All Forum Posts by: Troy B.

 I read this link and digging into the code, it prevents a landlord from raising rents or evicting if people add additional occupants to an existing lease. It doesn't say limiting occupancy of non-related adults is discriminatory as a tenant screening practice. 

The amendments are in section 6.15A which covers subletting and section 37.9 which covers eviction. In other words the text is in sections that apply to existing tenants. 

You could argue the end effect is the same, because this person could just have two people apply and move the third person in later without recourse. But to say having occupancy limits on unrelated adults is not allowed per screening and is considered discrimination doesn't seem correct. Unrelated adults are not a protected class federally and it doesn't appear locally in San Francisco. If they were a protected class, it would be listed as such. I listed the protected classes from the ordinance in an earlier post.

Personally I would just rent to the three roommates, because it is San Francisco. The anti-landlord hate there is so great that I would be afraid to deny anyone for any reason. It is sad that a landlord doesn't have the right to limit wear and tear on their property. Theoretically by San Francisco occupancy standards there could be 5 adults in that apartment. 

 It's going to be your Freddie Mac-defined "mortgage qualifying" income, which isn't your gross earnings, nor is it your taxable income, nor is it any number actually to be found on your tax returns. Costs nothing to have a LO work up your income.