Search

Always Use A Calendar

 

Virtually all legal notices in the landlord-tenant law give a certain number of days (or hours) for compliance. If a 30-day notice is mailed, three additional days must be added. This means that the deadline for compliance is at least 33 days. However, landlords and managers frequently count the day of mailing toward the 33 days. This is incorrect. Additionally, the 33d day is frequently identified as the deadline, when it should be the day after the 33d day. When notices are sent in the month of February, the 33-day calculation can get confusing, since there are only 28 days – or 29 in the case of leap years. Rather than trying to do it in your head, it is far better to physically count the number of days on a calendar. Don’t do it once. Count out the necessary number of days at least three times, just to make sure that you’ve gotten it right.

 

Don’t Cut Deadlines Too Close

 

Frequently, landlords and managers give only the minimal number of days for compliance. This can be dangerous. While the court will always throw out a notice that is too short, it cannot throw one out that is too long. Since the risk of error is so high in the calculation of the necessary number of days, it is always prudent to give a couple of extra days, just to be safe. Rather than giving just 33 days on mailed 30-day notices, give 35. The statute governing the calculation of days can be confusing. Rather than trying to remember each rule, it is far better to simply add a couple of extra days, in order to avoid the risk of miscalculation.

 

 

 

 

Avoid All Ambiguity

 

For all maintenance and repair notices, be as specific as possible. Assume that a judge or jury will be looking at it. Assume that they know nothing about the problem. Will they be able to understand it? For example, saying “Clean up your yard” will not be understood by a judge or jury to mean “Mow and edge the lawn, and remove the weeds and blackberry bushes.” While tenants may know, in their heart of hearts, exactly what the landlord is referring to when he says “Clean up your yard,” by the time the matter gets into court, the tenant’s attorney will argue that the notice was so vague as to make compliance impossible.

 

On disrepair notices, landlords and managers should be sure to tell the tenant exactly what is wrong with the home and exactly what is necessary to remedy it. To say “fix the steps” will be argued as too vague. This cannot be said of a notice that says “repair or replace the broken steps and handrail located along the side of the sundeck behind the house.”

 

Use Current MHCO Forms

 

Most forms have a copyright date at the bottom. Remember that the Oregon Legislature meets every two years and that a session never goes by without some changes being made to the landlord-tenant laws. There is a good chance that a 1996 form will not legally comply with those laws generated during the 2001 Legislative Session. Accordingly, if you have a form that is copyright dated before the latest legislative year, you should check to find out if it is still current.

 

Make Sure You’re Using the Right Form

 

While this seems obvious, errors can occur. This is especially true when sending out notices to repair a home due to damage or deterioration. ORS 90.632 expressly governs this situation. There is a special form that must be used. The law requires that the form must contain specific notice to the tenant regarding their rights to obtain an extension of time for compliance if certain repairs, such as painting, are required by the landlord. Landlords and managers frequently confuse damage and deterioration situations with failure to maintain issues. If a house is in need of paint or the skirting is rusted and broken, a notice under ORS 90.632 must be issued, since this deals with damage or deterioration. However, this is not so, if the problem is simply maintenance, such as debris in the yard, or the home needs to be power-washed.

 

Be Careful Using 24-Hour Notices

 

While there are several good reasons to use a 24-hour notice, before issuing one, you should first ask two questions: (a) Is the conduct expressly prohibited by the park rules, and (b) is it of such a magnitude that it jeopardizes the health and safety of the tenants or managers in the park. If the violation is a breach of the rules, but is not a health or safety issue, it is better to give a 30-day notice for a rules violation. Here’s why: 24-hour notices are not curable. This means that the court will be faced with having to kick someone out of their home. If there is any doubt whatsoever, the judge or jury will normally come down on the side of the tenant. However, a 30-day notice is curable. If the conduct stops, there is no further issue for the landlord. If it is repeated within six months of the date of the 30-day notice, the landlord may issue a 20-day non-curable notice. If the landlord must file an eviction based upon the tenant’s failure to vacate after the issuance of a 20-day notice, the judge or jury will know that the tenant was first given an opportunity to avoid termination of the tenancy but they ignored it.

 

Only Use Notices of Termination As A Last Resort

 

Several changes ushered in by the 2001 Legislative Session make it easier for landlords and managers to first seek voluntary compliance from a tenant before issuing notices of termination. The waiver statute is not as harsh as it once was. Additionally, since informal notices are not intended to be the basis of an eviction action, they do not need to be in any particular form. They can be mailed or hand delivered without the necessity of counting days. They do not have to threaten termination of the tenancy. They do not need to have a fixed deadline for compliance. They can say “please.” Perhaps most important, they make management look better, since they show that the landlord or manager “walked the extra mile” with the tenant, rather than simply terminating the tenancy. Most landlord attorneys would prefer to be in court with a tenant’s file that is thick with requests for voluntary compliance. By the time a legal notice of termination is sent, it should say to the judge or jury “this was the landlord’s last resort.”

 

Only Use Notices Of Termination If You Mean It

 

Landlords and managers who issue notices without enforcing them create the appearance they are “crying wolf.” If a notice is issued, say for failure to maintain the yard, but no enforcement occurs upon noncompliance, the notice loses importance. If this occurs park-wide, the minute an eviction is filed based upon a particular tenant’s refusal to comply, the argument occurs that management is engaging in “selective enforcement,” since it had never done it before.  Consistent with the “last resort” approach, discussed above, landlords and managers should reserve the legal notice of termination only for those cases in which they intend to follow through.

 

Conclusion

 

While legal notices of termination are a necessary precondition to filing an eviction, they can also prove to be management’s undoing, if not properly used. They should be reserved for those cases in which the landlord or manager has no other viable alternative, and when used, they must be properly prepared.  Indiscriminate use or sloppy preparation of notices of termination will do management more harm than good.

Fair housing law generally prohibits discrimination based on familial status, but there’s a limited exception that applies to senior housing communities that qualify as “housing for older persons.” To qualify, senior housing communities must meet strict technical requirements. Unless they satisfy those requirements, communities may not enforce “adult only” policies or impose age restrictions to keep children from living there.

The focus of this article is on federal law, but it’s important to check the law in your state governing senior housing communities. The specifics may vary, but you could draw unwanted attention from state enforcement agencies if you exclude families with children without satisfying legal requirements to qualify for the senior housing exemption.

Example: In January 2019, the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) announced a $10,000 settlement in a fair housing complaint alleging familial status discrimination against the owners of a six-unit rental community and a residential real estate brokerage firm that managed the property.

Fair housing advocates filed the complaint, alleging that the property was advertised online as an “adult complex” and included a restriction of “maximum 2 adults.” During a follow-up call, the property manager reportedly told a tester that children weren’t allowed. DFEH found that the complex wasn’t a senior citizen housing development and that there was cause to believe a violation of state fair housing law had occurred.

“In California, senior housing developments can, with some exceptions, exclude residents under 55 years of age if they have at least 35 units and meet other requirements,” DFEH Director Kevin Kish said in a statement. “All other rental properties violate the law if they categorically exclude families with minor children. By identifying such policies through testing, fair housing organizations such as Project Sentinel play an important role in ensuring that families with children have access to housing.” 

WHAT DOES THE LAW SAY?

The Fair Housing Act (FHA) bans housing discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, familial status, or disability—what’s known as “protected classes.”

Congress added familial status to the list of federally protected classes when it amended the FHA in 1988. In a nutshell, the familial status provisions make it unlawful to discriminate against applicants or residents because they have, or expect to have, a child under 18 in the household. Specifically, the FHA’s ban on discrimination based on familial status apply to one or more children under 18 living with:

• A parent;
• An individual with legal custody; or
• An individual who has the written permission of the parent or custodian.

The familial status provisions also apply to pregnant woman and anyone in the process of securing legal custody of one or more children under 18.

Nevertheless, Congress recognized the need to preserve housing specifically designed to meet the needs of senior citizens. Consequently, the 1988 amendment created an exemption from the FHA’s familial status requirements for communities that qualified as “housing for older persons.” Congress later amended the law in the Housing for Older Persons Act of 1995 (HOPA), resulting in the current version of the federal exemption for senior housing.

The exemption allows senior housing communities that meet specific requirements to legally exclude families with children. The exemption applies to housing communities or facilities, which are governed by a common set of rules, regulations, or restrictions. A portion of a single building isn’t considered a housing facility or community, according to HUD. The senior housing exemption applies only to the FHA’s familial status provisions; communities must still abide by the law’s protections based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, and disability.

The law describes three types of communities that are eligible for the senior housing exemption:

• Publicly funded senior housing communities: Housing communities where HUD has determined that the dwelling is specifically designed for and occupied by elderly persons under a federal, state, or local government program;
• 62-and-older communities: Communities intended for, and occupied solely by, persons who are 62 or older; and
• 55-and-older communities: Communities that house at least one person who is 55 or older in at least 80 percent of the occupied units and adheres to a policy that demonstrates intent to house persons who are 55 or older.

7 RULES TO FOLLOW TO AVOID FAIR HOUSING TROUBLE

IN SENIOR HOUSING COMMUNITIES

Rule #1: Comply with Technical Requirements for Senior Housing Exemption

Senior communities must adopt policies and procedures to ensure strict compliance with the technical requirements of the senior housing exemption. If you don’t comply with the law’s requirements, then you lose the exemption, which in essence makes your community automatically liable for excluding or discriminating against families with children. 

Complying with the law governing the 62-and-older exemption is relatively straightforward. To qualify, the community must be intended for and occupied solely by persons aged 62 and older. For example, HUD regulations explain that a 62-and-older community would have to refuse the application of a 62-year-old man whose wife is 59. In the same vein, a community would lose its exemption if it allowed continued residency by a current resident who married someone under the age of 62.

Complying with the law governing the 55-and-older exemption is more complicated. To qualify, the community must satisfy each of the following requirements:

• At least 80 percent of the occupied units must have at least one occupant who is 55 years of age or older;
• The community must publish and adhere to policies and procedures that demonstrate the intent to operate as “55 or older” housing; and
• The community must comply with HUD’s regulatory requirements for age verification of residents.

1. 80 percent rule. To meet this requirement, a community must ensure that at least one person 55 or older lives in 80 percent of its occupied units. The law doesn’t restrict the ages of the other occupants in those units. Furthermore, there are no age limits for the occupants of the other 20 percent, so communities may accept families with children, although they don’t have to do so.

The 80 percent rule applies to the percentage of “occupied units,” which includes temporarily vacant units if the primary occupant has resided in the unit during the past year and intends to return on a periodic basis. That means that a unit would count toward the 80 percent requirement if its 55-year-old occupant resided in the unit for only part of each year.

To maintain eligibility for the exemption, it’s a good idea to ensure that more than 80 percent of your occupied units are occupied by at least one person aged 55 or older. If you skate too close to the line, your community could be forced into a difficult situation—for example, if a 60-year-old resident dies, leaving a 54-year-old surviving spouse.

To prevent just such a problem, HUD advises communities to plan with care when renting the 20 percent portion of the remaining units to incoming households under age 55. Such planning should address notice to incoming households under the age of 55 regarding how the community will proceed in the event that the 80 percent requirement is threatened.

2. Intent to operate as senior housing. A community must publish and adhere to policies and procedures that demonstrate its intent to operate as housing for persons 55 years of age or older. HUD offers some examples of the types of policies and procedures to satisfy this requirement, including:

• The written rules, regulations, lease provisions, or other restrictions;
• The actual practices of the community used to enforce the rules;
• The kind of advertising used to attract prospective residents to the community as well as the manner in which the community is described to prospective residents; and
• The community’s age-verification procedures and its ability to produce, in response to a familial status complaint, verification of required occupancy.

3. Verification of occupancy. To qualify under the 55-and-older exemption, communities must able to produce verification of compliance with the 80 percent rule through reliable surveys and affidavits.

HUD regulations require communities to develop procedures to routinely determine the occupancy of each unit, including the identification of whether at least one occupant is 55 or older. The procedures may be part of the normal leasing arrangement. And, every two years, communities must update, through surveys or other means, the initial information to verify that the unit is occupied by at least one resident age 55 or older.

In addition, communities must establish procedures to verify the age of the occupants in units occupied by persons 55 and older through reliable documentation, such as birth certificates, driver’s licenses, passports, immigration cards, military identification, and other official documents that show a birth date. HUD regulations also allow a certification signed by any member of the household aged 18 or older asserting that at least one person in the unit is 55 or older.

Rule #2: Market Your Community as Senior Housing

For 55+ communities, it’s essential to ensure that your advertising and marketing doesn’t undercut your ability to qualify for the senior housing exemption.

To qualify for the senior exemption, the law requires communities to demonstrate an intent to provide housing for older persons. The manner in which your community is described to potential residents is among the relevant factors listed in HUD regulations to determine whether a community has complied with the intent requirement. Using the wrong words to describe yourself not only may trigger a fair housing complaint, but also undercut your ability to demonstrate your intent to operate as “55 or older” housing.

As an example, fair housing expert Doug Chasick points to the increasing number of housing developments that market themselves as “Active Adult” or “Empty Nester” communities. Yet, he points out, using the term “Adult Only” housing was outlawed back in 1988, when President Reagan signed amendments to the FHA into law. He says that some state and local enforcement agencies claim that using these phrases are always illegal because they’re incompatible with the intent requirement.

HUD doesn’t take it that far. It’s true that HUD regulations state that “Phrases such as “adult living,” “adult community,” or similar statements in any written advertisement or prospectus are not consistent with the intent that the housing facility or community intends to operate as housing for persons 55 years of age or older. But HUD says that the use of these terms does not, by itself, destroy the community’s ability to meet the intent requirement, according to HUD. If a facility or community has clearly shown in other ways that it intends to operate as housing for older persons, meets the 80 percent requirement, and has in place age verification procedures, then HUD says that the intent requirement can be met even if the term “adult” is occasionally used to describe it.

That’s not to say that Chasick says it’s a good idea to use those terms in your advertising or marketing materials. In fact, he recommends against it unless you want to be caught up in an expensive investigation or enforcement action. Instead, Chasick recommends using words like “senior housing,” “senior living community,” “a 55 and older community,” or even a “55 and Better Community” when describing your community to demonstrate your intent to operate as housing for older persons.

Rule #3: Don’t Discriminate Based on Race or Other Protected Characteristics

The FHA’s senior housing exemption is limited: It offers protection from federal fair housing claims based upon familial status as long as your community meets the FHA’s requirements to qualify as housing for older persons. It doesn’t exempt senior housing communities from any claims based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, or disability, or other characteristic protected under state or local law.

That means that senior communities must take steps not only to qualify under the senior housing exemption, but also to ensure they don’t exclude or otherwise discriminate against applicants or residents based on race or other protected characteristic. For example, senior communities must adopt nondiscriminatory policies and procedures governing the application process and treatment of residents in addition to complying with the age-verification and other requirements to qualify for the senior housing exemption. And train your staff to apply those policies consistently to all applicants and residents, regardless of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, or disability, or other characteristic protected under state or local law.

Rule #4: Enforce Rules to Prevent Harassment by or Against Residents

Take steps to enforce rules to prevent harassment or other misconduct by or against residents. If a resident complains about being harassed by other residents based on her race, sex, or any other protected class, then you should take the complaints seriously.

You shouldn’t be expected to police the behavior of your residents, but you should make it clear that bullying or any other forms of harassment based on protected characteristics won’t be tolerated. Depending on the circumstances, you could face liability under fair housing law if you knew that a resident was subjected to severe and persistent abuse from other residents, but you did nothing to stop it.

Example: In August 2018, a federal court reinstated a fair housing case against an Illinois retirement community for harassment and retaliation. The complaint alleged that the resident endured months of physical and verbal abuse by other residents because of her sexual orientation, and that despite her complaints, the community did nothing to stop it and in fact, retaliated against her because of her complaints.

Fair housing law prohibits discriminatory harassment that creates a hostile housing environment. To prove the claim, the resident had to prove that: (1) she endured unwelcome harassment based on a protected characteristic; (2) the harassment was severe or pervasive enough to interfere with her tenancy; and (3) there was reason to hold the community responsible.

The resident’s complaint satisfied the first and second requirements. She alleged that she was subjected to unwelcome harassment based on her sex, and the community agreed that the court’s earlier ruling—that employment discrimination based on sexual orientation qualifies as discrimination based on sex—applied equally to housing discrimination claims. And the alleged harassment could be viewed as both severe and pervasive—for 15 months, she was bombarded with threats, slurs, derisive comments about her families, physical violence, and spit.

The complaint also satisfied the third requirement. When the case goes back for further proceedings, the focus will be on the management defendants to determine whether they had actual knowledge of the severe harassment that the resident was enduring and whether they were deliberately indifferent to it. If so, then they subjected the resident to conduct that the FHA forbids [Wetzel v. Glen St. Andrew Living Community, August 2018].

Rule #5: Watch for Potential Disability Discrimination Claims

Senior housing communities must pay particular attention to fair housing protections for individuals with disabilities. The FHA prohibits communities from excluding individuals with disabilities or discriminating against them in the terms, conditions, and privileges of the tenancy.

Example: In December 2018, the owners and operators of a California senior housing complex agreed to pay $2,500 to resolve claims that they violated state fair housing laws by denying housing to a prospective resident because she has a disability.

In her complaint, the prospect alleged that the property manager initially approved her tenancy application but rescinded the approval after meeting her and seeing that she uses a wheelchair. The prospect’s daughter had handled most aspects of the application process, including viewing the unit. When the prospect arrived in a wheelchair to sign the lease, the property manager allegedly refused to rent her the unit and accused her and her daughter of misrepresenting the prospect’s identity by bringing other individuals to view the unit.

“The Fair Employment and Housing Act promises that all tenants, regardless of disability, have equal access to housing,” Kevin Kish, Director of the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing, in a statement. “Housing providers have a legal obligation to eliminate unlawful bias from every stage of the housing application process.”

Fair housing law bans discrimination against applicants and residents because they—or someone they’re associated with—is a member of a protected class. HUD says that the FHA’s disability provisions were intended to prohibit not only discrimination against the named tenant, “but also to prohibit denial or housing opportunities to applicants because they have children, parents, friends, spouses, roommates, patients, subtenants or other associates with disabilities.”

Example: In December 2018, HUD announced that a New Jersey condo association representing residents of a 55-and-older condominium development has settled a complaint alleging that it refused to sell a condo to a man with disabilities and his wife because the couple planned to have their adult disabled daughter live with them. The settlement requires the association to pay a $9,000 civil penalty to the United States, undergo fair housing training, and make changes to the associations’ bylaws as they relate to reasonable accommodations. The wife, now a widow, is pursuing claims against the association in state court. The association denies that it discriminated against the family.

“No family whose members have disabilities should be denied the reasonable accommodations they need to make a home for themselves,” Anna María Farías, HUD’s Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, said in a statement. “Hopefully, today’s ruling will remind homeowner associations of their obligations under the Fair Housing Act and encourage them to follow the law” [Secretary, HUD v. Tamaron Association, December 2018].

Senior communities must be prepared to comply with the full array of disability protections. For example, the FHA requires communities to make reasonable accommodations to rules, policies, practices, or services to enable an individual with a disability to fully enjoy use of the property. The law also requires owners to permit residents with a disability, at their expense, to make reasonable modifications to the housing if necessary to afford them full enjoyment of the premises.

Example: In December 2017, the owner and property manager of a California community agreed to pay $11,000 to resolve a HUD complaint alleging disability discrimination against a resident with a mobility impairment. According to her complaint, the resident requested to have a live-in aide and a key to a locked gate near her unit to make it easier for her to come and go. In both instances, she said that the owner and property manager asked her intrusive questions about her disability, challenged whether she really had a disability, asserted that the development was for individuals who could live independently, and ultimately denied her requests.

“Residents with disabilities have the right to reasonable accommodations that allow them to use and enjoy their home, without unnecessary and invasive questioning,” Anna María Farías, HUD’s Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, said in a statement. “HUD will continue to work with housing providers to ensure they meet their obligation to comply with national fair housing laws.”

Example: In December 2018, the Fair Housing Justice Center (FHJC) announced that a settlement has been reached with the remaining defendants in two federal lawsuits against the operators of dozens of nursing homes and assisted living facilities for allegedly refusing to make American Sign Language (ASL) interpreter services available to deaf and hard-of-hearing residents. Though denying the allegations, the defendants in the latest settlement agreed to pay $245,675 in damages and attorney’s fees to resolve the case.

The FHJC says that the settlements in these cases ensures that deaf and hard-of-hearing people will have access to ASL services and other auxiliary aids and services as a reasonable accommodation in 61 nursing homes and 35 assisted living facilities in the New York City region. The settlement agreements reached with the defendants in these two cases also yielded a total monetary recovery of nearly $1.2 million in damages and attorney’s fees.

Rule #6: Review ‘Independent Living’ Requirements

Depending on the circumstances, you could face a fair housing complaint for imposing independent living requirements on applicants or residents. Courts have found that a policy requiring applicants to demonstrate an ability to live independently violates fair housing laws protecting individuals with disabilities [Cason v. Rochester Housing Authority, August 1990].

Example: In September 2017, the owner and managers of a 41-unit community in California agreed to pay $18,500 to resolve allegations of discrimination against elderly residents with disabilities who relied on support from caregivers. A fair housing organization filed the complaint on behalf of an elderly resident facing eviction after returning from the hospital with support from a part-time caregiver. Allegedly, the owner and property manager said that they didn’t want the “liability” of her remaining in her home, threatened to call the county to have her “removed,” ordered her to move out, and asked invasive questions about the extent of her disabilities. According to the organization’s complaint, its investigation corroborated the resident’s allegations and revealed that testers calling for disabled relatives were told that the complex was for “independent living” and people who “can take care of themselves.”

Example: In Michigan, fair housing advocates recently sued an affordable senior housing apartment complex, alleging that the community applies “independent living” requirements to force residents with disabilities to move, even if those residents are meeting all the requirements of the lease. The complaint asks the court to recognize the community’s practices as discriminatory and prevent the complex from forcing tenants with disabilities to leave their homes when they remain capable of meeting all of their lease obligations.

“Civil rights laws ensure that people with disabilities can decide for themselves where and how to live in the community of their choosing,” says Susan Silverstein, Senior Attorney at AARP Foundation. “The law doesn’t allow landlords to refuse to accommodate tenants with disabilities,” adds a lawyer for the Michigan Clinical Law Program, “and it certainly doesn’t allow landlords to refuse to let tenants age in place just because they might need some outside help.”

Example: And in New York, fair housing advocates and two individuals sued the state and four adult care facilities, alleging that they maintained and enforced blanket policies barring wheelchair users, regardless of their individual needs or abilities, and steered applicants who use wheelchairs to nursing homes.

One of the individual plaintiffs, an elderly woman with disabilities, alleged that she was barred from returning to one of the communities once she began using a wheelchair. According to the woman, the community tried to evict her because of an internal policy barring admission of people who use wheelchairs and state health department regulations that supported such policies at these and other facilities.

The lawsuit also alleges that New York State promotes disability discrimination through its regulations and policies, including its policy permitting adult homes to ban wheelchair users from admission. Until recently, state health department regulations stated that adult homes and assisted living programs should not admit or retain people who are “chronically chairfast.”

The state has since amended the regulations to eliminate the phrase “chronically chairfast” and to add language that operators may not exclude individuals solely because they primarily use a wheelchair for mobility and must make reasonable accommodations as necessary to comply with the law. Last fall, the court issued an order directing the community to allow the elderly woman to return to her home. The case is still pending in federal court.

Rule #7: Comply with Applicable State and Local Laws

It’s critical to review applicable state and local fair housing laws because the laws affecting senior housing may vary substantially, depending on your location. For example, HUD points out that federal fair housing law doesn’t cover age discrimination, which is a protected characteristic under some state and local fair housing laws.

Moreover, HUD notes that some state and local governments with fair housing laws that have been determined to be substantially similar to the federal law may not include an exemption from the familial status discrimination for housing for older persons.

Alternatively, some state or local laws impose different standards for the senior housing exemption. In California, for example, the legislature adopted more stringent requirements on senior housing than is required under the FHA “in recognition of the acute shortage of housing for families with children” in that state. The law imposes specific requirements related to accessibility, common areas, and refuse collection.

Still other state and local laws apply an older version of the federal exemption. Under the original 1988 legislation, 55-and-older communities had to have “significant facilities and services specifically designed to meet the physical or social needs of older persons” to qualify for the exemption.

Though Congress eliminated the “significant services and facilities” requirement from federal fair housing law, some states didn’t follow suit. In Georgia, for example, communities are still required to furnish “significant facilities and services specifically designed to meet the physical or social needs of older persons” to qualify for the senior housing exemption.

Tip: HUD urges communities to check all relevant state, local, and federal laws, as well as any requirements imposed as a term of governmental financial assistance before implementing policies and procedures that limit residents’ eligibility. Because of the complexity of the issues involved, you should get legal advice from an attorney well versed in the legal requirements for senior housing issues in your jurisdiction. 

 

 

 

 

 

By Kriston Capps

July 16, 2024 at 2:00 AM PDT

Bloomberg Online

 

President Joe Biden is calling on Congress to pass a form of national rent control for some 20 million apartment units nationwide, a dramatic federal intervention in the housing market on behalf of current tenants.

The proposal would give large landlords a choice: Either they agree to cap rent hikes at no more than 5% per year, or they forfeit federal tax breaks coveted by rental property owners.

The plan is an effort to respond to Americans' frustrations about high housing costs, which have hurt Biden's standing among voters. Yet the proposal faces steep odds in Congress, where legislation would have to pass the GOP-controlled House and win a supermajority of votes in a closely divided Senate — at a time when lawmakers are squarely focused on the November election.

 

Biden’s new rent-control proposal, which was first reported by the Washington Post, drew an immediate response from industry organizations that represent builders, owners and lenders. Sharon Wilson Géno, president of the National Multifamily Housing Council, said in an interview that the Biden administration was casting for votes with rent control, describing the proposal as a “farce.”

“This whole idea that they’re going to cap rents for two years, just for existing property, but it’s not going to apply to any future property because somehow they don’t want to impede future development is nonsensical,” Géno said. “It’s absolutely going to impede future development because they’re seeing what’s happening to existing property.”

 

 

 

 

Answer: This was covered in a December 2016 MHCO Article. The major change in the law since then was due to the elimination of 72-hour notices of nonpayment of rent. Now a 10-day notice must be issued. (MHCO does not have a form for 144-hour notices, but it too has been eliminated. It has been replaced by a 13-day notice.)  For partial payments, MHCO members do have access to "MHCO Form 12: Receipt and Agreement for Partial Payment of Rent" available on-line at MHCO.ORG.

 

Withour a legal agreement to make specific and timely installment payments, tenants are required to tender to the landlord the full amount of rent owed under the rental or lease agreement no later than the date provided. Without a proper written agreement, the landlord may refuse to accept the tenant’s tender of rent that is for less than the full amount of rent due.[1]

 

If landlord is willing to accept partial payments, doing so must strictly follow ORS 90.417. If so, the acceptance of a partial payment will not constitute a waiver under ORS 90.412 (Waiver of termination of tenancy) or the landlord’s right to terminate the tenancy for nonpayment of the balance of the rent owed. Notwithstanding any acceptance of a partial payment of rent, the tenant continues to owe the landlord the unpaid balance of the rent.

 

However, the agreement must be in writing. It must specify the amount and date of the required payments. If the tenant fails to pay the balance due as agreed, landlord may issue a 10-day notice of termination under ORS 90.394 (Termination of tenancy for failure to pay rent). The written agreement should provide that the landlord may terminate the rental agreement and take possession under the eviction statutes (ORS 105.105  to 105.168) without serving a new 10-day notice under ORS 90.394 if the tenant fails to pay the balance of the rent by the agreed-upon time.

 

However, there are two important rules against giving the landlord rights under the written agreement that are more favorable than already permitted under the law. Specifically:

• It cannot permit the landlord to issue a termination under ORS 90.394 any sooner than would have been permitted had no rent been accepted; and
• The notice of termination must permit the tenant to cure it by paying the balance within the time period already allowed under ORS 90.394  (or by any date to which the parties agree, whichever is later.

 

Note that if the landlord already accepted a partial payment of rent after giving a nonpayment of rent termination notice under ORS 90.394, and then entered into a written agreement for installment payments, doing so will not constitute a waiver.

 

As always, before entering into a written agreement, landlords should consult with their legal counsel should they have any ques

 

[1]  Similarly, the landlord is not legally required to accept the tender of a late payment even if it is for the correct amount. However, if the rules or rental agreement provide for a late payment fee, I do not believe the landlord should refuse a late payment tender within the late-fee period. Can the landlord insist on payment of the fee with the tender of the late payment? My concern about doing so is the argument that the “fee” is not “rent.” I would not recommend refusing to accept any late payment unless there was a collateral issue involved, such as waiver – in which legal counsel should be consulted. If rent is tendered after issuance of the 10-day notice but before an eviction is filed, I would still advise my client to accept it. My belief is that once the court learns that rent has been tendered, albeit late, the judge would not likely grant an eviction. My belief is that the “3-strikes” rule under ORS 90.630(10) should suffice for habitual late payers. In all other case, granting some latitude (with collection of a late fee under the rental agreement of rules) should suffice in most cases. Some attorneys may disagree. Legal counsel should always be consulted if there are any questions.

 

In addition to the plan you are developing for your manufactured home community, you should encourage each resident family to have its own disaster plan in place.  Residents should know what types of disaster could occur, and what they can do about each one.  A community newsletter is a good way to educate residents, and so are community meetings.

 

Residents should also know how they will be notified of a potential disaster.  Does the community have a warning system, such as a siren, and what does each signal mean?  If someone in the family is responsible for helping to notify others in the community, phone numbers or addresses should be posted near the phone or in a place that can be easily reached.

 

It’s a good idea for all members of a family to discuss and develop these plans together.  The plans should include:

 

• Escape routes in the home, if doors are blocked
• Where to go in case of an immediate emergency, such as a community shelter
• Where to go in case of an evacuation
• A map of the evacuation route
• A list of phone numbers that would be needed in a disaster.  This would include doctors, relatives and insurance agents.
• A contact person outside of the area for all family members to call to report on their safety and whereabouts
• A place to meet if the family is separated

 

In addition, each member of the family should be assigned a job to do to get ready for an emergency.  For example,

 

• Set up, maintain and move emergency supplies
• Stow breakable items
• Secure outside items, such as awnings, grills or patio furniture
• Turn off utilities (electricity, water, natural or LP gas)
• Collect pets
• Collect valuable items, if time allows (credit cards, insurance papers, drivers licenses, photos)

 

Note: Different steps should be taken to secure the home, depending on what type of disaster is being planned for.  See more about how to secure your home in the section on each type of potential disaster.

 

Every member of the family should be familiar with the plan, and should participate in planned community practices or drills.  Children should know where to go and what to do in case of an emergency, and should practice with their parents several times each year.  They should also memorize contact names and phone numbers in case separated from their parents.

 

In a community disaster, families may need to be able to survive on their own for several days.  This means each household should have its own water, food, clothing, a first aid kit and other emergency supplies ready to go at all times.  Here’s a list of the basics each family should have, adapted from a list developed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

 

Family Emergency Supplies List

 

FEMA recommends that families use backpacks or duffel bags to store their emergency supplies and to move them, if necessary.  They should contain items from the list on the following page.

 

Families should keep their emergency supplies in a cool, dry place.  Boxed foods should be stored in closed containers.  The food and medical supplies should be dated and replaced with new supplies as needed.  If you are storing water over a long period of time, treat each container with a water purification element before storing it.  Keep water in a cool, dark place in tightly closed, unbreakable containers.

 

If someone in your family has a disability or specific medical problem that creates special needs, be sure that the necessary items are included in the emergency supplies.  If someone in the family is dependent on electric powered respirators or other medical equipment, find out what kinds of special assistance are available in the community.  If a family has no one who is capable of driving in an evacuation, make sure that a neighbor or someone else nearby will provide transportation.

 

Family Emergency Supplies List

 

Water, Food and Utensils

 

• Water (1 gallon per person per day) in non-breakable containers
• Ice and cooler chest
• Water purification materials – tablets, tincture of iodine or household bleach, with instructions on how they are used
• Food: high-nutrition and ready to eat items like canned tuna, peanut butter, granola bars
• Non-electric can opener
• Special foods, such as baby food, if needed
• Pet food, if needed
• Plastic utensils and cups

 

Communications, Lighting and Safety

 

• Battery-powered radio and extra batteries
• Cellular phone or citizens band radio
• NOAA weather-alert radio
• Fire extinguisher
• Flashlights and extra batteries
• Work gloves
• Propane gas stove

 

Clothing and Bedding

 

• One complete change of clothing for each person, appropriate for weather conditions
• Sturdy shoes
• Outer-wear appropriate for weather conditions
• Extra underwear and socks
• Sleeping bag or two blankets for each person
• Pillows

 

Personal Items

 

• Contact lens solution
• Dentures
• Deodorant
• Family Medications
• Insect repellent
• Sanitary napkins or tampons
• Sewing kit
• Shampoo, comb, hair brush
• Shaving kit
• Soap, toothbrushes, and toothpaste
• Special children’s needs, such as toys, blanket, pacifier, diapers
• Washcloth and towel

 

First Aid Kit

 

• Adhesive tape and bandages
• Antibiotic and anti-itch ointments
• Antiseptic solution
• Aspirin or substitute
• Diarrhea medication
• Fist aid handbook
• Petroleum jelly
• Prescription and non-prescription medications used by family
• Scissors and tweezers
• Sterile bandages

 

Papers and Valuables

(if not kept in a safety deposit box)

 

• Birth certificates
• Credit cards and cash
• Deeds and mortgages
• Drivers licenses
• Insurance policies
• Inventory of household goods (photos preferred)
• List of emergency phone numbers
• Photos that can’t be replaced
• Savings and checking account records
• Small valuables (watches, jewelry, cameras, electronics)
• Stocks and bonds
• Wills

 

 

Answer:   This is a good question, and all too frequently ignored by owners and managers. The first question is whether the issue is addressed anywhere in the community documents, i.e. the statement of policy, rules, or rental agreement. Likely not. It really isn’t addressed in the Oregon Residential Landlord-Tenant Act, with the exception of ORS 90.222, which covers renter’s liability insurance, and is excluded from the manufactured housing section of the law. 

Strictly speaking, the fact that the home was destroyed and is likely uninhabitable does not make it any less of a resident responsibility than before the fire. In other words, it is the resident’s primary responsibility to either promptly repair, replace, or remove the home.  The space is still under lease or rental to the resident, so all of the same rules apply, i.e. to keep it in good condition and safe. If the home is nothing more than a shell, the resident should likely remove it as soon as possible.

If the resident does not have fire insurance to repair or replace the home, I suspect he or she will abandon it, thus making it your problem - or the problem of the lienholder if there is one.  Incidentally, if there is a lienholder, the loan documents likely require fire insurance, and that it be a named insured on the policy.  If that is the case, then hopefully, between the resident and their insurance company, there may be available proceeds to repair or replace.[1]

If the resident abandons the home, you should immediately send out a 45-day abandonment letter, thus triggering your right (and duty) to take control of the personal property.  It is likely an attractive nuisance for children, which could result in injury to them, and liability to you.  In such case, you should consider having it either cordoned off with “No Trespassing” signs, or removed.  Make sure that you independently confirm that it is a total loss, and with no salvage value.  If there is salvage value, it belongs to the resident.

following my article titled “Home Fire in the Community” I received an email from John Van Landingham with a ‘gentle reminder’ that “…you might want to add that, if a governmental agency posts the burned-out home as constituting a health hazard, the abandoned property timelines can be shortened. ORS 90.675 (21).” John was – as usual – absolutely correct.  Below is an amplification of my earlier post.

ORS 90.675 is the abandonment law that applies generally to homes located in manufactured housing communities. Today it contains 23 separate subsections, a behemoth in size compared to most statutes.  Buried 21 sections down in the subterranean recesses of the statute is that portion of the law dealing with health, safety and welfare issues, in which 45 day letters and 30 response periods could not possibly work. In such situations, time is of the essence.  Accordingly, subsection 21 sets forth a fast-track protocol for declaring the abandonment of a home that poses certain risks to others (such as the abandoned shell of a home destroyed by fire). Below is a summary of what this subsection says:

If a governmental agency determines that the condition of the abandoned  home constitutes an extreme health or safety hazard under state or local law and the agency determines that the hazard endangers others in the facility and requires quick removal of the property, the landlord may sell or dispose of it by taking the following steps[2]:

 

• The date by which a tenant, lienholder, personal representative or designated person must contact a landlord to arrange for the disposition of the property shall not be less than 15 days after personal delivery or mailing of the abandonment letter required by ORS 90.675(3);
• The date by which a tenant, lienholder, personal representative or designated person must remove the property must be not less than seven (7) days after the date the tenant, lienholder, personal representative or designated person issues the abandonment letter;
• The contents of the abandonment letter must be in accordance with ORS 90.675(5), except that:
  • The dates and deadlines in the notice must be consistent with the fast-track protocol above;
  • The abandonment letter must state that a governmental agency has determined that the property constitutes an extreme health or safety hazard and must be removed quickly; and
  • The landlord must attach a copy of the agency’s determination to the abandonment letter.

 

 

[1] Note that the MHCO Rental and Lease Agreements do have a provision for the resident to maintain fire insurance, but it is optional, and applies only if the box is checked.  This situation should be a cautionary tale for owners and managers requiring such insurance, with proof that it is being maintained.

[2] Note: the following steps are exceptions to the rest of ORS 90.675.  This means that if there is no exception in this list, the rest of the statute will apply.

1. Form 21 Pet Agreement. The form now includes a “Notice of Rights Under ORS 90.530” which summarizes management’s rights and restrictions. It is contained at the top of the first page so it can’t be missed. Generally, it informs residents about the landlord’s right to control pet activities, the maximum of $50 on fines, and liability insurance.

 

Several years ago it appears that the fair housing advocates “discouraged” limitations on breeds based upon fair housing issues. I have retained the restriction for obvious reasons[1] but limited it to the following which I believe will provided a good level of protection: If (a) your liability insurance carrier will not insure the Park against claims arising from injuries based upon a dog’s breed; and (b) you are unable to obtain financially reasonable substitute coverage elsewhere, you should retain the restriction. [2]

 

The Agreement further clarifies that service and assistance animals are not “pets” under the Park rules and regulations. Pets fees are not permitted. This is not to say they may be allowed to run free without safety and sanitation restrictions. Activity restrictions are still appropriate.  

 

The Agreement also addresses the “reasonable accommodation” provisions under the Fair Housing and Americans with Disability laws.[3]

 

2. Form 43 Notice to Vacate for Continuing Violation. The revised form addresses and clarifies that violations under the Pet Agreement may also constitute violations of Oregon’s Landlord-Tenant law.

 

3. Form 43A Notice to Vacate for Distinct Act. The revised form addresses and clarifies that violations under the Pet Agreement may also constitute violations of Oregon’s Landlord-Tenant law.

 

4. Form 48 Pet Violation Notice. The revised form clarifies that violation of the Pet Agreement can only result in a fine, but that Management reserves the right to alternatively issue a notice of termination under Oregon’s Landlord-Tenant law.

 

Members with questions or concerns on the changes should direct them to MHCO.

 

[1] All one needs to do is read the occasional newspaper articles on dog maulings to appreciate the risk. Putting this in perspective, which liability would you sooner face: (a) A multi-million-dollar damage claim after a child has been permanently disfigured from being mauled, or (b) a nasty letter from the Oregon Fair Housing Council?

[2] This is my opinion only. It is not “legal advice.” Landlords should rely upon their own legal counsel’s advice.

[3] See MHCO Q&A article: “Assistance” Animals – When Do They become A Ruse?”

While setting up a disaster plan for manufactured home communities, rv park or floating home community,  be sure to include steps that would reduce the risk of damage or injury.  Here are some actions to consider:

 

• Keep trees healthy and strong.  Remove dead limbs immediately, and cut back branches that overhang buildings or touch power or phone lines.

 

• Make sure all homes in the community are installed properly and comply with all local codes that apply to disasters.

 

• Do visual inspections of the community on a regular basis to look for damage to foundations, roofs, walls, tie-downs, awnings and other structures.  Notify residents of any potential problems observed on their homesite.

 

• Install an audio warning system, such as a siren or horn, and tell residents when and how it will be used.

 

• Have a battery-powered radio that can monitor reports from the National Weather Service, an agency of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).  These are referred to as NOAA Weather Radios.  The National Weather Service broadcasts updated weather warnings and forecasts for most kinds of weather emergencies.  NOAA recommends that you buy a radio that can run on either electricity or batteries, and that has a feature that automatically sends out a warning “beep” when a weather watch or warning is issued.

 

• Inspect fire hydrants regularly and keep them clear of debris, plants and other obstructions.

 

• If floods are a potential problem, consider building earth mounds or other types of flood walls around the community.

 

Also educate residents about steps they can take to reduce risk.  Here are some actions they should consider:

 

• Anchor major appliances to the walls or countertops with heavy brackets.

 

• Put child-safety locks on cupboards, so they won’t fly open.

 

• Use picture hangers instead of nails for wall hangings.

 

• Recoat roof with sealer as needed.

 

• Check awnings, gutters, siding, roof and other parts of the home regularly for structural problems.
• Make sure the water heater and furnace are bolted to the floor or wall.

 

 

• Learn how to turn off the water, electricity, natural gas or propane quickly, and teach everyone in the family how to do it.

 

• Have a professional technician install and maintain a proper set of tie-downs with anchors.

 

• Use additional tie-downs for decks, sheds, car ports or other additions.

 

• Make sure the tie-downs and anchors used are the right kind for the soil under the home.

 

• Inspect tie-downs regularly to ensure straps and connectors are not damaged.  If tie-downs are loosened in the fall to damage from frost-heave, be sure to tighten them again in the spring.

 

 

General Home Safety

 

In addition to helping residents get ready for a disaster, help them learn about general home safety.  If they make their homes safer for day-to-day living, they will also reduce problems during a disaster.

 

Fire is the most serious hazard.  Here are some general guidelines that will reduce the risk of fire and other accidents:

 

Install smoke detectors.  If they run on batteries, change them once a year.  Clean the detectors monthly and test them regularly.  (Some local fire departments give away smoke detectors or make them available to the community for very low prices.  Community owners and operators might want to consider a similar program if one is not offered by the local fire department.)

 

Have appliances and heating and cooling equipment checked each year by a qualified technician.

 

Don’t store combustible or flammable materials like paint thinner, gasoline, turpentine or kerosene, anywhere near water heaters, furnaces, stoves or other possible sources of heat that could ignite them.

 

Inspect electrical cords for fraying or other damage, and replace as needed.

 

Keep and “A-B-C” – type fire extinguisher handy and teach all family members how to use it. (Fire extinguishers are labeled for the types of fires they can be used on.  An ‘A’ rated unit is good for wood, paper, trash, and plastic fires.  ‘B’ rated is good for gasoline, oil and grease fires.  ‘C’ rated is used for electrical fires.  An “A-B-C” fire extinguisher can be used for all three types of fires, so it is the best choice for homes.)

 

Keep curtains, clothing and other materials away from space or wall heaters.

 

Install vinyl or metal skirting material around the home to keep out leaves, debris or other material that could catch fire.

 

Don’t store anything flammable under the home.

 

Trim back trees that overhang the home or interfere with incoming services, such as electric and phone lines.

 

Take steps to prevent falls: Add lighting to areas indoors and outdoors that are dark or shadowed.  Mark steps with reflective tape, if appropriate.  Keep a flashlight in each bedroom, and tuck away extension cords and other tripping hazards.

Answer:  In a word – No.  Or, to be more precise, as discussed below, if you do not renew the lease, it will automatically become a month-to-month tenancy on the same terms as the lease.  In other words, your non-renewal will not result in forcing the tenant to vacate the space.

 

When this law was first being discussed, this issue was addressed.  Prior to enactment, there was an open question whether fixed term tenancies [i.e. leases - those with definite start and ending dates] were even legal.  From the tenants’ perspective, under the manufactured housing landlord-tenant laws, since a landlord cannot terminate a tenancy “without cause,” a lease that expires without renewal is the same thing i.e. termination without cause.  Accordingly, ORS 90.545was enacted, which provided protections to tenants against the possibility of unilateral nonrenewal.

 

Is this unfair to a landlord, such as yourself, when an applicant is approved, ostensibly based upon a satisfactory application, who then becomes the “Tenant From Hell?”  Some would say that the landlord’s best protection is at the front end of the business relationship, since he/she is given a full and complete opportunity to set out all screening criteria and performing a thorough vetting of the applicant’s financial, rental, and criminal background. But once the landlord approves the applicant – presumably because he/she passed the vetting process - they have the right to remain at the space, so long as they don’t commit certain material violations, such as nonpayment of rent, breach the rules, rental agreement, state law, or commit certain actions outrageous in the extreme.   

 

Here is how the fixed term tenancy law, found at ORS 90.545 and 90.550, works:

 

• At least 60 days prior to the ending date of the lease term the landlord must provide to the tenant a proposed new lease, together with a written statement that summarizes any new or revised terms, conditions, rules or regulations.
  •  The new rental agreement may include new or revised terms, conditions, rules or regulations, if:
    • They fairly implement a statute or ordinance adopted after the creation of the pre-existing lease; or
    • They are the same as those offered to new or prospective tenants at the time the new proposed lease is submitted to the tenant and for the preceding six-months prior to submission period;
    • If there have been no new or prospective tenants during the six-month period, the new lease terms must be same as are customary for the rental market; and
    • They are consistent with the rights and remedies provided to tenants under ORS Chapter 90; and
    • Do not relate to the age, size, style, construction material or year of construction of the manufactured dwelling [or floating home] contrary to ORS 90.632 (2);[1] and
    • Do not require an alteration of the manufactured dwelling [or floating home] or alteration or new construction of an accessory building or structure.
• The tenant may accept or reject a landlord’s proposed new rental agreement at least 30 days prior to the ending of the term by giving written notice to the landlord.
• Note that if a landlord fails to submit a proposed new rental agreement as allowed, the tenancy renews as a month-to-month tenancy under the same terms as the prior lease, except that the landlord has the right to increase the rent unilaterally, pursuant to ORS 90.600.
• If the tenant fails to accept or unreasonably rejects a landlord’s proposed new rental agreement, the fixed term tenancy terminates on the ending date without further notice and the landlord may take possession through the eviction process, assuming the tenant does not vacate the space and remove the home.
  • However, if the tenant surrenders possession of the space prior to the filing an eviction, he/she has the right to enter into a written storage agreement with the landlord, and then has the same rights and responsibilities of a lienholder during an abandonment, i.e. pay storage fees, maintain the space, and sell the home within six months [rather than 12 for lienholders].  See, ORS 90.675 (19).

 

Conclusion.  My suggestion is that if your tenant is continually causing problems, paper your file thoroughly, showing the efforts you’ve made to work with that person. If there are complaints from other residents, document them. Eventually, the tenant will slip up – doing something that gives you the basis for an eviction.  If he is a chronic late payer, consider using the three strikes law, found in ORS 90.630(8). Then find a good landlord attorney and discuss the best method to evict the tenant.  You will then be armed with good evidence for the judge or jury to show that you walked the extra mile with this person, but they simply refused to cooperate.  And remember that although there are restrictions on the contents of the new lease you offer, it may contain provisions that will give you a better foundation for the eviction.  Good luck!

 

[1] This specific protection was important to the tenant lobby, since until it was enacted, there was an open question as to whether landlords could impose as a condition upon accepting an applicant who was purchasing an older home, that it must be removed upon subsequent resale. In addition, ORS 90.632 was enacted which permits landlords to expressly require that homes be repaired due to damage or deterioration.

The person is first and foremost a trespasser.  As such, you should first try contacting the police or sheriff, explain the situation to them, and ask them to remove this person from the park.  You should also ask them to issue a no trespass order so that if the person returns, they can be arrested for trespassing.

 

However, sometimes law enforcement officers are reluctant to remove squatters even when they have the lawful authority to do so.  In that case, you may need to resort to court action.

 

There is a “midnight move-in” statute (ORS 105.115 (1)(c)) that allows RV parks to immediately file an eviction case in court without notice if the owner or possessor of an RV places it on park property without the park’s prior consent.  If you are forced to go to court, you would cite this statute on the eviction complaint when you file it with the court.  At trial, you would present your case with testimony and perhaps a few photos to explain to the judge that the person is a squatter who should be immediately evicted.

 

There is another statute (ORS 105.115 (1)(b)) that also allows a landowner to file an immediate eviction case when a “person in possession . . . is holding possession without any written lease or agreement.”  This would apply if someone doesn’t have an RV, but perhaps only a regular passenger vehicle and/or a tent.  When you file the eviction case at your county courthouse, ask for and fill out the eviction complaint form for a tenancy not covered by ORS Chapter 90. In the section where you must indicate why the park is entitled to possession of the premises, check the “No Notice” box and write: “ORS 105.115 (1)(b) – Trespasser in possession.” The filing fee for this kind of case is more than a regular residential eviction case, but after filing the case will proceed like any other eviction case.