My Tenant Lease has max of 3 days stay for guests but

[Eric S.]

New tenant wants to know if I will authorize her relatives (1 adult and 2  kids) staying a month each summer.

What are the Cons of allowing this?

Thanks!

Eric

[Bill Gulley]

Doesn't really matter what your lease might say, saying no or charging more (try justifying that to a judge, even in Texas) is clearly getting involved in defining family status, relatives are relatives, part of the family. One month is reasonable once a year.

You going to tell a tenant they can't have a baby, can't adopt an 8 year old, can't be a foster parent?

See what HUD has to say, if the residence can support the family under its accepted living standards, they can be there, but you can't pack 5 kids in a 10x12 bedroom.

You can put anything you like, almost, in a lease, enforcing it is another matter, get a tenant who understands their rights more than the landlord does or can cause trouble, and may likely be warranted.

Let's face it, most mom and pop landlords don't have a clue as to what they are doing when they lease a residence, they are leasing part of the owner's rights in title, rights of possession with quiet enjoyment, yet, they still like to think the can lease those rights and remain entitled to them at the same time. Don't feel bad, many Realtors don't get it either.

The rights can be limited, but not beyond what is customary, accepted and reasonable, if you limit the rights too far, you're not really entitled to the full boat of rents you may be charging, tenants rent more than the roof and toilet. It's not your castle anymore, it's the tenants castle. Limit the use of the property and you limit your ability to charge for the use.

These aspects of rights leased are paramount and the basis of tenant-landlord law, looking for any excuse to reach in a tenant's pocket for a mother-in-law staying for a few weeks is absurd IMO, how do you justify additional wear and tear, are you implying the property conditions is so poor, that the toilet is so fragile that its use by one or two people for a couple weeks or a month is likely to cause it to cause a measured financial loss through depreciation, that such use is that much more than what can be reasonably expected? Really?

And, the tenant probably has a security deposit, what is that for? If granny rips off the door falling, the tenant is already responsible, so, is granny a significant damage risk, is some 4 or 16 year old, can you show that?

The tenant is generally restricted to lawful uses, they can't run a crack factory in the kitchen, they can't put ten kids in there or 3 other unrelated adults, you probably already have ordinances restricting the rights of possession and tenancy. If you lived there, you couldn't do just anything you liked either. The rights you have to possession are granted to your tenant by your leasing the place! What you could have done, they can do!

I get a little burned when I hear of helicopter landlords hovering over tenants infringing on their lives, trying to look for another 50 bucks, controlling their family relationships, dreaming up bogus claims as a justification to gig the people who are buying your property for you. Nothing personal toward the OP or anyone posting, it's an attitude and a misguided one that gets carried away at times.

Might study up, beyond a definition of "rights of possession" and "quiet enjoyment" and the definition of "family" as amended by HUD along with "reasonable accommodation" as well as what "tenants rights" include. Simply following what some other landlord gets away with in some other state can get you in trouble too.

If you can't trust your tenants, don't rent to them, if you can't trust anyone, don't be a landlord.  :)