All Forum Posts by: Ken D.

Is it crucial to have a copy of the cosigner's social security card and/or a federal issued photo ID such as a drivers license, passport, etc.? I've always asked for these two forms of identification and have never had a problem getting them. Recently a group of people that want to move into my 4 bedroom apartment are giving me a hard time like I'm asking for too much identification. Am I asking for too much identification? Or is this pretty standard? I feel like I'm protecting myself and by giving me such a hard time I should just move on to more cooperating tenants to be.

Situation: I am renting a 4 bedroom apartment in a duplex in a college area and have 4 college students interested in renting it. The apartment is not available till June 1st because the previous tenants trashed the place so bad that we had to do a full renovation. Anyways, the 4 college kids don’t bring in enough income so I’m requiring them to have co-signers but one of the co-signers refuses to give me his social security number and refuses to give me a copy of his driver’s license or the driver’s license number. He says he will have his bank do a credit check and have them notarize it for the credit check portion. His situation with the driver’s license he says he’ll let me take a peek at his driver’s license but I can’t have a copy of it or have the license number off of it. He also said he’d bring a couple pieces of mail with his name and address on it as proof of his residence.

note: *He refuses to do any sort of online background check whether I submit the information or if he submits it- he had his identity stolen twice so now he’s super paranoid of it happening again.

Question: Is there another way of doing this? Is it crucial to have a copy of his driver’s license to make the co-signer form more concrete? Is there a substitution for a driver’s license?

Additional note: I understand that he’s worried about protecting himself. I’m running a very small business and can’t afford to get screwed over by anymore bad tenants. I need to make sure I’m doing everything in the most proper way that would hold up in court and not cause me any more headache than necessary.

Thanks for the advice, but most people seem to be addressing the practical question rather than the legal question. I haven't consulted with a lawyer, because I was hoping tons of landlords have dealt with this issue enough to know what the law says (and because lawyers are expensive and I don't have a working relationship with one at present).

I found this info:
http://www.seattle.gov/civilrights/documents/RHB_Engl.pdf

"Limited-English Speakers

I don’t speak English well and some landlords refuse to talk with me
when I try to apply. Is this discrimination?

Probably. A landlord cannot turn away an applicant simply because of a strong accent or because communication with a limited-English speaker presents an extra challenge. This violates laws protecting people on the basis of “national origin.” Landlords and managers must make every reasonable effort to communicate. However, landlords have the right to do business in English and are not required to translate applications, lease agreements, etc.

Is a landlord required to hire an interpreter to help me through
an interview and application process?

If you need an interpreter, you will probably have to arrange and pay for the service yourself, or you might try getting a friend to help. If a landlord won’t let you bring someone who speaks English with you to read through your lease before signing, it could be an act of discrimination. Call your local fair housing agency.

My landlord is evicting me because I broke the rules, but I speak
very little English and didn’t know I was doing anything wrong.
What can I do?

As a tenant, it is your responsibility to follow the rules regardless of your language ability. However, a landlord must give you written notice that you have broken the rules, along with the opportunity to comply before you are evicted. If you understand little English, you should seek help from someone who can interpret official documents you receive or are asked to sign. These might include leases, notices to vacate or court orders regarding eviction."

This seems to indicate that I can request the tenant hire an interpreter or bring an English-speaking adult to serve as an interpreter during the application/interview process -- although the question is framed from the perspective of the applicant, it seems to say if the applicant feels they need an interpreter the landlord is not required to pay for one, not if the landlord feels they need an interpreter the applicant is required to provide one (a non-child interpreter).

It seems to me, however, to say that I do not, as a landlord, have the right to not rent to someone who has zero English-speaking ability. Even if I interpret the interpreter question in a pro-landlord way, and require the applicant to provide an interpreter, I'm still not allowed to not rent to them because the reasonable expectation that communication with them will be an unreasonable burden since they are likely to not have that interpreter during our future communications (lease violations, late rent notices, etc).

Giving the uncertainty in the law, it certainly seems like _it could_ be interpreted as discrimination to not be willing to conduct business with someone with virtually no English skills. (NOTE that this is NOT an issue of accent or national origin, it is purely a situation of inability to communicate in a language both of us know).

Today a family of 6 (3 adults, 2 babies, and a 10 year old) viewed one of my apartments but only the 10 year old could speak English. I tried my best to speak to the adults through the 10 year old but the child struggled to explain the rental income requirement. I ended up giving up trying to explain rental income, gave them an application, and left for my next showing. I admit I am new to property managing but it seems hazardous to conduct business with a child. I would think there would be a law that would protect landlords from business like this. What if the child words what their parents say incorrectly? The child can't be held responsible for any problems that result from bad communication. What if you allowed them to move in and the rest of the time the kid isn't available and they can't understand a word I say? What if there is an emergency and I can't communicate with them? Don't I have a right to protect my business from bad business scenarios?

Reggie,

Thanks for your reply -- it's frustrating that the laws are so different in every state, it's very difficult to get a solid answer on what is allowed, and I'm loathe to pay a lawyer $200/hr to research all the various questions I have, I'm obviously not in the best financial situation.

I have a clause about showing the unit, but I don't think it says anything about "show" condition, nor about damages being taken otherwise. I want to add this to my lease, whether it's legal or not at least it gives a basis to demand a certain level of cleanliness during that time.

-Ken

I've had luck so far with filling units without vacancy, I realize it's not always possible, but my financial model, admittedly, does not have enough room for vacancy in it. When it was created, it did, but in practice, it doesn't. I've recently taken over management from a professional property manager who did a poor job (and stole from me).

They're moving out at the end of July, so I'm not going to evict them. I was told by another business partner that I could charge for damages incurred because of gross lack of cleanliness during the showings, but I don't have a legal citation for that and I don't want to screw up on legal matters, which is why I asked here. Worst case, for now, I get some tenants in there who don't have the best rent/income ratio (2X).

I've got a problem with a group of tenants who haven't been willing to keep their unit even remotely clean during showings for the last four weeks. They've got three cats and two litter boxes, and the entire unit stinks of litter -- they've also got food and dishes everywhere, and huge piles of dirty clothes everywhere.

This is a nice, fairly high-end apartment in a not-so-great area, it should stand out as being nicer than the surrounding apartments. Before showing the unit to potential tenants, I've started having to warn them about the smell and have made promises that a professional cleaning crew will be in the unit during the flip period to make sure that the smell is removed.

The unit is a major turnoff to everyone who sees it. Very few people are able to look past its current condition, and I'm sure everyone is worried about committing to an apartment with the risk that the smell will linger. I'd be willing to offer them an escape clause in the lease, or just start off month-to-month, but I haven't been able to get anyone interested enough to even get to that point. I've impressed upon the tenants that they need to improve the condition of their unit, and they've made some modest efforts, but the situation is far from acceptable.

I need to have this unit filled in 10 days and I only have one applicant who really doesn't meet the financial criteria I would prefer. I consider them a big risk, and I think the condition of the apartment has forced me to accept them when I otherwise could have been able to get a much higher quality tenant.

QUESTION: Other than damages for cleaning the unit after they move out, can I deduct damages for the condition of the apartment during the showing period? Will this hold up in court? If I failed to find a tenant, I could see claiming one months rent in damages, but if I accept a lower-quality tenant, this seems hard to quantify or justify. Although I've talked to the tenants a few times about cleaning up, I haven't sent them any formal letters or threatened to take money from their deposit for the state of the apartment during the showing period, which I feel like would be important documentation if they protested my damage assessment in court. Thoughts? Should I add conditions in my lease saying what the expectations are during the showing period? Can I have language in the lease saying that there are basic expectations of cleanliness even apart from the showing period?

I'm in Minnesota.

I'm in Minnesota.

Do I have any legal liability for tenants having garage sales on-property? What if someone trips on a recently fallen tree branch, or some other unlikely but possible scenario?

Do I have the legal authority to tell a tenant that they cannot have a garage sale? Does this need to be in my lease agreement or can I do it even without that? Do people think garage sales are a problem or not?

My wife was denied permission to have a garage sale supposedly because of insurance reasons when she lived in a fairly large ~40-50 unit building without much parking or frontage space to ever have a garage sale. All my properties are 2/3/4-unit buildings with decent yard area where it's possible to have a garage sale.

I'm in Minnesota.

I'm in the process of beefing up my existing lease with additional expectations of tenant behavior (such as not having other adults not on the lease living at the property). My understanding is that having such items in the lease gives me more flexibility to potentially evict people if I have a problem with them. My question, however, is whether I can have financial penalties in the lease agreement for violations?

For example, I had a friend who managed some very slummy properties tell me they had very strict penalties for cigarette smoking. A single occurrence of smoking in the unit carried a $250 fine. Is this legal?

Similarly, I don't allow dogs -- if we were to allow dogs, it would be a very hefty monthly surcharge -- but, if I go by the property and hear dogs in their apartment, my only recourse is to evict them and deal with all the hassle associated therein. Sometimes, these people have gone ahead and gotten pets despite what their lease says, other times they're just borrowing a pet from someone else, but I still don't want it in my unit even for a day or two because of smell and noise and bite-risk. I'm not going to evict someone for doing something small like that, but I'd like there to be some explicit penalty.

I can imagine potentially a variety of other items over time which it would make sense to handle in this way, but I haven't been managing long enough to know.... any suggestions?

All my rental properties have water faucets on the outside of the property. My current leases do not have language indicating that car washing, gardening, etc, etc, are not allowed -- but, I know these things are happening because there's always a hose hooked up to the faucet when I come by, even when I've told them not to use the faucet.

Can I put a locking device on the faucet or is there some law (Minnesota) that says the properties must have an exterior faucet (for fire safety, for example)? All my properties were 100% refurbished 3 years ago, and many of them got new exterior faucets during this process -- so I don't understand why the faucets would have been put in if they weren't required when they're such a water/cost liability?