Question for landlords/people who know about such things

[Derek Sutton]

move their stuff out and change the locks, make them jump through the hoops of the legal system (sheriff, affidavit, and like terms). We've learned this the hard way, to legally evict someone, it cost us over 2 grand, plus we never got rent for two months. A more experienced landlord then told us "Next time, move their stuff out and change the locks. IF they take you to court, it may cost you about 2 grand." She then said she's done it twice and hasn't gone to court, it's cost her nothing.

[photon]

The fine could be up to $5,000 if I recall, not including legal fees and what would have to be paid to the tenant (if anything).

[ken0042]

What if the OP just paid the landlord today? Couldn't he just argue that his friends were just staying with him for a few months? Especially if he gets the entire June rent paid on the 1st.

Perhaps a little underhanded; but so is not paying rent and utilities on time.

[Rutuu]

I'm sure you've considered transfering the lease to these two and moving somewhere else with your good roommate?

...and just because I've read a million threads where I see photon as a dirty landlord I wanted to point out that there is a board in Brisbane that holds the security deposit in trust so landlords just can't keep it. LOVE that rule and wish Alberta had it.

[photon]

Security deposits are my only profit!

I'd like to see something in place that makes it easier to go after tenants when they do more damage (or steal your fridge) than the security deposit covers.

[Boblobla]

Originally Posted by photon

Yeah, the landlord would have to be involved, and as you say if they pay then they can stay. Getting rid of tenants can actually be quite difficult.

Understatement of the year, more like ####ing impossible.

[troutman]

You could probably smoke them out by playing ABBA 24/7, and walking around nude.

[Crazy Bacon Legs]

You should have had these guys paying the rent directly to you. If you're renting a room out and live in the same dwelling, a tenancy does not exist. So if they were paying you and only you (the guy on the lease) were paying the landlord, then no tenancy exists between your roommates and the landlord.

If they are paying the landlord directly, then a tenancy exists between them and the landlord, regardless of whether a written lease exists between them or not. How are they making payments? Cash? Check? (And I know, the problem is they haven't been making their payments). Who do they typically pay? Who showed them the place, moved them in, etc.? Service Alberta will look at facts like these to determine whether a tenancy exists or not.

In future, if you're going to sublet to someone else in the house, make sure everything goes through you (and you have to get written permission from the landlord!). Then it really is as simple as telling them to get lost, as they legally are not tenants.

From the Residential Tenancies Act:

(2) This Act does not apply to

(c) rooms in the living quarters of the landlord, if the landlord actually resides in those quarters,

[Save Us Sutter]

They have been paying the landlord directly through email transfers, so there's a paper trail.

I showed them the place, and I moved them in (literally, with my truck).

I've certainly learned a few lessons in this thread. Going to be talking to my landlord today to see if I can avoid throwing there stuff out on the lawn!

Thanks again everyone.

[Mazrim]

When I lived with a roommate who wouldn't/couldn't pay the bills, I used his facebook page to find out who his parents were and contacted them and asked them to basically take him away and pay me back, and it worked. They were so embarassed by the situation that they paid the next two months after he was gone as well to cover any losses I would suffer from having one less roommate too. Pretty happy ending for me considering the guy was living on the street to avoid me near the end.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Crazy Bacon Legs

You should have had these guys paying the rent directly to you. If you're renting a room out and live in the same dwelling, a tenancy does not exist. So if they were paying you and only you (the guy on the lease) were paying the landlord, then no tenancy exists between your roommates and the landlord.

Assuming that's allowed by his agreement, my agreements specifically do not allow this, I do not want roommates living there without me first vetting them and without them being 100% responsible.

Otherwise good points, I've never had a tenant with this kind of situation, but if I do I could have an amendment that allowed this in the way you say, though as the landlord I'd still want a rental application from the potential roommate so I can meet them and do the same checks I do with any tenant.

[yads]

So obvious question, are you sure these guys aren't freemen on the land? Cause if so they probably have a legal right to leech off of you.

[comrade]

Originally Posted by yads

So obvious question, are you sure these guys aren't freemen on the land? Cause if so they probably have a legal right to leech off of you.

It's not leeching. It's an IOU until their 8 million dollar world bank payday.

[Regular_John]

Gonna bump this thread rather than start a new one, but I've got a question about a landlord ending tenancy because he indents to sell.

Our landlord has given us 3 months notice (we're a month to month lease) that he indents to list the property for sale(it's a bungalow with the main floor & basement suite as separate rentals).

From what I'm reading it sounds like he can't actually end the tenancy unless the buyer is moving themselves or a relative in, where as it seems like he just wants the place empty so he can sell it without the tenants there.
http://tenant.landlordandtenant.org/...ds.aspx?id=464

the landlord has agreed to sell the rented premises, the buyer or buyer's relative wants to move in, and the buyer has made a written request that the landlord terminate the tenancy;

the landlord has agreed to sell a detached or semi-detached unit or a condominium unit, and the buyer has made a written request that the landlord terminate the tenancy;

As always there's two sides to the story, there has been headaches/issues for him, but nothing that would be a substantial breach (rent is always paid, no property damage, no drugs etc). But I think he's just ready to wash his hands of being a land lord and feel this is the best way out for him.

So any experts on this, can he just say "I'm selling" stick it in the market and give us notice? Or is a buyer actually required? From my understanding if a new person was to purchase the home tomorrow with the intent to rent it out they would simply become our new landlords, no need for us to vacate.

[Dan02]

you've got 90 days to find a new place, don't be a dick, it's not like he's trying to boot you out in the middle of the night. Assuming your month to month is on the first he's actually given you over 100 days notice, if you wanted security in the place you live, you should have bought not rented.

As for ending the tenancy to sell, I'm not sure if that specifically is allowed, but he could claim to be planning renos before he sells in which case it's all good. Or with 3 months notice he could jack your rents to say 10,000 per month, in which case you're out of there right?

The dudes trying to do the right thing in giving you more then full notice, time for you to man up and start looking for a new place to live. If you find a better place it's not like you can't leave earlier.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by jaydorn

Our landlord has given us 3 months notice (we're a month to month lease) that he indents to list the property for sale(it's a bungalow with the main floor & basement suite as separate rentals).

From what I'm reading it sounds like he can't actually end the tenancy unless the buyer is moving themselves or a relative in, where as it seems like he just wants the place empty so he can sell it without the tenants there.
http://tenant.landlordandtenant.org/...ds.aspx?id=464

As always there's two sides to the story, there has been headaches/issues for him, but nothing that would be a substantial breach (rent is always paid, no property damage, no drugs etc). But I think he's just ready to wash his hands of being a land lord and feel this is the best way out for him.

So any experts on this, can he just say "I'm selling" stick it in the market and give us notice? Or is a buyer actually required? From my understanding if a new person was to purchase the home tomorrow with the intent to rent it out they would simply become our new landlords, no need for us to vacate.

He could intend to do major renovations beforehand to get more money on the place, which he can not very well do with people living in it, or he wants to turn it over in September and increase the rent on the next tenants.

At least he didn't decide to list it during the winter and expect you to find a new place while it is -40 outside.

There are a few ways to free yourself of tenants though if you're a landlord. We rented out our basement to a psycho lady and her family and it turned out to be the most stressful experiences we ever had. We went a different route and reported ourselves to the city for having an illegal suite just to get them out of our house as fast as we could, and swore off having tenants ever again.

[BlackArcher101]

The intent to list the residence for sale isn't enough to end a periodic tenancy. According to the Residential Tenancies Ministerial Regulation (exerpt below http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/Regs/2004_211.pdf), the sale must be agreed upon and conditions must be met. If the buyer intends on becoming his own landlord and renting it to others, then it's not a valid reason to end tenancy.

(2) For the purposes of section 6(1) of the Act, a landlord may
terminate a periodic tenancy for any of the following prescribed
reasons:

(b) if the landlord has entered into an agreement to sell the
residential premises of the tenant in which all conditions
precedent in the agreement have been satisfied or waived
and
(i) the purchaser or a relative of the purchaser intends to
occupy the premises, or
(ii) the agreement is to sell one detached or
semi-detached dwelling unit or one condominium
unit,
and the purchaser requests in writing that the landlord
give the tenant a notice to terminate the tenancy;

(c) if the landlord intends
(i) to demolish the building in which the residential
premises of the tenant are located, or
(ii) to make major renovations to the residential premises
of the tenant that require the premises to be
unoccupied;

Like mentioned above however, if his intent is to renovate the place before sale, then that is another option he can use. In the written notice from the landlord, he/she MUST state the reason they are terminating. The landlord then must carry through with the plan as described to you (ie renovations) or else there can be penalties given against the landlord or reimbursements. Note that "major renovations" does not include new paint or floor coverings. If he wants to slap a different color on the walls and call it done, then that's not a good reason.

All said and done, it sounds like you'll be out eventually. You can push it back possibly until the house is actually sold, then 3 months from that date, or you can just start looking now. If you wait for the house to sell, you'll be into winter for a move out date most likely.

[LChoy]

Originally Posted by Dan02

you've got 90 days to find a new place, don't be a dick, it's not like he's trying to boot you out in the middle of the night. Assuming your month to month is on the first he's actually given you over 100 days notice, if you wanted security in the place you live, you should have bought not rented.

As for ending the tenancy to sell, I'm not sure if that specifically is allowed, but he could claim to be planning renos before he sells in which case it's all good. Or with 3 months notice he could jack your rents to say 10,000 per month, in which case you're out of there right?

The dudes trying to do the right thing in giving you more then full notice, time for you to man up and start looking for a new place to live. If you find a better place it's not like you can't leave earlier.

That's kind of harsh, the guy was just asking for advice
You had a bad personal experience with ejecting renters?

[Regular_John]

Originally Posted by Dan02

you've got 90 days to find a new place, don't be a dick, it's not like he's trying to boot you out in the middle of the night. Assuming your month to month is on the first he's actually given you over 100 days notice, if you wanted security in the place you live, you should have bought not rented.

Easier said than done, and at this point in the game the difference between moving in 3 months VS 6 months will determine if we rent or buy our next home. We're basically on the threshold of being able to purchase, and being forced to move an extra time, sign a lease ect will simply cost more time/money/stress than we'd like.

Basically we do plan to buy our next home, we just don't want to be rushed into it because of outside factors. I don't think that's being dickish to try and avoid an extra move in a 6-8 month period.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by jaydorn

Easier said than done, and at this point in the game the difference between moving in 3 months VS 6 months will determine if we rent or buy our next home. We're basically on the threshold of being able to purchase, and being forced to move an extra time, sign a lease ect will simply cost more time/money/stress than we'd like.

Basically we do plan to buy our next home, we just don't want to be rushed into it because of outside factors. I don't think that's being dickish to try and avoid an extra move in a 6-8 month period.

Could you/would you be interested in purchasing the place you're in now? Might be a situation where your landlord would be flexible on price/possession. After all, you know he wants to sell, and you could save him the commission. Plus, he wouldn't have to deal with serving you notice/fighting to get showings, etc.

Could be a win/win situation if you like the place.