All Forum Posts by: Brad Schaeppi

@Tim Swierczek and @John Woodrich both have good general advice--generally speaking--"what does the lease say" before you move onto state code and city ordinances.  Please also accept this general advice that is not a legal opinion, but preliminary feedback.  As I always state--if you seek good, fact specific legal advice, hire a landlord-tenant attorney to help you.  

First, when residential lease violations complications arise, and in Minnesota with a private market lease,  first revert to the "out" meaning:  when does the lease end?  Sounds like from your earlier post the lease is month to month or term ends soon.  Check your notice date on your lease.  No landlord wants to spend extra money they don't have to (cost to turn, find new tenants), but landlords constantly make decisions over the "benefit of the bargain:" is it worth the lease violations and city trouble to deal with a tenant who otherwise pays rent on time.  

Always, Always start negotiation with a delivery of a notice to vacate (if applicable).  If new lease negotiations do not work out, the notice sticks and the tenant must go on the notice date.  If you do not deliver a notice to vacate first and instead only negotiate in good faith, you are hoping the problem tenant will accept your more stringent lease terms--but he or she may not--and you lost time to find a replacement tenant. 

Good luck!

@Johnny Nelson The City of Minneapolis has their own list:  Rental License Checklist.

Big picture:

Notice the tenant and walk through their unit several days prior to the inspection to check for the overall condition. First, the bulk of the inspection is the property physical condition, but tenant actions can also complicate the walk through:  removed smoke alarms from ceilings, improper extension cords, etc.  

A few common items to be on the lookout for:  Look everywhere inside and out for peeling or missing paint and fix as necessary, test windows to make sure they open, can stay open, close, and lock (old wood windows may have problems doing this regularly or be stuck all together), review basement for any signs of standard black, non-toxic mold/standing water, make sure all stairs are cleared of tenant items (no bikes, boxes, etc.).   

At the end of the day, the inspector may be difficult or may be reasonable--it really depends.  

Good luck!

Thanks @John Woodrich.

This is a good opportunity to comment on how 14 day notice to pay or quit scenarios differ from standard non-payment of rent in Minnesota.  

Minnesota landlords can and should use 14 day notice to pay or quit provisions to address non payment of rent.  The source law is Minn. Stat. 504B. 135.  However, landlords may ONLY use this as a method to address non payment for month to month or "at-will" tenants (504B.135 requirement).  Using a 14 day notice to pay or quit on a tenant on a "term" lease that ends in several months has no legal effect.  

If and when a tenant fails to pay rent within 14 days, the month to month  lease terminates and the tenant immediately becomes a holdover.  I have a specific form I use and advise for clients.  A good form goes a long way to educating a tenant on what is going on, what action they need to take, and legal consequences of no action.  

Upon lease termination (no $ after 14 days), and the tenant remains in the premises, a landlord can bring an eviction action against a holdover tenant under 504B.285 Subd. 1(a)(3) "any tenant at will holds over after the termination of the tenancy by notice to quit."

A key difference between an eviction action under 504B.285 and 504B.291 (standard non payment of rent), is that there are no tenant redemption rights under 504B.285.  In other words, once the lease terminates, it is terminated and the tenant no longer has a legal remedy in court to pay back rent plus court costs to stay and "redeem" the tenancy.  Upon proper written notice to tenant and filing the proper 504B.285 eviction, the tenant can be forced to leave through an eviction action---unless the landlord agrees to new terms.  

Please note, this blog is a legal overview and does not apply the law to any facts.  Please consult an attorney for your fact specific scenario.  

All purchasers of rental property should independently contact the municipality where the rental property is rented to verify (at a minimum):  1) rental license valid and what tier (if exists), 2) any open work orders on the property and when was the last inspection, and 3) any criminal activity at the property (public data request).  In some cases, this info can be viewed with a few clicks online, such as St. Paul:  https://online.stpaul.gov/stpaulportal/sfjsp?interviewID=PublicSearch.  Obviously if your are purchasing distressed property, these are the tip of the iceberg.  

Sure a PA can require a Seller to notify/supply the Buyer with copies of city notices, etc.--but then Buyer is left with legal remedies post closing (if Seller was silent) but when issue raised before closing, Seller has leverage to delay closing or negotiate a discount. 

Caveat Emptor!

@Bruce Runn I agree with you 100% on the issue of mitigating non-payment of rent in a collaborative way.   I am not an expert with county emergency assistance, but I do find that in housing court, a good % of tenants who do seek emergency assistance in cases I handle are not eligible due to use within the past 12 months, etc.  I have raised the issue with several CMs and the mayor with more resources for emergency assistance--how can MPLS partner with County or start own pool of funds with criteria, etc.  Not one has taken my offer to help invest time, etc.  

I agree there are many many cases of good tenants who just don't have rent--sometimes just 1 or 2 months behind (also backed by data).  If the city focused on solving that gap rent problem first (not just multiple hearings over added landlord regulation), they could keep many more families in their homes and kids in the same schools.  To me this is the obvious first step with potential for real common good (tenant stays in housing, landlord gets paid, no eviction and time wasted to both), not just support for new housing ($200k+/unit), NOAH housing, or added landlord regulation.  

@Jake S. start with a review of all the recorded docs against the property which will appear in a title search--Declaration, By-Laws, Amendments, etc.  Don't assume the Seller produces all the documents.  You need to pay special attention to existing language, voting rights, and what language you may need to rent if any) the units you will own.  

Josh.

First, this is not legal advice.  @John Woodrich is correct on the complexity.  It sounds like you have an opportunity to offer a developer site control of an opportunity--that essentially is the pitch to a developer.  You are looking for an active participant as it sounds as if you are not the developer.  Typically, property value add of site control comes AFTER the site is fully entitled for the new development and someone has to funds soft costs--preliminary design architecture fees, design fees, legal fees, potential contractor consultation (to get #s).  This is an entrepreneur's game of cart before the horse and horse before the cart at once--place property under contract not knowing if the deal will happen and spending at-risk soft cost dollars.  The more a developer has done a specific property size in a city, the more confident and less risk.   If the property is not under contract, you have little to offer at this time.  Once it is, you have a PA that you might be able to assign to a developer--but would need all the standard pre-development/entitlement terms, or a really long contingency with little earnest risk.  Your best bet today may be to visit the City of St. Paul and consult with zoning to get an immediate read on what you will need given the zoning, parcel size, etc.  

@Monica Morff  First rule of eviction settlement:  the better detail, the better result and outcome.  It is common for tenants to file a motion to quash the writ---tenants do so in good faith if a landlord sought a writ but did not complete his/her side of the bargain (fix sink), and in bad faith when they don't have the money and the landlord moved for the writ for non-payment (filed an affidavit of non-compliance).  There is little an attorney can do stop a motion to quash by a tenant--the judge reviews the affidavit and decides to accept or deny the motion.  As other folks mentioned above, the parties can agree to the payment method and day/time.  Avoid any method that would permit the tenant to argue the check was dropped off, but the landlord did not know (drop box at 5, etc.).  At trial, it is up to the facts and your attorney.  Good luck!

The implicit message in the policy is that landlords are bad, tenants are good, and that the average landlord is somehow, someway, taking advantage of the tenant.  This is a narrative, that most often is not true.  Regardless of any new "policy" the fact is 9/10 evictions are for non-payment of rent:  tenants did not pay rent as required under contract.  The landlord offered the tenant housing (kept the benefit of the bargain) and the tenant did not pay for the housing (did not keep to the contract or meet its end of the bargain).  Yes there are bad landlord actors but they in no way outstrip the # of tenants who destroy properties, don't pay rent, etc. and leave landlords out thousands.  There are a minor amount of bad actors on both sides and arguing one versus the other is the true victim is a political decision.  

The truth is CM Frey, Bender, etc. seek votes and re-election.  They seek votes in a city where 50%+ rent.  Unless the mayor or CMs are fighting for renter constituents, another candidate in the next election will fight more and they will be replaced.   This is why new pro-tenant "wins" (aka additional regulation) are added almost each year in Minneapolis:  1) Landlord requirement to notice tenant of voter registration info (2016), 2) Advanced sale notice with 3 month tenant protection period (2018), and 3)  time of sale energy disclosure on TISH for SFH and duplex (2019).  

Big picture, multifamily real estate investors need to know that if you invest in Minneapolis, and increasingly in other inner ring suburbs and urban Minnesota cities, landlords and management companies do and will face significantly more regulation than other suburbs or out-state cities, including regulation with civil penalties.  In other words, yes there is state and federal regulations, but the city level varies considerably from city to city in Minnesota.  

As an old mentor of mine used to say go into a deal with "eyes wide open" (the good and the bad).  If you invest in Minneapolis for whatever reason, expected higher returns, estimated appreciation, etc. you do so with "eyes wide open" to the political and regulatory reality of Minneapolis.  

Caveat Emptor!

The answer is there needs to be a specific plan in place--either with a contractor, an employee, or the tenant.  See below for more detail.  Slip and fall cases are filed by tenants all the time.  Knowing and following the law plus good business documentation will go a long way to defending that case---even if it is your insurance company.  

Any lease or contractor language should be specific about snow removal to meet any city ordinance for property location (city) and type of property (residential vs. commercial)--sidewalks, driveway, if sand/salt applied, and frequency.  City ordinances generally speak to sidewalks, but note tenants may call the city about parking areas to leverage against the rental license.  

City regulations may differ from a residential duplex to a commercial apartment building.  See City of Minneapolis Snow Shoveling Rules webpage  and City of Minneapolis Clearing (24 hours for 1-2 units, 4 hours for commercial--after ceasing of all snow).  Notably, the ordinance, 445.20 requires the sprinkling of sand where snow or ice cannot be removed.  In summary, if there is a slip and fall on ice/snow, and there is a city snow removal and sand ordinance that the landlord cannot prove was met with written evidence, then the landlord may be more exposed to damages.  

ALSO--this is a great opportunity to remind landlords that in Minnesota, a landlord cannot shift maintenance to a tenant without "adequate consideration" and set forth in "a conspicuous writing."  504B.161 Subd. 2.  Yes, this means shoveling snow, mowing lawn, changing filters, etc.  I DO NOT advise landlords or management companies to bake in a sentence into the lease stating, "tenant acknowledges consideration in reduced monthly rent amount for maintenance services."  It is BEST to have a specific monthly dollar amount for each maintenance service per month that then is reconciled each month (ask your accountant for proper advice on reduced rent or charge full rent and send monthly payment to tenant for maintenance).  For skeptics out there, good luck on your eviction for non-payment of rent when your tenant raises a defense of maintenance without compensation.  If the tenant has been doing a maintenance service for years without compensation, a Minnesota landlord may end up owing the tenant money greater than rent owed, and out a lot of money.