Reply to Buying house with existing tenant?

Forum Index » Real Estate

Reply to "Buying house with existing tenant?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]

You're misreading that link.  It assumes the initial lease term has expired, and the lease has converted to month-to-month.[/quote]

Yes, that's right. Also the citation to the DC Code is a subsection that makes the same assumption.

(a) Except as provided in this section, no tenant shall be evicted from a rental unit, ***notwithstanding the expiration of the tenant’s lease or rental agreement, so long as the tenant continues to pay the rent to which the housing provider is entitled for the rental unit; provided....

The whole 90 day owner occupier notice is about evicting a tenant who is month-to-month.
[/quote]

Huh? Not true at all - you're misreading. "[i]Except as a provided in this section...[/i]" language means that section (e) allows for a legal eviction. Section (e) describes what happens when the property is sold and the new buyer intends to reclaim the property for personal use. This is a LEGAL eviction.

"[i]Notwithstanding[/i]" means "in spite of" or "nevertheless."

The "[i]notwithstanding[/i]" clause of that sentence [u]only[/u] modifies the phrase "[i]no tenant shall be evicted from a rental unit...[/i]" So, no tenant shall be evicted from their rental IN SPITE of the current status of their lease (i.e., they are in the 12 month lease period or month-to-month). But this has no affect on the phrase "[i]Except as a provided in this section...[/i]" and section (e) is one of the statutorily provided reasons for eviction.

The current lease status has no bearing on a new owner reclaiming the property for personal use.[/quote]

You're misunderstanding the background property law regime. The procedure in (d) and (e) doesn't extinguish the tenant's leasehold interest, which is enforceable against the grantee if the lease is either recorded or the grantee otherwise has notice.[/quote]

Leases never end in DC; after the initial 12 month period they automatically go month-to-month with the same terms. The landlord is allowed to raise the rent once in any 12 month period. According to your interpretation of case law, they tenant would never need to move out since in DC the lease is always in effect so long as the tenant pays rent. Month-to-month means the tenant only has to give 30 days' notice. Month-to-month has no benefit for the landlord in DC.

That's why I'm not agreeing with you - you're not recognizing that[b] residential leases are perpetual in DC[/b]. So the paragraph (e) MUST be as I stated, otherwise there's no way to buy a tenanted property in DC.[/quote]

That is why they are called "tenant for life".

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics