All Forum Posts by: Bradley Bogdan

Usually, Section 8 will just require what your state law requires, as state/local laws are usually the same or more stringent than the broad Section 8 requirements for heating and cooling. In general, window and wall units are fine, provided they're of appropriate size for your space (so no one window unit or tiny ceramic heater for a whole house). The one thing they are no longer able to OK that throws some folks is free standing electric heaters that circulate oil, which are now considered a fire hazard as they retain heat and could potentially cause a fire if they fell over. A side note, not all areas require cooling. If A/C isn't something everyone has in your area, check with your local PHA to see if it's a requirement or an extra. If you're in the South or Southwest, you probably are required, but many localities in NY, northern CA, OR and WA are not.

Section 8 will allow what's ever allowed by your area (state or city). For instance, in My area, you can only charge up to 2x rent in last month/deposit holdings, so it's legal to charge a full last months rent, but you have to take a smaller deposit and then also presumably refund a bunch of that last months rent at the end. Most landlords here just charge a larger deposit and forget about last months rent.

So Chris Martin does bring up the sole instance of a PHA attempting to lower rents, but accurately points out that it's Raleigh PHA. It's amazing how many of the Section 8 warning stories on these boards come from that PHA. Basically, everything I said holds, other than that PHA :-).

Hi all,

I'm a young investor who has a day job (that I like!) but would like to save additional cash to make future investments happen faster. I'd love to work with folks that need grunt work that can be performed after hours, like envelope stuffing, printing things at Kinkos, internet database research, etc. I'm happy to negotiate a reasonable rate/split with anyone who'd like to PM. 

Thanks!

Brad

Originally posted by @Account Closed:

Originally posted by @Bradley Bogdan:

@Account Closed Just to clarify, certain drug convictions are lifetime bans from receiving assistance through any HUD program. These mostly revolve around manufacture of controlled substances or manufacture or sale while in, or from, public housing.

This is so interesting to me  Go to jail for rape, battery, child abuse....come home to housing benefits if you're eligible.  Sell drugs....no housing benefits for you.  I understand lifetime bans from public housing if you get convicted of committing a felony on the premises.  Are you sure is the ban is from all housing assistance programs, including Sec8?

 That isn't a complete list of lifetime ban items, other things, like being on a state registry for sex or drug offenders is also a universal no-no. Most convictions, including the majority of felonies, are subject to whatever rules the local PHA sets up and the discretion it uses. Most items are forgivable with enough time since the conviction, or a demonstrated effort to correct the issue (like drug treatment), but again, the details are usually left up to local rulemaking. 

For the most part, the rules are the same for all programs in a locality, with only a couple exceptions. HUD-VASH, the veterans program, only denies sex offenders, for instance.

While I'm a big proponent of Section 8 as a program (though not necessarily of all the tenants), and have issues with the application of the 3x rent income requirement for those with vouchers (which gave rise to the anti income discrimination laws in some localities), I am not a fan of what your applicant is proposing. You are absolutely allowed to deny them if they aren't willing to put all residents on the lease. Here's a couple theories on what they are doing:

1) The gentleman's income would put the couple over income for the program, so they're trying to game the system financially. When the local PHA finds out, they would likely just bring the hammer down on the couple, but depending on their view of the situation, they might come after you for some of their money back, it depends on the details of the fraud by your tenants. It would be a giant headache for you. 

2) The gentleman's previous criminal history or history on public housing programs is bad enough where he isn't eligible for assistance, and can't be placed on a voucher. Either way, there's a great chance that there's something in his history you wouldn't approve of in an application if you dug a bit. Again, recipe for a giant headache. 

HUD rules mandate that the adults on the lease match the adults on the voucher, so you're in the clear mandating that if they are going to use a voucher on your rental, it needs to include all residents, just as any other applicant would need to.

(Not a lawyer, not legal advice, just a guy who works with voucher programs all the time)

@Account Closed Just to clarify, certain drug convictions are lifetime bans from receiving assistance through any HUD program. These mostly revolve around manufacture of controlled substances or manufacture or sale while in, or from, public housing.

Originally posted by @David Moore:

Originally posted by @Tony Ngo:

Currently section 8 pays 100% of rent.  We don't know what's going to happen to that until she talks to them on Monday.   Section 8 is requiring her to add her husband to the lease other wise her section 8 would be terminated since she is violating her lease agreement by having him live there.  Her husband is not employed at the moment so there is no additional income to consider.  

The solution to your problem is in the very words of your post.  Who is required in this process to add her husband to the lease?  Sounds like you, the owner.  And if you do not do this, she loses her section 8 voucher, and goes back to the bottom of the 3 year waiting list to get back on section 8.  She knows this.  Go to the tenant, tell her you are not going to change the lease to allow the husband.   Tell her you will notify Section  8 of this the next business day.  If she loses her voucher, start the eviction immediately.  If you need to, do a cash for keys.  Move this tenant on down the road.  And screen all applicants, especially section 8 tenants.  Call previous landlords. 

 Just to be clear, the OP here isn't required to add anyone to the lease. The PHA is just informing them that the husband is being added to the voucher, which means the family ether must add him to the lease (to match the voucher), needs to find a new place to live (that will agree to have him on the lease, again to match the voucher), or they can forego their voucher (or at least him being added to it) and continue under the same lease they have now with no changes. This is all the choice of the landlord as to what to do. 

It is highly likely that any arrangement other than them finding a landlord who is comfortable housing him will turn out badly. There are many other issues tenants can cause other than doing damage and not paying rent, DV and drug busts wreaking havoc with your rights as a landlord to manage your own property being two major ones. They will almost certainly move him in if you don't add him to the lease and continue to let them live there, not to mention the fact that Section 8 would likely stop paying you, as the family probably isn't savvy enough to take him off the voucher once they see you wont add him. I work with low income tenants as a day job, so I can attest that this is a recipe for disaster. Explain your position to them that he doesn't meet your background check standards that you use for everyone, explain that you understand that since he's on the voucher whatever lease they have needs to include him and you can't accommodate that, give them ample notice to move out (perhaps more than whatever is your locality's minimum to show good faith and appreciation for the quiet tenancy they've given you), take the couple week income hit to find new tenants and move on. Even if they do sneak him in, its only for a short period of time as they're on their way out. Fair, equitable, and now not your problem. 

@Tony Ngo , I would double check with your PHA to make sure you can deny him from the lease (I'm 99% sure you can) provided he doesn't meet your usual rental application requirements (doesn't sound like he'd meet anyone's). 

I'm actually surprised they're ok with letting him on the voucher. Each PHA has some leeway as to what criminal history they're ok with, other than a list of automatically disqualifying previous offences (like being a sex offender, etc.), but that seems like a much longer list of serious stuff than most would let go. The only explanation I can think of is that the offences are all old. Even so, still more than most would approve of. If he has income, they would almost certainly start paying a portion of their rent themselves.

Personally, I wouldn't allow him to move in if I wasn't comfortable with him living there, as this seems like a recipe for drama and legal issues (DV, CPS, other violence, drugs, etc.). They will likely move out on their own if you explain he isn't approved and you'll move to evict (and cause them to lose their voucher) if he moves in anyway. Don't trade a short term buck for long term drama (and the associated costs!).

@Padma Mody you could have definitely kept the tenant if you had wanted to. You may not have been aware, but all you had to do to was negotiate a reasonably quick timeline with the PHA to make repairs/renovations to fix/replace the HVAC and assure them you would be meeting the letter of the law in proving other accommodations for the tenants during any time where the unit would not be inhabitable due to the work being performed. The tenant would still owe you rent like normal, you would continue to receive the other portion of rent like normal, and the work would be completed. 

While a bit over the top, I don't think you should take the police being called too personally. You didn't have a right to enter the unit without proper notice as there was no obvious emergency, and someone trying the door handle definitely would freak me out if I were a tenant inside. Protect yourself and post proper notice that you'll be entering the unit at X time on X date and they won't be able to complain at all. Remember, even if they're past the point of PHA payments ending, they're still residents of the unit until they leave, meaning they have legal rights until they leave or are evicted. Those vary state to state, so consult your local legal resources, but just because its Jan. 2nd doesn't mean you can bust in with no notice. 

Finally, you do have the option to work out an agreement with the tenant for them to stay, off the program, for an agreed period of time or until they find a place. IMHO, this would have seemed like the humane thing to do considering they didn't seem to have all that much time to locate and secure a new rental (which can be difficult for even the best tenants with a voucher). The PHA just notified you that they would stop paying you as of Dec. 31 because you were not providing a unit with the minimum level of services under your agreement with them, not that the tenant was evicted. Because of this, I would also check with your legal resources to make sure that you didn't need to post appropriate notice for them to leave, I suspect you did. Remember, the tenant signs a lease with you (or the previous owner), even when they have a voucher. Even when the voucher lapses, the voucher payments to the landlord are suspended/cancelled, etc, the lease itself is still in effect. It doesn't just magically disappear. 

Please don't take any of the criticism here personally, the folks here are (usually) critical of folks in an honest attempt to help people succeed in their investments. In this case, it seems that you didn't totally understand how the voucher program or how rights of entry worked and it potentially placed you in a stickier situation than was necessary. We don't want to see you get burned because of it. Much the opposite, we'd love to see you make the best of a busted HVAC system and succeed so you can share your story the next time someone here is in a similar situation!

PS Not a lawyer, consult your legal resources for local law stuff, yadda, yadda, yadda...