Tenant's one year lease ends tomorrow, I want them out, how to proceed?

The language in the lease says that at the end of the year the lease converts to a month-to-month only with the approval of the landlord.

I have not provided that approval in writing or verbally.

I am willing to give the tenant reasonable time to move out, I just don't want my giving them time beyond the one year to constitute an extension of the lease or a conversion to mo-to-mo status.

The tenant is a severe alcoholic who after months of sobriety fell off the wagon a few days ago, lost her job, and is probably not even in a state to get out of bed, much less move out.

SUCKISSTAPLES said:   Saying nothing till now was not a good way to make them pack their bags tomorrow , if that's what you were hoping for

I definitely realize that. I was planning to extend lease another year until a few days ago when I found out the tenant fell off the wagon and lost her job.

Springing this on her will not go over well no matter how it's handled. You can be nice and offer her $300 if she leaves this weekend. Sort of a "cash for keys " approach that is better than her trying to stay as long as possible without paying.

What if she lost her job? Why care as long as she pays you when the rent is due??

biomedeng said:   SeattleLandlord said:   SUCKISSTAPLES said:   Saying nothing till now was not a good way to make them pack their bags tomorrow , if that's what you were hoping for

I definitely realize that. I was planning to extend lease another year until a few days ago when I found out the tenant fell off the wagon and lost her job.
Who cares if they lost their job as long as she keeps paying? I believe fair housing laws allow you to screen applicants on whether or not they have sufficient income to pay rent, but I am not so sure you can fail to renew the lease just because they are unemployed. Depending on the laws, you might be opening yourself up to legal action by kicking them out and renting the unit to someone else at the same rate. Why not keep taking this persons money and the minute they are late file eviction paperwork?

I'm not a lawyer (or a landlord), so obviously take what I say with a grain of salt.

How is this different from requiring proof of income from a tenant at the beginning of a lease, considering that it is a month-to-month lease now? Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I would think that would give OP the ability to kick her out with sufficient notice (unless prohibited for other reasons...ie discrimination, landlord-tenant law, etc). But if it were halfway through the lease and OP somehow found out that the tenant lost her job, I don't think it would be possible to break the lease solely on that premise as long as she keeps paying. I'm not certain if the source of the income can be considered, but the amount can (around here at least, landlords want your income to be ≥ rent*3).

OP says another reason that (s)he doesn't want her there is because the tenant is supposedly an alcoholic who recently relapsed. Although it probably doesn't apply to the tenant's current situation, alcoholism/substance dependence can be considered a disability under the ADA (see ADA.gov). This doesn't cover people who are currently abusing substances, but it applies to people who are in recovery/treatment, or had previous addictions. (OP might be exempt from "fair housing" laws though, since it sounds like (s)he is just renting out a basement in an owner-occupied house.)

Look at local landlord-tenant laws too, that would probably play a big role. I would think a city like Seattle would have some sort of tenant protections that might restrict how OP can do this.

I am not planning to rent the basement apartment out again after current tenant moves out. The plan is to rent the entire house out as one unit for the next year while my wife and I move to the east coast for a one-year fellowship.

In my research i have not found anything that says I have an obligation to remind the tenant that the lease is ending. She knew the ending date a year ago when she signed the lease.

Just tell your tenant what you told us. Knock on the door and hand her a 30 day notice and as nicely as you can, say "Hi, I wanted to thank you for being my tenant for the past year. My plans for this property have changed and I am no longer interested in renting out the basement. I am not planning to rent the basement apartment out again after current tenant (you) moves out" You don't have to tell her your plan. Tell her "Please have your stuff out and return the keys within 30 days". Also, while you are there, you can ask to inspect the unit. If there is damage or anything document it and tell her it needs to be cleaned and repaired before she leaves. What is so hard about this?

Is it a legal apartment and within Seattle city limit?

wd and redwolfe, Thanks for your responses.

Washington state law, and Seattle City law in particular, very much support the tenant's rights above the landlord's. I am worried that providing a 30 day notice might imply a continuation of the lease, making it a month-to-month lease in the eyes of the law.

My research suggests that if the lease is month-to-month, I must have "just cause" for terminating the lease and even if I can show just cause, I have to provide 20 days notice prior to the end of the current rental month, which means in this case, the tenant would be here until mid-July and may be able to drag it out longer by claiming I don't have "just cause".

ZenNUTS said:   Is it a legal apartment and within Seattle city limit?

It is within Seattle city limits. It is not an official "additional dwelling unit".

When you say It is not an official "additional dwelling unit", are you "illegally" renting this out.

You have probably seen this; #9 seems to be a "good cause" in your situation.
Text

Good causes include:
<snip>
9. The owner wishes to terminate a tenant who lives in
the same housing unit with the owner or the owner's
agent; or the owner desires to stop sharing his or her
house with a tenant living in an approved accessory
dwelling unit (ADU) in an owner-occupied house.

DeGlass said:   SeattleLandlord said:   Any advice or stories about similar experiences would be appreciated.
I played ball back when I was a tenant in Seattle, dealing with a clueless landlord.
Lived rent-free in a SFH for 1 year+. Not a ding on my credit. Even LinkdIn with the guy.

Red on.

My advice would be to follow the letter of the law ... to the letter.
I hope you even have a valid lease.Wow, didn't see that coming from you. I sure hope the person deserved it.

There's no such thing as valid lease in an illegal apartment, unless the lease is for a roommate??

Proceed as WD advised, and talk to her. Perhaps she was planning on moving out anyway, problem solved.

SeattleLandlord said:   wd and redwolfe, Thanks for your responses.

Washington state law, and Seattle City law in particular, very much support the tenant's rights above the landlord's. I am worried that providing a 30 day notice might imply a continuation of the lease, making it a month-to-month lease in the eyes of the law.

My research suggests that if the lease is month-to-month, I must have "just cause" for terminating the lease and even if I can show just cause, I have to provide 20 days notice prior to the end of the current rental month, which means in this case, the tenant would be here until mid-July and may be able to drag it out longer by claiming I don't have "just cause".

 

ZenNUTS said:   Is it a legal apartment and within Seattle city limit?

It is within Seattle city limits. It is not an official "additional dwelling unit".

Is there a rent control statute and does your unit fall under the rent control statute? Usually these sorts of "just cause" rules for month-to-month tenancies stem from rent control. Without rent control, month-to-month means month-to-month as we all know it -- either party can give one month's notice.

Even if your unit is not an official unit, it may still fall under the rent control law or have additional penalties, and the tenant may be able to use this as leverage. In San Francisco, the tenant can potentially get what are essentially penalty payments in some cases because SF landlord-tenant law is so ridiculously skewed towards tenants, and this is especially true if the tenant is old or disabled or meets some other category the City wishes to favor.

SeattleLandlord said:   arktc, the unit is not under rent control. The unit is not legally permitted as an "accessory dwelling unit". It is in the basement of my house with a separate entrance and its own kitchen and bathroom.

If there's no rent control or other overriding statute, generally a lease for a term of years is a lease for a term of years and is self-terminating if there's no language to extend it. That's why I was confused as to why a lot of commenters on this thread, trying to give legal advice, were talking about giving 30 days' notice and were making some strange assumptions. Since your lease said that it requires landlord approval to extend, and there appears to be no overriding landlord-tenant law that would override that provision, you're in the clear.

All of the stuff your attorney said is very standard for this scenario. You don't want to tell the tenant they can stay or take any money, because that could create some sort of additional tenancy. Glad this looks to be working out for you so far.

In New York State, you can sue to evict a tenant in an illegal basement apartment, but you CANNOT sue for back rent. (Cannot collect on an illegal apartment.)

You need to either familiarize yourself with Seattle procedure for giving notice to a tenant or hire a lawyer who is to advise you how to proceed. At this point, the vomit, the falling off the wagon, and the loss of a job will all be irrelevant to a court. You are the one responsible for giving proper notice to vacate and for choosing to rent out an apartment that didn't meet code.

Making some kind of cash-for-keys offer might work if you are on more less good terms with the tenant. If she has a lot of stuff in there you might have to throw in a moving truck and storage for a couple of months, no one is going to want to just abandon their stuff.

Keep in mind that if the tenant complains to the city or you take her to court, you may have a lot more to hassle with various city agencies to deal with regarding bringing your house up to code.

I assume most posts said to give the tenant 30 days notice because most states have that as a law where a lease goes month to month automatically and ending month to month requires a month notice (generally put as 1 month meaning if you give notice January 1st-30th they have until Feb 29 to leave).

Evidently the OP has seen a lawyer and this law does not apply in their state/with their lease conditions so they can force the person out sooner.

LordB said:   I assume most posts said to give the tenant 30 days notice because most states have that as a law where a lease goes month to month automatically and ending month to month requires a month notice (generally put as 1 month meaning if you give notice January 1st-30th they have until Feb 29 to leave).

Evidently the OP has seen a lawyer and this law does not apply in their state/with their lease conditions so they can force the person out sooner.

In many states, there is an automatic provision for how to renew a lease if the lease does not state how to do so. If the lease is clear on what happens after the term, as this one was, most state statutes do not override the lease unless there is a rent control statute that applies. Do you know of any states for which that is not the case? I'm genuinely interested if anyone has experience with this.

hpmax said:   FWIW, I think the OP here is being a bit of a jerk, kicking the person while they are down.

I don't feel good about leading the tenant to believe I was going to extend the lease and then changing my mind when new information about her financial and mental stability came to light, but I am covering my own ass. I've gone way out of my way for this tenant multiple times. I have accepted late rent at least four times (didn't document the lateness properly unfortunately). Yesterday, I got her car keys from her and went and jump started her car which she abandoned at a nearby grocery store parking lot and drove it back to our house so it wouldn't get towed. I've talked with her family member to try to get someone to come help her with her withdrawal and moving out. I've done other things for her in the past as well (changed a tire on her car, gave her a cell phone charger when her's died, helped move furniture), so I feel I'm actually a pretty nice guy.


hpmax said:   
The OP seems to have contradictory stories claiming he wants her out because she's an alcoholic and lost her job, and then also claiming he wants her out because he wants to rent out the entire house as a unit

My plan three weeks ago (before tenant fell off wagon again) was to sign a new 13 month lease with my downstairs tenant and then rent out the upstairs (where I currently live) on a 1 year or 11mo lease, depending on when it is rented, so that when my wife and I get back from her fellowship, both leases are up for renewal at the same time. We could then reoccupy the upstairs and re-lease the downstairs. When the recent events with current downstairs tenant came to light, wife and I decided it would be simpler to try to rent out the house as a whole. That way I only have one tenant, one lease, no concerns about two tenants squabbling with each other about noise, utilities, etc. Less stress, headache, less chance of phone calls from pissed off tenants when I am 2500 miles away.

I agree with hpmax that in a perfect world the best scenario would have been to extend the lease for one additional month (though I know my tenant has no money and can't pay for that month). However, Seattle rental laws are very clear that if a tenant feels that a month-to-month lease is being terminated without "just cause", then they can fight it and I've read a lot of horror stories about tenants dragging this process out for 3 months or more. In fact, at least one poster on this very thread bragged about how they were able to stay rent free for a year because of a botched attempt by a landlord to get them out. The fact is, with a defined term lease ending, the legal landscape is much clearer for me. The year lease has ended, we didn't extend it, she has to leave. I don't care about collecting an additional month's rent, I just want her out ASAP so I can fix up that unit and get the whole house ready for advertising/showing/renting.

I don't plan to kick her out on the street tomorrow, or even within the next two weeks, but I am going to start eviction proceedings soon because my understanding is it takes a while to happen and I need to get the ball rolling to save time and show that I am serious about the lease being over.

Having talked to her and her family member, I think she will move out without a fuss within a week or two without a fuss.

Again, thanks for all your responses.