State Specific Question About: OKLAHOMA (OK)

I have a tenant who moved out of property owing rent. Towards the end of her tenancy she married. Her husband wasn't in the picture when she moved in so he wasn't on the lease. Is there anyway I can hold both of them legally liable for unpaid rent and damages?

I take that back. I will say that I don't see how. He's not on the lease. But then, if you're married I believe you are considered to be one. Correct? I also know that my leases should have a "together or in severalty" rent clause.

Jeff,

My husband and I had pretty much the same conversation last night as your responses to me. I said since he's not on the lease he isn't liable. My husband brought up that since they're married he may be liable as well.

The lease states "In the event of more than one tenant, each tenant is jointly and severally responsible and liable for all provisions of this agreement. No other persons nor animals may live there without Owners' prior written permission."

They are both employed. She recently got a new job and he's worked for the same company for years. I don't know whose income is greater. My thought was since I don't know where they moved that if I could have them both served at work it might embarrass them enough to make good on their debt without going to court. Plus if necessary, we could get a garnishment for both of their wages.

Kay,

It sounds like you're on top of things. Your lease covers you very well. I wonder how that would work, but I would just go after her. She's a sure thing.

Jeff,

I had the reverse. A single man got married two years into a lease. His new wife was bossy, sometimes paid the rent with her personal check. They one day they moved out. They purchased a condo across the street that was underwater from a bank with a zero down payment. So I knew they could afford to pay their last months rent.

I went after them. The Wife told the judge she wasn't on the lease and therefor took no owning on her husbands debt.

I told the judge these few facts:

1) After a tenant moves in, it is almost impossible to "make" a tenant sign a new lease here in Los Angeles. Since his year lease was up after the 1st year, it became a month-to-month tenancy. As such, after the wife presented me a rent check with her name and that property address on the check, she then declared herself a tenant.

2) She lived in the apartment for over six months and we had many phone calls, text'ed messages and emails about their tenancy. Once working in their unit on a repair, she spoke often for the two of them.

3) She wasn't a roommate. She wasn't a guest. She was a tenant.

Is OK a community property state?

Did he EVER pay ANY rent? (at all)?

You just don't drag people into court. It costs money to serve people. You should always be sure that you are suing the right party. If you sue the wrong person you could very well have to reimburse them for their costs. There might also be other legal remedies available to someone who is falsely sued.

Ken, you can file a small claims case in NY for $20? Here we can include multiple parties on a small claims summons and complaint.

Ken,

It seems that the cost may have gone up since you last filed.

On nycourts.gov I see this:

Filing Fees - Court of Claims

Filing of claim $50

[Court of Claims Act §11-a]

Moshe,

No Oklahoma is no longer a community property state. Yes he did pay rent a couple of times with cash which is how she always paid as well.

Mike (TX)

If you were to ask any Los Angeles eviction attorney, they would tell you that unless you have a contract with a "roommate", if you evict, you will only get possession and NOT a MONEY JUDGEMENT. The rules are very specific.

They also changed the rules about landlords refusing to accept rent from a 3rd party. Before if a landlord accepted rent from a third party, then that person is a tenant. Now if a third party ties to pay a landlord rent, they landlord can make the 3rd party write a paper saying they are paying the rent for the tenant and are NOT LIVING there and agree they are not a tenant.

With 15 city counsel members, each one tries to make tenant groups happy at the expense of landlords.

And in our fewer and fewer eviction courts, we used to have 24 and and now down to 4 courts, there are Judges Pro Tem -- an attorney given a temporary job as the judge. They were put there because they love tenants and dislike the rich sumlords.

Then there's commissioners without a law degree but have worked in the courts for 10, 15 or 20 years an know how to do evictions.

And if you want a real judge, you will have to wait until the end of the day, like 4:30 pm to get a tired judge to hear your case.

Disagree, Robert!

If he paid any rent at all, then he has acknowledged that he is a tenant and therefore is responsible for rent along with the wife. The problem in this case is to prove that he paid rent, since he paid in cash and presumably without any receipt or other paperwork. For confirmation, see the law that you cite above, that in CA, a 3rd party can pay rent, but landlord must be careful to get signed agreement that he is not paying AS A TENANT.

By the way, Commissioners are lawyers in order to first be hired. They serve for, I think, 6 year contract (or more than one term) which allows them to get some good experience. Some of them are pretty good, but I think that judges are better.

I have never had to wait for more than 20 minutes to get a judge. I haven't been to court in years, and things might have gotten worse, but with 10-12 judges in a courthouse, there is usually at least one who is not actively presiding over an in-session courtroom, and can (and will) make time to hear a small claims case.

Moshe, there's no doubt that your very sharp when it comes to these legal issues. But since I still own low income housing, I find myself at the mercy of the courts. Instead of 15 to 20 cases assigned to a court room, it's now 40 to 60 cases. Then they are split into two groups. The uncontested cases and the ones going to trial. Unless the landlord and tenant go into the hallway and try to work out a compromise, then the judge will put your case at the end as punishment.

And if you ask for a real judge, not a commissioner or pretend attorney judge, they will make you wait until a judge is free -- which is after the daily docket -- like 4 PM or later.

So it comes down to knowing what your state / local laws are and how to get a judgement. Maybe contact a lawyer.

Last small claims (less than $3000) I did last year cost $15. Although I didn't win all that I was due, I did get some, and the court fees. I brought the case against both my tenant and the live in girlfriend. Tenant never showed in court, the girlfriend brought a lawyer.

It seems to me that if he is living there and not on a lease, he is a tenant at will. A tenant at will must pay the rent or be evicted.

You can't throw a tenant at will out onto the street without a court order, because legally, he has tenant rights.

Tenant rights means he has a tenant's responsibility t pay the rent.

I'd bill him.

The Courts do not spend most of their tine dealing with small cases like evictions and small claims, where hordes of cases are heard in a day and run like an assembly line. Most cases are larger and often take more than a day for a single case. Judges spend a lot of time in the office reading briefs, doing research, waiting for attorneys to confer. If a small claims party asks for a judge, the request goes to the presiding judge's secretary, who will call around to the various courtrooms asking who is free to handle a small claims hearing. That generally means 5 or 10 minutes, and a judge will be reluctant to turn down the presiding judge's secretary when he knows that the standard of conduct is to make room for these requests when they are made.

Judges punish lawyers when they get too tricky, but I have never been punished or have seen a judge punish any party to a lawsuit for asking for their legitimate rights, and demanding a judge is one of those legitimate rights. Judges know that a request for a judge means that the party is unhappy with what he expects from a commissioner or a pro-tem, and that reflects on every judge in that courthouse.