect their properties against damages from smoking and to protect other occupants from secondhand smoke.
However, now the problem becomes one of detecting violators without running afoul of privacy rights. The solution is to both prohibit smoking inside of units; for multi-family properties, on associated patios and balconies and within any common areas; and to make tenants responsible for damages resulting from failing to adhere to the prohibition.
This requires that applicants first be made aware that the unit is a non-smoking one in order to avoid wasted time and money in processing applications for those who might be unwilling to sign a lease that includes non-smoking provisions. Upfront notice can be accomplished in advertising, in an information sheet attached to the application form, and/or within the application form itself (the more places, the better).
The lease agreement should, of course, contain very specific clauses related to the non-smoking issue. In addition to a clear statement of the prohibition, acknowledged by the tenants upon signing the agreement, the lease should also
set out in some detail a list of damages resulting from smoking for which a violator will be responsible. The list would include items such as burns or stains on any component of the unit, odors, smoke residue on any surface, and
potential other liabilities such as damages resulting from smoking related fires. It should also include wording to the effect that these are examples of damages and not the only possible damages for which they will be liable.
The lease agreement should clearly make the tenant responsible for the cost of repairing, cleaning, painting, or replacing any items so damaged. Of course, the tenant must be initially provided with a unit that has no evidence of previous
smoking-related damage or such previous damage must be noted in the move-in checklist.
A landlord cannot introduce a non-smoking policy within units during the term of an existing lease, but can include it as a clause in any extension or renewal of an existing lease agreement. It would be best to give all tenants in a multi-unit
property advance notice that such will be the case. I won’t guarantee that prohibiting smoking within common areas or in other places (balconies & patios) where other tenants could be exposed to secondhand smoke would withstand a challenge by a smoker whose lease agreement does not prohibit it, but I wouldn’t be surprised if such a prohibition would be allowed because it protects the health of other tenants.
For multi-unit properties, prohibiting smoking inside units and in common area hallways and within some distance of residents’ patios, balconies, doors, etc, can actually reduce the risk of problems. Because tobacco smoke is often considered a nuisance in the same way that loud noise would be considered a nuisance, if tenants complain about drifting tobacco smoke landlords must take action to protect them.
In fact, landlords and property managers who fail to accommodate non-smoking tenants who complain about secondhand smoke may be exposing themselves to lawsuits. If a resident or prospective resident has a disability or chronic illness which is made worse by exposure to tobacco smoke, Fair Housing Laws will require a ”reasonable accommodation.”