Tenants Break Up - But BOTH Want To Stay - What should I do?

[Daniel Yip]

All, I have a sticky situation. Any advise would be appreciated.

My tenants (boyfriend, girlfriend) have broken up ... the man is the sole bread winner.  The woman stays home to care for the kids (they are of a mixed family).  They pay the rent on time and take care of the property.  Recently the couple had argued so much that the cops were called once.  Long story short they've agreed the relationship is over, but BOTH parties want to remain in the house.  They've signed a year-long lease until Apr 2023 ... 

The man asks me if he can remain there and restructure the contract (to be without her name; evicting her essentially).  The woman, whom I haven't talked to, though has broken up with the man, still feels she's done enough in this domestic relationship to be allowed to stay in the house.  Again, the rent is paid on time.  

So, from a landlord's perspective, is this a case of "there's nothing I can do" (or even should do)?   Thanks.

[Bruce Woodruff]

Well, what does your lease say? You follow that first. If it is unclear or ambiguous, then you need to decide who can continue to pay you the rent every month. Sounds like she can't unless she gets a job, so I would choose him. I would not leave this as is, you gotta do something...because this ain't gonna get any better and you will have a huge mess....

[Daniel Yip]

Bruce. Thanks for your reply.

The contract has both their names on it.  Standard CA lease contract.  They fulfilled 1 year of problem-free rental prior to the lease extension that was signed a few months ago.  The man is paying the full rent.  The contract doesn't spell out who pays (ex: 50/50 from the 2 of them).  The man just wants to continue pay and live there peacefully, without her, since he's paying the full rent anyways.  That means that she needs to voluntarily leave ... which thus far she's not willing to.  And from my perspective I have no grounds to do anything.  But the man did ask me if there's something I can do as the landlord. 

From my point of view, the rent is paid and like the cops' position, this is a domestic issue that he might have to go to the courts to resolve in. But this is not a good situation for the man, which can potentially affect his ability to work and fulfill the rent.  So I agree I gotta do something because it ain't going to get better, but what it is that "I can do" is not so clear...

[Bruce Woodruff]

Well yeah, as long as the rent is being paid, I guess it is their problem to resolve who stays. I can't imagine wanting to live together if they're to the point of having the cops show up.....

Good luck. I'll be interested to see what others might offer as a solution.

[Madison Wilson]

Geez! That is quite a predicament, but a really good experience for future reference or fellow readers to recognize. I would vote to stay within your four corners of the lease as well. I believe ultimately it would come down to them resolving amongst themselves. If neither of the tenants are actively a threat or danger to themselves, or others; or breaking the law. It sounds like a sticky situation, but ultimately as landlord you can only resolve so much unless laws or terms of the lease are being broken. Great learning experience for all! Best of luck to you, and hopefully it remains civil until the lease expires. 

[JD Martin]

I would do nothing until there's something to do. I have 3 rules regarding my rental properties:

1. Rent is paid in full on time, every time, all the time.
2. Don't damage my property.
3. Don't cause problems (for me, the police, the city, the neighbors in that order).

In theory they are violating #3, but that's only because you know they had a big fight and the cops were called. Otherwise, you'd know nothing. As far as you're concerned, the rent is paid in full on time and no one is damaging the property. It's up to them to figure out who's moving since both are financially responsible. One wrinkle is that you're in California and it will be harder to get rid of whomever stays behind.

One approach you could take: have both of them reapply individually and requalify. Chances are one won't requalify. That clears you on who to lease to. But doesn't solve getting the other one out of the house, which one of them will likely have to do through the court system.

Lesson: don't give lease extensions. Month to month only at the conclusion of the lease.

[John Clark]

Quote from @JD Martin:
One approach you could take: have both of them reapply individually and requalify. Chances are one won't requalify.

On what grounds would you have them re-apply? There is a lease and it is being adhered to, except maybe quiet enjoyment covenants. On what grounds does a landlord pick sides? On what grounds does a landlord have them "re-apply" with a lease in place?

The landlord especially doesn't want to be accused of an improper eviction. They settle it between themselves (and if he goes he still pays rent, you're not modifying the lease) or they are both out.

[Kimothy Bynum]

yea not much you can do. Rent needs to be paid by someone if not they both will be getting evicted. She is on the lease so she has every right to be there whether they are together or not. 

[Scott Trench]

I think that the facts from my perspective are: 

- You have a lease in place. 

- The tenants are jointly and severally liable for the rent collection. 

- As long as this continues, and you don't get problems, there is no action to take. 

- If and when this lease ends, the next tenant(s) must meet your criteria, which should include satisfactory credit score, credit, criminal, and background check, and has income of at least 3X the monthly rent.

I agree with @JD Martin that there really isn't any action to take here. The next move needs to come from the tenant, not you. They can ask to change the lease, but if they aren't aligned, you need an action from them that moves to terminate the lease, per the terms of your lease. You are not the arbiter of this relationship, you are the landlord, and you will rent to the first qualified applicant. And if there is an escalating problem, it might be best not to renew with either of them, and just get a new tenant in there.

[JD Martin]

Quote from @John Clark:

Quote from @JD Martin:
One approach you could take: have both of them reapply individually and requalify. Chances are one won't requalify.

On what grounds would you have them re-apply? There is a lease and it is being adhered to, except maybe quiet enjoyment covenants. On what grounds does a landlord pick sides? On what grounds does a landlord have them "re-apply" with a lease in place?

The landlord especially doesn't want to be accused of an improper eviction. They settle it between themselves (and if he goes he still pays rent, you're not modifying the lease) or they are both out.

 I thought it was clear from my post that my position was do nothing, but that comment was assuming the existing lease was concluded or terminated in some fashion.

[Daniel Yip]

Thank you all for your replies.

Yes, a lease is in place, and both their names are on it.  It's a yearly lease expiring in Apr 2023.  Long story short I try to give the tenants a long term "security" by signing them to a yearly.  Nobody likes to live month to month not knowing if the landlord wouldn't extend with you anymore.  In this situation it kind of bit me in the behind ... would have been cleaner if it's a month-to-month, and have them reapply separately that way.  

The lease doesn't spell out "who" pays.  Thus far only the man contacted me and explained the situation ... the woman has not.  I'm leaning towards telling them that 1) the rent is paid fully each month so that's great 2) the property is taken care of, but 3) if there will be further domestic issues, there might be a breach in contract with the Quiet Enjoyment clause stating: 

"QUIET ENJOYMENT. Tenant, upon payment of all of the sums referred to herein as being
payable by Tenant and Tenant's performance of all Tenant's agreements contained herein and
Tenant's observance of all rules and regulations, shall and may peacefully and quietly have, hold
and enjoy said Premises for the term hereof."

[JD Martin]

Quote from @Daniel Yip:

Thank you all for your replies.

Yes, a lease is in place, and both their names are on it.  It's a yearly lease expiring in Apr 2023.  Long story short I try to give the tenants a long term "security" by signing them to a yearly.  Nobody likes to live month to month not knowing if the landlord wouldn't extend with you anymore.  In this situation it kind of bit me in the behind ... would have been cleaner if it's a month-to-month, and have them reapply separately that way.  

The lease doesn't spell out "who" pays.  Thus far only the man contacted me and explained the situation ... the woman has not.  I'm leaning towards telling them that 1) the rent is paid fully each month so that's great 2) the property is taken care of, but 3) if there will be further domestic issues, there might be a breach in contract with the Quiet Enjoyment clause stating: 

"QUIET ENJOYMENT. Tenant, upon payment of all of the sums referred to herein as being
payable by Tenant and Tenant's performance of all Tenant's agreements contained herein and
Tenant's observance of all rules and regulations, shall and may peacefully and quietly have, hold
and enjoy said Premises for the term hereof."

I know this will come off sounding cold but, so be it: who cares about your tenant's long term security? The only person that should care about that is your tenant. A tenant that *really* wanted long-term security would buy their own house. A long-term lease works out only to your tenant's favor, since in rental agreements the party far more likely to break the agreement is the tenant, typically by not paying rent.

We offer 1-year leases on a brand new tenancies only because to do otherwise would shut us out of a large percentage of the rental market, because reasonable people who rent also understand that without a lease the LL can kick them out any month or raise the rent any month. So our compromise is that we give a 1 year lease for new tenants, who don't know us (and we don't know them), and then at the conclusion of that year we all know each other - if they've been good tenants, they stay M2M and we give them good notice of any rent increases or changes in terms, and if they've not been good tenants they either get the heave-ho or a rent increase proportional to their level of PITA'ness. I have great tenants in some houses that have been with us 5-6 years on M2Ms after their initial lease expired, because once you have a relationship you don't really need ironclad long-term contracts. Everyone knows their responsibilities and lives up to them. 

[Bruce Woodruff]

Quote from @JD Martin:

I know this will come off sounding cold but, so be it: who cares about your tenant's long term security? 

Thank you JD. This is something a lot of younger/newer LLs get caught up in.....I know from your posts you are a caring kind of guy, but this is business and I agree we landlords must take care of #1 first. That means ourselves and our families, not the tenant. We are obligated (legally and morally) to provide a clean decent place to live in exchange for a set sum of money. That's it, period.

[Jonathan R McLaughlin]

I don't think you can or should do anything now. And what is there to do really? But, I would anticipate that if the domestic situation deteriorates there will be a restraining order and if so the husband will move. The courts will take the position that whatever is most stable for the kids will rule. Unfortunately for you, your immediate interests will not be paramount.

Without getting involved you may want to investigate practical alternatives.  

[Jay G.]

"Oh, that's unfortunate. That's the rent in your hands though, right?"  

Nothing has changed? ... they were roommates on day 1 and they're roommates now. 

Anyway, my bet is they're back together now or within a couple of days anyway. A lot of arguments seem to happen around end/start of month.... for some totally unknown reason. If it doesn't work out, she'll probably find a new guy (or him a new girl) and the new bf/gf isn't going to want them living with their exes, so it'll work itself out for you.. 

Just let him/them know NOW -- if SHE wants off the lease, you could all mutually agree to terminate the existing lease without penalty and write a new 1 year for him alone since his income qualifies alone. This is presuming no damage, all rents paid up, etc.

Btw are you related to Cindy?

[Daniel Yip]

@JD Martin, thanks for those words.  It's not cold, but realistic and straightforward.  Yea I'm kind of a newbie in this department and thought year to year extension is a win-win for all involved, without considering this as one of the possible scenarios.  Now that I have to cross this bridge, I finally understand what the valley beneath looks like.  I gained a new perspective.  

And there's more to the back story.  I "inherited" the couple when I purchased the property.  Did not make them move.  And even rented to them under the market price.  When extension time came I gave them another year of a good rate.  The more I am thinking about this, the more I think I'll just talk to the couple and have them come up with something agreeable so that no more cops being called, nor the premise becoming anything but a quiet enjoyment.  

Thank you all for helping me think this through. 

[James Wise]

Quote from @Daniel Yip:

All, I have a sticky situation. Any advise would be appreciated.

My tenants (boyfriend, girlfriend) have broken up ... the man is the sole bread winner.  The woman stays home to care for the kids (they are of a mixed family).  They pay the rent on time and take care of the property.  Recently the couple had argued so much that the cops were called once.  Long story short they've agreed the relationship is over, but BOTH parties want to remain in the house.  They've signed a year-long lease until Apr 2023 ... 

The man asks me if he can remain there and restructure the contract (to be without her name; evicting her essentially).  The woman, whom I haven't talked to, though has broken up with the man, still feels she's done enough in this domestic relationship to be allowed to stay in the house.  Again, the rent is paid on time.  

So, from a landlord's perspective, is this a case of "there's nothing I can do" (or even should do)?   Thanks.

 Say this....

What goes on in your relationship is none of my concern. Call me if there is a problem with the heat, roof or plumbing. Otherwise, rent is due on the 1st. If it's not paid in full everyone gets evicted. Have a great day.

[Nathan Gesner]

Quote from @Daniel Yip:

Don't get involved in personal drama. They signed a one-year lease so they need to honor it. If they want to separate, then they can both leave and deal with the separation somewhere else. They would be liable for early termination penalties, if you have any, or they are responsible for rent until a new tenant is placed.

[Bud Gaffney]

@Daniel Yip ah Daniel! The old boyfriend/girlfriend dilemma! Been there and it isn’t fun. Going forward, only put 1 name on the lease.

[Michael Deering]

Not your problem. DO NOT GET INVLOVED!  The lease continues as written. They figure it out.   You collect rent or evict if rent is not paid.

[Matt Bishop]

@Daniel Yip, if this situation came up at one of my rentals, I would be thankful I have a property manager company to professionally handle everything and I would never ever be aware it had happened.

We are Real Estate investors first and foremost. Is there a reason you have chosen to also be a property manager?

[Jared Boundy]

If they were at the end of the lease, I'd just not renew the lease, but invite both to reapply individually.  However, you've got a lease that goes into 2023, and you should just tell them that if there's going to be any disturbance, noise problems, etc. they can't both stay, but they need to work it out between themselves who stays. If they can't agree, you could allow them to break the lease and leave, but it doesn't sound like either one wants that anyway.

[Steve Skirvin]

Quote from @Daniel Yip:

@JD Martin, thanks for those words.  It's not cold, but realistic and straightforward.  Yea I'm kind of a newbie in this department and thought year to year extension is a win-win for all involved, without considering this as one of the possible scenarios.  Now that I have to cross this bridge, I finally understand what the valley beneath looks like.  I gained a new perspective.  

And there's more to the back story.  I "inherited" the couple when I purchased the property.  Did not make them move.  And even rented to them under the market price.  When extension time came I gave them another year of a good rate.  The more I am thinking about this, the more I think I'll just talk to the couple and have them come up with something agreeable so that no more cops being called, nor the premise becoming anything but a quiet enjoyment.  

Thank you all for helping me think this through. 

Having been a tenant, month to month sucks.  As a landlord, there are definitely pros and cons.  If you have good tenants, there is nothing wrong with extending annually. It gives you and them a level of predictability.  I have known a number of very successful mom and pop landlords who rented at a little below market on long term leases, and had really good tenants (and cash flow) for many years.   

[Ron H.]

Quote from @Steve Skirvin:

Quote from @Daniel Yip:

@JD Martin, thanks for those words.  It's not cold, but realistic and straightforward.  Yea I'm kind of a newbie in this department and thought year to year extension is a win-win for all involved, without considering this as one of the possible scenarios.  Now that I have to cross this bridge, I finally understand what the valley beneath looks like.  I gained a new perspective. 

Thank you all for helping me think this through. 

Having been a tenant, month to month sucks.  As a landlord, there are definitely pros and cons.  If you have good tenants, there is nothing wrong with extending annually. It gives you and them a level of predictability.  I have known a number of very successful mom and pop landlords who rented at a little below market on long term leases, and had really good tenants (and cash flow) for many years.   

I have had a few tenant's complain about my not offering follow on 1 year leases but I have never had anyone move out because of it.  I just hype up that I am being very nice to them by not forcing  them into another 1 year lease in case they decide to move later.

I haven't had to non renew a long term tenant yet but I definitely like having the Option available.

[Anthony R.]

I'm not a LL anymore, but technically, what does their situation have to do with you? They need to work it out for themselves. As long as the rent gets paid and there's no more disturbing the peace/domestic stuff, it's not a decision you have to get involved with. So, they need to leave you out of it. So long as you're contractually and legally upholding your end of the deal, their situation is nothing you are required to be pulled into.

But again, I'll defer to the wisdom and experience of everybody else.

[Sergey A. Petrov]

As others mentioned, stay out of your tenant's domestic issues. They and only they can and need to figure out what happens with their household. Once they do, you can start taking action - either finding new tenants, re-qualifying each without the other, amending leases, and/or doing something else.