Anonymous wrote:We currently have tenants that we haven't been very happy with. They are in a 1-year lease, which ends August 31, 2022. If we do not want to renew with them, could we let them know June 1 (which is 90 days' notice) that we don't intend to renew the lease and we ask that they plan to move out at its expiration?

I recently saw a thread that said tenants are allowed to automatically go month-to-month at the end of their lease agreement even if the landlord wanted to end the lease (unless the landlord was moving back into the house themselves). Is that true?

What is the point of having a lease at all with a determined time period (for example, 12 months) if only one party has the power to renew or terminate it at the end of the set time? Is it really not possible for a landlord to simply say "this isn't working for us, we don't intend to renew with you as tenants"?

Any insight would be helpful.

How in the blazes did you become a landlord without knowing this

Anonymous wrote:How does one decide to become a landlord being so thoroughly ignorant of basic landlord/tenant law?

It's kind of like getting a driver's license.

Anonymous wrote:Can't you just say you are selling the house and moving and they need to be out?

For those in the back not paying attention: 1. Selling a house is not a reason you can cancel a lease. 2. If you say you're going to move into a house in order to get tenants to leave, you can't lease it for a year or risk punishing fines. Please don't give advice if you don't know what you're talking about.

Can't you just say you are selling the house and moving and they need to be out?

Anyone who's a landlord, especially in a landlord in DC (and other tenant-friendly cities), should have a professional relationship with a good attorney for this stuff.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like you can only terminate a rental if the tenants do something to break the lease or if you actually are going to sell the place. Is that right?

I don't live in DC but this really sounds bizarre to me.

You can only terminate a lease if tenants break the lease, you intend to re-occupy the property, or you intend to dramatically renovate it (such that it will be uninhabitable). Selling is not actually a reason you can terminate a lease (although the buyer can terminate the lease if they wish to occupy).

If you're coming from a jurisdiction where landlords can do more or less whatever they want, then it's bizarre. For a different perspective, think of DC's landlord-tenant laws as providing a default assumption that people can stay in their homes, even if those homes are rented. DC law has been this way for going on 50 years now, so everyone knows the rules of the road when they become a landlord or tenant.

People often get confused about rent control. If you are not subject to rent control (which, for readers of this board, you very likely will not be because it applies only to owners of more than four rental units), you can raise rent by any reasonable amount as long as it's not done for an illegal purpose. That means, more or less, that you can always keep rent at market rate. Just don't double rent because your tenants refused to vacate.

The DC system for small landlords more or less guarantees them market rate rent that will be paid but does not give them the ability to evict tenants at will as long as they keep up with their rent payments.

OP, you should run the rental comps for your area. Given that rents have increased dramatically all around the DMV, chances are that you will be able to increase your rent to the new market rate. That alone may cause your tenant to want to vacate if the increase is $100+ a month. We are landlords in VA. We almost never increase our rents by that much for tenants we want to keep. For the tenants we want out, up their rent goes!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like you can only terminate a rental if the tenants do something to break the lease or if you actually are going to sell the place. Is that right?

I don't live in DC but this really sounds bizarre to me.

You can only terminate a lease if tenants break the lease, you intend to re-occupy the property, or you intend to dramatically renovate it (such that it will be uninhabitable). Selling is not actually a reason you can terminate a lease (although the buyer can terminate the lease if they wish to occupy).

If you're coming from a jurisdiction where landlords can do more or less whatever they want, then it's bizarre. For a different perspective, think of DC's landlord-tenant laws as providing a default assumption that people can stay in their homes, even if those homes are rented. DC law has been this way for going on 50 years now, so everyone knows the rules of the road when they become a landlord or tenant.

People often get confused about rent control. If you are not subject to rent control (which, for readers of this board, you very likely will not be because it applies only to owners of more than four rental units), you can raise rent by any reasonable amount as long as it's not done for an illegal purpose. That means, more or less, that you can always keep rent at market rate. Just don't double rent because your tenants refused to vacate.

The DC system for small landlords more or less guarantees them market rate rent that will be paid but does not give them the ability to evict tenants at will as long as they keep up with their rent payments.

If you're eligible for a rent control exemption and didn't apply for it, then your place is rent controlled. A lot of dcum folks probably didn't go through the dcra/dhcd/rad process so they should be aware of it. The landlord tenant survival manual developed by Georgetown law school and on the ota website is a good free guide.

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like you can only terminate a rental if the tenants do something to break the lease or if you actually are going to sell the place. Is that right?

I don't live in DC but this really sounds bizarre to me.

You can only terminate a lease if tenants break the lease, you intend to re-occupy the property, or you intend to dramatically renovate it (such that it will be uninhabitable). Selling is not actually a reason you can terminate a lease (although the buyer can terminate the lease if they wish to occupy).

If you're coming from a jurisdiction where landlords can do more or less whatever they want, then it's bizarre. For a different perspective, think of DC's landlord-tenant laws as providing a default assumption that people can stay in their homes, even if those homes are rented. DC law has been this way for going on 50 years now, so everyone knows the rules of the road when they become a landlord or tenant.

People often get confused about rent control. If you are not subject to rent control (which, for readers of this board, you very likely will not be because it applies only to owners of more than four rental units), you can raise rent by any reasonable amount as long as it's not done for an illegal purpose. That means, more or less, that you can always keep rent at market rate. Just don't double rent because your tenants refused to vacate.

The DC system for small landlords more or less guarantees them market rate rent that will be paid but does not give them the ability to evict tenants at will as long as they keep up with their rent payments.

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like you can only terminate a rental if the tenants do something to break the lease or if you actually are going to sell the place. Is that right?

I don't live in DC but this really sounds bizarre to me.

That is not correct. You cannot terminate the lease if you are going to sell the place.

It sounds like you can only terminate a rental if the tenants do something to break the lease or if you actually are going to sell the place. Is that right?

I don't live in DC but this really sounds bizarre to me.

Anonymous wrote:Are you registered as exempt from rent control with the RAD? If not, you are rent controlled.

Not sure where people are getting the it has to be reasonable or CPI rules, if you are not subject to rent control. Cites? Because from what I can see, the cap is only subject to your lease agreement, which probably doesn't specify.

Sometimes people say that as a shortcut for saying you can’t raise the rent to either retaliate against a tenant or to get them to leave.

Anonymous wrote:PP again. My lease (I am the landlord, not in DC) specifically states that the tenant must move out at the end of the lease term; it does not become month-to-month. Have your next lease written to reflect this.

This would be an illegal lease term in DC and would not be enforceable.

Anonymous wrote:Yeah just give 90 day notice that you will not be renewing. If they get nosy, just say it’s nothing personal, but part of the contract. As a landlord, I’ve done this. The tenant was grateful that we gave them a heads up and they were able to buy a house further out, so win-win.

What state are you located in?

-Not the OP

Are you registered as exempt from rent control with the RAD? If not, you are rent controlled.

Not sure where people are getting the it has to be reasonable or CPI rules, if you are not subject to rent control. Cites? Because from what I can see, the cap is only subject to your lease agreement, which probably doesn't specify.

Anonymous wrote:How does one decide to become a landlord being so thoroughly ignorant of basic landlord/tenant law?

Trolly McTrolllngton