All Forum Posts by: Ramesh K.

My current tenant of more than a year wants to sublease the unit. It's a 5BR SFH. He mentioned in our recent meeting that he's trying to save up to buy a house and would like to sublet the unused room (to save on his rent). I'm open to his idea given that they've been great tenants and prompt in paying rent for the past year. Current lease has restrictions that prevents subleasing without LL's written consent.

As for who to sublease, he's thinking of his military friends who would stay for a short term (3 - 6 months) after which he's planning to replace them with others.

I see a lot of posts here in BP where the current tenant wants to move out or terminate lease early in which case transferring or finding a replacement tenant makes sense. However in this case, my tenant is capable of paying the rent and he's more likely to stay or extend the lease for another year if I allow him to sublease. Is anyone here doing anything similar?

1) Should I not entertain the idea at all? Would it turn out to be a huge headache?

2) If I do allow him to sublease, I'm definitely planning to at least do a background check on the sub-tenants and approve them based on that. Would it better to also add them each time to the lease as occupant(s) or leave them out of the lease. He says he's capable of continuing to pay the rent by himself.

3) Should I write an addendum that restricts number of occupants, make the sub-tenants agree to the terms of the original lease, etc. What about additional wear and tear? Should I chalk that up as operating expense or increase rent to cover for that?

Thanks in advance for your input.

@Luc Boiron I'm going to skip the whole section from the lease. As you said, it's not worth enforcing something that might create a potentially dangerous situation for my tenants.

Thanks!

Right, I don't have this clause currently in my lease and leave it to the tenants to do what they need to. 

I came across this clause as I'm writing my new lease and wanted to see other people's take or maybe experience on this. Thanks!

No, we don't. We ask the tenant to be responsible for snow removal.

Hi Folks,

First post here. And btw, thank you for all the wonderful posts and answers. I haven't had a question to ask myself until now. So here it goes...

Does anyone (especially the landlords in the colder states such as Colorado) have a clause in their lease that restricts tenants from using ice melts. Something similar to the one below...

"No ice melt, salt or similar product may be used on the Premises. Any damage to the Premises (including, without limitation, concrete walkways and stairs) caused by Tenant's use of ice melt, salt or similar product shall be the sole responsibility of Tenant, and Tenant shall be responsible for the cost and expense any repairs required as a result thereof."

I'm wondering if adding such a clause would open us up for liability claims. I know ice melt is very corrosive on concrete and driveways and I personally don't use it in my house - even though my driveway faces North and comes with all the wonderful joy of shoveling. But as far as restricting the tenant from using ice melt, salt or similar product, are we opening ourselves up for potential liability claims from slip and fall accidents?

Thanks!

Ramesh