When I talked to Minut about this, they said they might update the language to reflect it can take longer to establish a baseline.

For the language in the lease, I would just add provisions there on what you're comfortable with.

I do not feel comfortable going back over there after how they acted during the inspection.Do you think they will have legal grounds to move forward with suing or rent escrow actions given the following circumstances 1) "as-is" language in the lease (pasted below); 2) nothing about smell is included on the pre-move-in inspection; and 3) the city inspector was already out and stated there was no violation?

I also put in exclusions for the water heater and furnace so that they are responsible for those.What type of language will make the AS-IS language stick and make it very clear that they are required to maintain the heating and water systems?

I will list his known assets at the bottom.Here are my two questions: If the documents I sign show him as personally guaranteeing the loan (specific language below).

If anyone can point me to specific language in the laws passed that does so, that would be helpful as I am operating under current knowledge that short term rentals can be had with ADU's.That said, since the bill does not appear to prevent local municipalities from adopting no short term rental policies, I suppose they can.

@Kerry Gray I am not sure your tenuous grasp of the English language is helping properly defend Citrona homes, please stop.

Offer contracts generally have language in them already that incorporates this stuff (or at least they have blank spots for your agent to fill in these requests), you should be able to talk to your agent if you have any questions about how this all works in your area.

Because of language in a "homemade" lease the landlord had to pay back all the rent they have received over the entire tenancy.

It is effective Aug. 1, 2024.This ordinance is referred to as the Source of Income Discrimination Ban Ordinance" - which is identified in File #231019 and amends sections of Chapter 38 (Civil Rights) and Chapter 34 (Health and Sanitation) in the Missouri Revised Statutes for the purpose of classifying source of income as a protected trait in regard to housing discrimination.Here are some key takeaways from the attached ordinance:This ordinance bans discrimination against tenants based solely on:Source of income from an occupation, including gig work or paying rent in cash Use of public programs like Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers, disability checks, or social security Poor credit score Prior evictions and alleged damages older than 12 months (less than 12 months can be a basis for denial) Prior convictions or arrests (sexual and violent crimes are excepted, a landlord can still deny based on these convictions)The ordinance also requires the city to proactively scan for rental ads using discriminatory language like "no Section 8" or "no past evictions".Landlords who are found to be in violation of the ordinance with respect to source of income can be fined up to $1,000 per incident.