Question 1
We have a corporate rental where the leaseholder is a corporation, and we recently discovered that one of the occupants residing in the unit is a registered sexual offender. The problem is that the corporation filled out the application, not the actual occupants. We want to terminate this tenancy immediately and remove this person from our property, but we're not sure if we have legal grounds to do so. What are our options?
Answer
The only way you are going to be able to legally remove this sexual offender from your property and terminate the tenancy is if the leaseholder, the corporation, misrepresented information on the rental application. The problem is that most likely, the question regarding criminal background was not even filled out on the application, and you did not run a criminal background check on the occupants.
This is a massive mistake that is all too often made with corporate rentals. With a typical individual rental, you go to great lengths to screen your applicants. You usually conduct a full criminal background check which ALWAYS includes a sexual offender and predator search. For some reason, many apartment communities completely let their guard down with corporate rentals, somehow forgetting that human beings, not corporations, will be residing in the rental unit.
Just because it is a corporate rental does not mean the people living in the unit would otherwise qualify under your guidelines or have no criminal record. Corporate rentals create many complex issues and should not be entered into without proper knowledge and training.
Critical Policy: Your company needs to create a strict policy under which each person who will reside in the corporate unit MUST undergo the usual criminal background checks, just like any other applicant. If you do not run a criminal background check on the occupants of a corporate unit before they are allowed to reside in the unit, but insist that it is always run on applicants for your regular units, you may be illegally committing discrimination against your other applicants.
You need to contact your attorney immediately regarding this matter, because it is quite possible that you will not be able to legally terminate this tenancy. Hopefully the corporate tenant will voluntarily vacate, or your company can pay the corporate tenant to vacate.
Question 2
We had a situation when executing the writ of possession when one of our maintenance techs took some items of value and put them in the maintenance shed rather than putting them out on the street. Another resident who was watching the move-out from her window promptly called the evicted resident, who now is demanding the return of his items and is threatening to call the police. I spoke to my maintenance tech, and what he claims he took to the shed is nothing near what the former resident says has been taken. Do we need to return these items? This resident owes us a lot of money.
Answer
When a writ of possession is executed, it is crucial that your maintenance tech never take any of the items for his or her own use. All the items need to be taken to the property line, no matter what the value, or how much the maintenance tech wants to keep the items.
The purpose of the law requiring the items to be taken to the property line is to allow the evicted resident access to the items, as he has presumably been removed and now barred from the premises. Just because the evicted resident is not there at the time of the writ execution does not mean this is a green light to take any of the former resident's personal belongings.
Will the neighbors and people passing by take these items? Of course. Invariably, if your maintenance tech gets caught taking some items and the evicted resident finds out, the quantity and value of these items will magically increase, further exacerbating your company's liability.
Legal Risk: Your maintenance tech could be charged criminally or your company sued civilly, so the potential stakes are a lot higher than you may think. Carefully train your maintenance staff to never take any of an evicted resident's belongings during a writ execution.
Regarding the current situation, yes, you should return the items that are in your possession. Document everything carefully, including what was returned and when. The fact that the resident owes you money does not give you the right to hold their personal property.
Question 3
Our new property opened in phases, and some amenities like the pool and fitness center aren't finished yet. A group of residents is now demanding rent reductions and threatening legal action because these amenities were prominently featured in our brochures and website. We did verbally tell prospects during tours that the amenities weren't complete yet, but apparently that's not enough. Several residents are talking about forming a tenant group and possibly pursuing a class action lawsuit. Are we in serious legal trouble here?
Answer
Yes, you are potentially in serious trouble. Advertising amenities that are not yet available can expose your company to claims of false advertising, breach of contract, and unfair trade practices. Even if your leasing staff verbally explained the situation during tours, written marketing materials that omit clear disclaimers create significant liability.
The core problem is that your brochures and website created a reasonable expectation that these amenities were available or would be available when residents moved in. Verbal statements made during tours are often insufficient to override written representations in marketing materials, especially when those verbal disclaimers aren't documented or included in the lease agreement itself.
When residents sign a lease based on marketing materials showing certain amenities, courts often view those amenities as part of the promised living experience. If you're collecting full rent while major amenities remain unavailable, residents have a legitimate argument that they're not receiving the full value of what they contracted for.
Immediate Actions Required: First, review all marketing content immediately—website, brochures, social media, listing sites—and ensure complete accuracy. Add prominent disclaimers about construction timelines and which amenities are not yet available. Second, document everything: when each amenity is expected to be complete, what residents were told, and any written communications about the delays.
For current residents, you have several options to mitigate legal exposure. Consider offering a prorated rent credit for the period that amenities remain unavailable, or provide alternative solutions like guest passes to nearby facilities. These concessions accomplish two things: they demonstrate good faith and can help resolve complaints before they escalate into costly litigation or damaging class action lawsuits.
Moving forward, implement a strict policy: never advertise or list amenities unless they're immediately available for use. If you must market a property during phased construction, use clear language like "Pool - Opening Summer 2026" with specific disclaimers. Include these disclaimers not just in fine print, but prominently in all marketing materials and in the lease agreement itself.
Consider adding a lease addendum for current residents that acknowledges the amenity delays, provides a specific timeline for completion, and outlines any rent adjustments or alternative accommodations. Having residents sign this addendum can help demonstrate transparency and potentially limit your legal exposure.
Prevention Strategy: Create a standardized "Phased Opening Disclosure" that must be signed by all applicants before lease signing. This should clearly list which amenities are unavailable, estimated completion dates, and any rent adjustments that will apply during the construction period. This disclosure should be separate from the lease and require its own signature to prove informed consent.
Contact your attorney immediately to review your specific situation. The threat of class action litigation is serious and should not be taken lightly. Your attorney can help you craft an appropriate response to the resident group and advise whether offering settlements now would be more cost-effective than defending against potential lawsuits later.
