Question: A few years ago, a married couple originally applied together for residency in our community. Based on their combined credit scores, they were both approved for residency. They have since divorced and one of them has moved out. How do we deal with this? We have several questions listed below.
Question. Following your article on screening for criminal history, I’m needing some help digesting all the Do’s and Don’ts. Are there any recent visual aids that might help?
Question: An occupant lives in a home that is sub leased from her father. The father, who is the official tenant on the lease, does not live in the home. The occupant (sub lease tenant) has been in the house since the beginning of January. The occupant was asked at the time to complete and submit a criminal background check, but refused. So the occupant is living there as an unauthorized person. The father has given the occupant (his daughter) an eviction notice. They went to court, and the judge told them to come back in two weeks. This morning the occupant gave the community owner a money order for February rent. What should the community owner do with the money order. Should it be returned? Should the community owner issue a 24 hour notice since the occupant is there without another person in the home having signed a rental agreement? Or should the community owner give a no cause eviction?
Question. As a manager, do I have the ability to terminate the tenancy of a current resident who committed a crime outside of the community?
Question. I understand that there are certain regulations dealing with our ability to sell formerly abandoned homes. How will this affect me?
Background. On April 4, 2016, the U.S Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) issued its “Office of General Counsel Guidance on Application of Fair Housing Act Standards to the Use of Criminal Records by Providers of Housing and Real Estate-Related Transactions” (hereinafter, the “Memo”). The full text of the 10-page Memo can be found here. Not surprisingly, it follows the June 25, 2015 ruling by the U. S. Supreme Court, in the Texas Dept. of Housing vs. Inclusive Communities case, which upheld the much-debated concept of “disparate impact” under the Fair Housing Act, as amended (the Act”).
Oregon landlord-tenant law is complicated. And mistakes in understanding the law frequently work against landlords. The basic rule-of-thumb to remember is that the written document which defines the landlord-tenant relationship must be complete and must be followed. While Oregon law does contain some restrictions upon what landlords can put into their rental agreements,[1] generally, they are far better off commencing the rental relationship with a strong, clear and fair written document. MHCO has gone to great lengths in making sure that its forms meet these criteria. What follows is a list of ten tips and traps to remember when using the MHCO Rental Agreement form.
Question: I understand that Oregon law governs late fees. Can you summarize it for us?
The Fair Housing Amendments Act (FHAA) went into effect on March 12, 1989. That Act amended Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, which prohibited discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin in the sale, rental, or financing of residential housing. The FHAA added two additional protected classes; (1) persons with disabilities and (2) families with children. Children include persons under the age of 18 years.
Question - A rent increase notice of $20 was sent out last year and became effective October 1, 2015. A resident has refused to pay this increase, and has tendered rent for the pre-increase amount. Can I give her a 72 Hour Notice (MHCO Form 42) for the past six months for not paying the additional $20?