The Landlord Protection Agency  
Main Menu, Landlord Protection Agency homepage Membership With The Landlord Protection Agency Free Landlord Services Member Services  
Re: Multiple tenants - Landlord Forum thread 354901







Free Landlord Newsletter





Free
Pre-screening
Prospect Card





FREE BONUS Forms Disk for
2 -5 year LPA Members




Excuses!

Re: Multiple tenants by Stephen (Washington (WA)) on November 3, 2017 @21:29

                              
I grasp that "joint and several" would cover this but I'm aiming at the lowest common denominator. I believe that tenants who believe they are renting only a portion of the unit wouldn't understand "joint and several." My way spells it out for them.

In regard to whether this is discriminatory against some group (I'm unclear whether Anonymous believes this discriminates against married people or single people), a married couple would be jointly and severally responsible already. I'm adding that requirement to those who aren't married to each other. Does that discriminate against singles?
[ Reply ] [ Return to forum ]

Re: Multiple tenants by Brenda (Ny) on November 3, 2017 @22:41 [ Reply ]
* a married couple would be jointly and severally responsible already*

No, because one person could be listed as a tenant while the other is an occupant. I agree that the lease clause would be discriminatory and is unnecessary. You cannot have different terms for single applicants or tenants different from married couples. Marital status is protected under Washington state law. I would not risk having such a clause, it might just draw the attention of some fair housing group, which would cost much money to defend. Just too risky.
    Re: Multiple tenants by Stephen (Washington (WA)) on November 4, 2017 @14:21 [ Reply ]
    Brenda,

    First, I'm bouncing this off a lawyer to see whether anything has changed since I originally got the form from a lawyer.

    Second, while you are correct that I could lease to a married couple and list only one as the tenant and the other as an occupant, I don't. Both are listed as tenants. Both sign.
      Re: Multiple tenants by Anonymous on November 4, 2017 @14:49 [ Reply ]
      I believe the point that everyone is trying to make is that you cannot have different lease terms for single or married people due to the fact that marital status is protected by your state fair housing law. Marital status as defined by Washington State laws includes... Married, single, divorced, and widowed.

      You are only requiring single applicants or tenants who wish to live together to sign your document. That is a violation of the law and could lead to a discrimination charge being filed.

      Is your document worth the possibility of ten's of thousands of dollars defending it? You need a lawyer who specializes in your state fair housing requirements to confirm how this may jeopardize your bottom line.
Re: Multiple tenants by Anonymous on November 4, 2017 @04:49 [ Reply ]
Since marital status is protected by your state law, you cannot have different terms for non married or single tenants as that is a violation of your state fair housing.
I would not used such a clause as it has the potential be found discriminatory somewhere along the way and be costly to my bottom line. It's up to the landlord to explain and insure that any tenant who signs the lease may be held responsible for the whole rent and terms of the lease. Any landlord should be able to explain that fact easily to a tenant.

Check-Out
Log in

Look-up
Associations
Attorneys
Businesses
Rentals Available
Rentals Wanted
Realty Brokers
Landlord Articles
Tips & Advice
Tenant Histories

Other Areas
Q&A Forum
Free Forms
Essential Forms
Landlord Tenant Law
Join Now
Credit Reports
About Us
Site Help



Contact The LPA

© 2000-2017 The Landlord Protection Agency, Inc.

If you enjoy The LPA, Please
like us on Facebook The LPA on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter The LPA on Twitter
+1 us on Google