By way of refresher, ORS 90.630 pertains to curable maintenance/appearance violations relating to residents’ spaces.  However, if the violation relates to the physical condition of the home’s exterior, ORS 90.632 applies, to address repair and/or remediation that can take more time to cure, either due to the weather, the amount or complexity of the work, or availability of qualified workers.

As a result, SB 277A, which became law on June 14, 2017 (“Effective Date”), will apply: (a) To rental agreements for fixed term tenancies – i.e. leases – entered into or renewed on or after the Effective Date; and, (b) To rental agreements for periodic tenancies – i.e. month-to-month tenancies – in effect on or after the Effective Date.

MHCO has significantly changed its current form No. 55 to address the changes in the new law. The major issue going forward is for managers and landlords to be able to recognize when to use Form No. 55 to address disrepair and deterioration conditions, versus Form No. 43C, which is appropriate for violations relating to maintenance and appearance of the space.

Illegal immigration is a touchy and politically charged subject. It’s also an issue that many landlords in America need to address on a daily basis. There are approximately 11.5 million undocumented aliens living in this country, according to U.S. Census Bureau estimates. Because the vast majority of these people don’t own a home, they must look to the rental market for their housing. So, landlords need to be aware of the legal implications of leasing to them.

The Pros & Cons of Leasing to Undocumented Aliens

Because they constitute a major part of the rental market in some parts of the country, categorically refusing to rent to undocumented aliens or even asking about immigration status may impair your rental business. It may also expose you to risk of liability under fair housing laws. This is especially true if the aversion is based on stereotypes about immigrants. Landlords may shy away from leasing to undocumented aliens based on stereotypes about their being unlikely to work hard and pay rent diligently.  

On the other hand, in some states and municipalities, you can get into trouble if you do knowingly lease to undocumented aliens. You may also encounter difficulties if you do seek to hold such tenants legally accountable when rental or other disputes arise. “An undocumented alien has a much greater chance of being judgment-proof,” a Maryland attorney explains. “The landlord’s toolbox for collecting a judgment is neutered since there’s no bank account or legal job generating paychecks to garnish.” And if the state or municipality makes it illegal to rent to undocumented aliens, the landlord will want to avoid going to court in an eviction situation.  

While there are no easy or absolute answers, the legal principles that landlords must understand to navigate this dilemma. Specifically,  the fair housing implications of leasing—and not leasing—to undocumented aliens and non-U.S. citizens. 

90-Day Rent Increase Notices Sent Before 2023 Legislation Becomes Law

Question:  All indications are that the 2023 legislature is going to revisit the rent increase formula currently in effect, and once passed it would likely become law immediately upon the Governor’s signature. How can landlords deal with having already issued a September 2022 90-day rent increase notice if the 2023 rent cap is legislatively reduced before the landlord’s previously-issued September 2022 increase goes into effect?

Introduction. First, let’s start with the basics: There are two main types of property, real and personal. (There is a third category, a hybrid actually, called a “fixture,” which was originally personal property that when securely attached to the real property becomes a part of it. Removal would cause damage to the structure. Fixtures transfer with the structure unless removed by pre-agreement before closing of the sale. In residential housing, attached light fixtures are the main example.) For purposes of this article, we  will ignore fixtures.

Introduction. A recent ruling from the Oregon Court of Appeals should be of interest to landlords, including those owning manufactures housing communities. Many provisions in the Oregon Landlord-Tenant Act apply a multiplier for the landlord’s violation of a statute.

A case in point is 90.315(4), a utility billing statute which allows that aggrieved tenants may recover the greater of “one month’s periodic rent or twice the amount wrongfully charged” for each individual violation. In Shepard, the plaintiff sought to apply the statute in an ongoing manner for every month the alleged violation existed. It does not require a calculator to conclude that an alleged violation that existed for 12 months (the statute of limitations under the Act) can amount to a sizeable claim against the landlord – and especially so if brought as a class action on behalf of the entire Park.

Not all requests for disability accommodations are reasonable. How can you tell which are and which aren’t?

While the COVID-19 pandemic may have kept people at home in 2020, it apparently didn’t keep them from suing for discrimination. There were 28,712 total fair housing complaints in that pandemic year, according to the National Fair Housing Alliance (NFHA). That’s the third highest annual total since 2009, and only 168 complaints fewer than the second-place year of 2019. (Note: NFHA, a national civil rights organization that tracks fair housing litigation across the US, hadn’t published the 2021 statistics as of the date we went to press.)

Continuing historic patterns, disability discrimination was the most common ground of complaint, accounting for 15,664 (54.46%) of all 2020 cases. It’s a pretty good bet that failure to provide reasonable accommodations was at the center of most of these cases.

Bottom line: Statistically at least, if an applicant or resident ever sues you for a fair housing violation, it’ll most likely be for allegedly violating your obligation to provide reasonable accommodations for a disability.