3x the Rent Rule and Housing Choice (Section 8) Vouchers

[Tynan Dill]

How should I apply this rule to prospective Housing Choice/Section 8 applicants, or should I even apply it ?

I've seen a mixed group of advice on this topic. Some say they apply it as they would anyone else, some say reduce the standard to 1x or 2x the rent, some say they simply don't apply it to voucher holders...

And some say they only apply it to the tenants portion of the rent they pay out of pocket...Example, say the tenants voucher portion of the rent they pay out of pocket is $50, so they only need to show income of $150 to meet the 3x the rent standard as a voucher holder.

A lot of grey area about how this should be handled, how do you guys handle it ? I honestly feel as if I shouldn't because if a voucher holder was making 3x the rent, they wouldn't meet the income limits eligibility requirements to even obtain a housing choice/section 8 voucher. Especially with the recent source of income discrimination laws popping up everywhere, I can see it being a fair housing discrimination violation issue and could cause costly problems for a landlord or property manager.

What are your thoughts, opinions, or advice on how this situation should be handled correctly ?

[Richard F.]

Aloha,

Unfortunately it is a very grey area, without clear guidance in written law that I have ever seen. In fact, there is a lot about subsidized housing that is never clearly spelled out with actual authority. The housing offices want to place their long list of clients, so they have their motivation; the activists have their motivation; but the laws seem to actually be lacking. You are asked to accept greater risk, with only the (false) promise of "guaranteed rent".

Standard Contract Law tells us a contract signed under duress is void, yet there is zero negotiation with HAP contracts, which are around 15 pages long. Contracts are supposed to represent a "meeting of the minds". Have you ever actually read a HAP contract? They are extremely one-sided,and NOT in your favor!

Fair Housing tells us to treat everyone the same, yet most subsidized programs will require that you wait an extended period (as much as two months) before you receive ANY payment, and in many cases you are not getting either the deposit or pro-rated rent prior to move in, while non-subsidized tenants are routinely expected to pay full deposit and first month rent before ever getting keys, and typically within two weeks of approval or less. This is even more of an issue in those locales that are now telling you that you cannot discriminate based on source of income.

With regard to your specific question, absent written, authoritative guidance, I simply include the voucher amount (or estimated voucher amount) with their total household income, and require the same 2.5 times rent for the total amount needed. In other words, they must have some other actual income to make up the difference. There is no logic to a requirement of 2.5 times only the tenant's rent portion...they still have many other living expenses, that are not reduced by a housing voucher, the same as anyone else. What are they expected to live on? Until these programs are willing to return a unit to you vacant, and in the same condition as when they accepted it from you, I feel they are far to one-sided with their requirements.

[Vanessa Regalado]

@Tynan Dill we have worked with Section 8 tenants for more than 10 years. We only do 3X the tenant portion but we also make sure they are financially able to afford the other expenses on their own as well. For example if the tenants portion is $100 then we would require an income of at least $300 a month but also other income where they can pay for living expenses. All our Section 8 tenants are hard working people and pay their rent on time. If they fail to pay their portion of the rent and you evict them, then they lose their housing voucher.