As many of you are aware, the Department of Housing issued new guidance on April 4, 2016 that requires anyone offering residential rentals to revisit their rental criteria. This article discusses how The Fair Housing Act applies to the use of criminal history by landlords.  

The Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009 was set to expire on December 31, 2014, if it was not extended through further legislation.  According to information received from the office of Arizona Congressman David Schweikert (R-6th Dist), and confirmed by the office of Arizona Congressman Trent Franks (R-8th Dist), the PTFA extension was not included in any end of year legislation, and has therefore expired.

Synopsis of A.R.S. § 33-1260.01 & A.R.S. § 33-1806.01, which are the 2 statutes amended and changed with the law, effective as of Thursday, 7/24/14, as presented by Attorney Denise Holliday with Hull, Holliday & Holliday, at the 7/22/14 West-side NARPM meeting at WeMAR.

Questions that our clients have posed for us and our answers.

The Arizona Legislature was very active this session.  They posted 1158 bills and passed 282 of them.  The Governor vetoed 24 and has signed 2454 into law or allowed them to become effective by not vetoing them within a timely window.  Most of these laws will go into effect September 13, 2013.  So which of these new bills are relevant to landlords?

1. Name of all occupants in that specific unit.
2. Information on any activity you, staff or residents perceive that involves anyone in or around that unit (ie: see, smell, hear).

The AMA member attorneys have met to discuss what to teach at Five Star Classes, as well as what advice to give to clients who face these issues, regarding what to say and/or give to officers that come to rental properties requesting to either gain access to a Resident’s unit or access either the file or information in a Resident’s file.

The following are questions that we have received concerning landlord-tenant issues:

The first question was: A section 8 tenant was not paying their portion of the rent but section 8 was, is this considered a partial payment preventing an eviction? The answer is no. The tenant’s portion and the section 8 portion are considered separate leases, so that you can take the money from section 8 and still proceed with your eviction on the tenant who has not paid their portion. 

When the AAR created the new Residential Lease Owner’s Property Disclosure Statement, many property managers raised concerns about how their owner clients would respond to any requirement to fill out this document.  There is a fear that listing every single issue the owner knows has ever been a problem on the property may cause a potential renter to be wary of renting the home or that failing to list an issue because of forgetfulness may create automatic liability.  Each broker needs to consider the pros and cons of using the new form and institute a consistent policy in their office to avoid fair housing concerns.  A brief analysis of some of the current concerns of using the form may help guide brokers through this discussion.

Recent events have renewed cries for stricter gun control.  The question that has risen is “How far can the Government go in restricting and individual’s right to keep and bear arms?”  In the Landlord/Tenant arena, the question becomes, “Can a Landlord prohibit Tenants from owning or possessing firearms on the property?”

Happy New Year!  I hope everyone had a wonderful holiday.  The following are questions that our client’s have asked and we hope the information provided can help you, should these issues come up.

The first question we had was concerning recording conversations with an employee or a resident at the apartment community.  In Arizona, you can tape record a conversation as long as one party to the conversation consents to it.  That of course, is obviously the person doing the recording.

Can you believe it’s Christmas time again? At the law offices of Hull, Holliday & Holliday, you can just feel the excitement! All the toy soldiers are lined up in their best Christmas fashion, the garland and tinsel sparkle with Holiday Greetings, and the “Major Award” from the movie “A Christmas Story” shines its gaudy brightness for all to see. The staff and attorneys merrily sing their favorite Christmas Carols as they work like Santa’s Elves preparing your evictions so you can kick as many tenants to the curb as possible before Christmas Eve. Someone’s going to be on the naughty list!

The following questions came into our office and these were the answers that were provided.

The question was asked if we could, as a landlord, give a co-signer all of the information in the lease agreement and the application.  The answer is no, the co-signer is simply guarantying payment, they are not considered a lease holder.

The following are a few questions and answers we have received over the last month or so.

The landlord wanted to know if a tenant could have more than one service animal.  Generally speaking, two documented service animals would be considered reasonable.  Any request beyond that would need to be looked at and determined if it is a necessity or not.

The following questions have come in regarding day to day landlord and tenant issues.  

The first question was from an apartment manager whose tenant was evicted and prior to the constable being ordered to come out and do the lockout, had come into the office and surrendered all of their keys.  When the manager went to the apartment to inspect it, they found that the resident had left some of his personal property behind.  The question was whether the manager had to hold the property for twenty one (21) days.  The answer is no.  Once the keys have been returned, the tenant is returning possession and everything in the apartment.  I would still photograph what is left behind and if there is anything of value, try to get a hold of the tenant to see if they wanted to pick it up within a short time such as 24-48 hours.

The first question we received was from a client who executed a lease agreement with an error in the monthly rental amount.  The person that prepared the lease typed in $7.00 per month as the lease amount, rather than $700.00.  The client was concerned that they might be held to that.  Generally in Arizona if there is a mistake, or the lease is ambiguous, it gets resolved in favor of the tenant and against the landlord, since the landlord wrote the lease.  In this particular situation, because the amount is obviously wrong and you can show that other units rent for the same amount, the landlord should be able to enforce the $700.00 amount on their tenant.