All Forum Posts by: Wesley W.

Hello folks!

Today I have an issue I need to leverage the collective wisdom on the BP forums for.

I have a terrific tenant (single woman) who recently asked for her boyfriend to move in.  So, I had him fill out an application, had them both sign a new lease (M2M), and voila!

Well, here we are a few months later, and I get a frantic text from her.  Suffice it to say, the guy has become physically abusive and she wants him out.  I haven't had time to dig in to the situation yet with her, so I'm not sure at this point that HE knows she wants him out.  So, here are my questions...

Scenario #1:  Boyfriend agrees to leave.  In this situation, can I just have them both sign a release saying he is no longer occupying the unit and he is absolved of any future financial responsibility associated with its upkeep, he waives any claim to tenancy, and she is the sole tenant with sole responsibility moving forward?  If this is acceptable, does anyone have a copy of such a document they would be willing to share?

Scenario #2:  Boyfriend refuses to leave.  Is there an easier way of me extricating him from this contract (and tenancy) without me sending a 30-day notice of termination to both tenants?  Could I send a notice of termination just to him?  Is there another option?

I'm trying to learn a lesson from this experience, but I am not sure how I could have done this any differently to avoid the current situation.

I've been putting the "move-in significant others" on a new M2M lease with my original tenant.  My logic is it holds them both financially responsible in case there is damage or a non-payment issue in the future with either or both.

I thought of just adding an addendum to the lease for the SO as an "authorized occupant" that I could terminate with a shorter notice, but I am not sure that would fly here in tenant-friendly NY.  I believe that any occupant is considered a tenant and is afforded all the rights and privileges thereof.

If I refuse to add the SO, then the likely scenario would be that I would (a) have an unauthorized occupant that I could not hold to the articles of the lease since they are not a party to it, or (b) the couple would move to a new place where they could both be on the lease (where, presumably, the next landlord would encounter my current situation).

My questions are twofold:

How do I resolve the current situation (and keep my original tenant) with as little hassle as possible?

Is there something I could do differently moving forward that could avoid this sort of thing next time?

Thanks in advance!

So, this hasn't happened to me yet, but I am curious.

With the advent of the passage of laws in various states allowing for the medicinal use of marijuana, I'm wondering how this interfaces with landlords and their leases.

For example, we have both a "drug-free" clause in the lease, and a "no smoking indoors" provision.

Let's say a tenant claims to need medical marijuana.  Is there some health care law that precludes me from enforcing the lease provisions? (ala the various threads here regarding "emotional support" animals)

Are they going to claim a HIPAA violation if I ask them for proof?

Again, just looking down the 'pike and am curious if anyone has any experience or insight on how this might play out.

 I'm a HUGE animal lover.  But this is BUSINESS. And I'm not going to let my personal emotions and feelings about animals jeopardize the assets I've worked so hard to acquire to provide for my family (which includes my own personal animals).

@Deanna McCormick @Account Closed

Thanks, ladies.  I like Deanna's tact a bit better; I'm worried a "blanket" letter to the building would cause undue consternation to my good tenants about their units being inspected.

What exactly is "excessive traffic"?  Do you have that spelled out in your lease?

Thanks again!

Hello All,

I'll start out with the situation to provide context and then follow up with my question.

I have a tenant who works two jobs and is seldom at home.  She is currently allowing her father to come over in her absence (to let the dog out, let's assume).  Problem is, I think he is dealing drugs out of the unit.  I have circumstantial evidence, which is enough for me to feel compelled to react.  Minimally, he is chain smoking marijuana every day, which permeates the entire building.

I have verbage in my lease about illegal activities, but I frankly don't want to get into it with them about trying to prove my case.  What I would like to do is add a provision to my lease that would address the "use" of the unit by those other than the tenants of record.  Does anyone have something they wouldn't mind posting that they use?

I have a paragraph that addresses "unauthorized occupants", but it only covers overnight guests.  This guy just comes during the day, does his thing, and leaves at night.  I'd like to tighten up my contract so this is not an issue in the future.

I think what I will do in this instance is send a notice to cure (citing "indoor smoking" and "illegal activities" in the lease), but I want to make sure that future contracts have items against the mere use of the unit (regardless of whether or not the activity is illegal).  She is on a MTM, so I can always terminate, but I just want to put something in writing for next time. 

It's a fine line between micro-managing guests that our tenants invite and the pseudo-subletting that is nearly the case at this point.

I welcome your feedback.  Thanks!

 They run a tight ship in Cohoes.  You don't want to get on wrong side of Code Enforcement.  The ROPs are tied into everything - police reports, school records, etc.  Unless your tenants don't exist on paper they are bound to find out.  If you try and circumvent their system, the fines for being out of compliance are levied on a per-day basis.

On a positive note, they've run all the slum lords out of town, and yes - they just passed a new resolution over the summer that raises the bar for long-distance owners.

 Please keep in mind it is not the frequency of incidents of biting that matters; it's the injuries sustained from those bites that do.  Actuarially, that's that the insurance companies are using to exclude specific large breeds.  It's a business model for them.  It should be for you, too.

 Unfortunately, not being liable after a judgement gets rendered does not protect you from being sued and having to defend that lawsuit.  Sure, your insurance company might provide the attorney fees (or not), but that won't help you sleep better at night during the long process.

You as the landlord have assets that your tenant doesn't.  The victim's attorney will look to hold you responsible after a cursory asset search.

Hello folks,

Okay, here's an issue I would love people to provide input on.  In our rental agreements we give a 5 day grace period before late fees and pay or quit notices are generated.  We only accept payment through a dedicated sweep account so tenants can either walk cash in to the branch, pay by check at the branch, or execute a BTB transfer.  We do not accept any form of payment made directly to us.

Our regional bank was just bought by a much larger bank, and our accounts were ported over to this new nationwide bank.  Previously, tenants who paid on the 5th at a local branch had their payment posted to our account immediately so that (a) we could see that they paid, and (b) we were given provisional credit on that money that we could use to pay for debt service, etc.

This new bank now processes payments much more slowly, and this has created the following concern illustrated in this example:

Tenant pays rent the morning of the 5th (a Saturday), but the money wasn't available to us until the 8th.  This is not as favorable as our previous bank, as we must wait this cooling off period which further extends the period where that rent money is not usable by us.

So, to those of you that have grace periods, when do you consider the rent "paid?"  The date their check is deposited (regardless of when those funds show up in your account), or when the funds are available (e.g. "if you are paying after the 3rd, payment must be in cash.")

I'm curious as how people handle this, as well as any unforeseen consequences of this new financial arrangement we have yet to experience.

Thank you in advance!

Being a slob is not a protected class. Not sure there is any state in the union that would see this as unlawful discrimination.