Our Lanlords recently sent an eviction notice (letter form) stating that our authorized occupant must leave the premises in 3 days... We were advised by an attorney however that the lanlords needed a court order to evict him... When they showed up 3 days later to enforce his eviction we all stated to the lanlords that they were to present a court order of eviction first.. Now They are claiming they are now not only evicting him but us (the tenants on the lease) as well for non compliance... Is this legal? Can they evict us even though we can not physically force our authorized occupant to leave? We have stayed mutual an have not told our authorized occupant to stay either... We are only trying to do what's legal... We were all under the presumption that anyone who is a legal resident anywhere is to be given at least 30 days to vacate the premises... The lanlords are claiming they do not have to give our authorized occupant 30 days because he has no rights under the lease... Please Please Please HELP!! I need advice... Thank you in advance for any suggestions...

Heart, Andrea

Let me see, you are allowing someone to live in the apartment, the owner told you to get rid of them, and you refused, they sent notice ( which they are required to do prior to filing in court) since this person is staying there with YOUR permission against the consent of the landlord, and you have refused to obey with his wishes to remove this person,

Yep I would say he will evict all of you now. Hope your guest was worth
It.

Your "authorised occupant has no rights under the lease since they did not sign it, they are your guest not a resident ( you are trying to use a lot of fancy words to make them sound like they have more legal status

Hello D:

I'm going to disagree with my friend, the Padre.

The landlord can't tell you who you can have as guests. I don't know what you mean "authorized occupant". There is no such person in the law. According to the law, he's either a tenant, a guest or a trespasser.

I suggest you think he's a guest (legally), and the landlord thinks he's a tenant, because he can't evict a guest. But, if he's going to evict anyone, he has to do it in court. Plus, he can't pick which tenant he evicts.

Can he evict ALL of you?? Depends on how your lease is written, and how one determines who is a tenant and who is a (authorized occupant) guest. I can't tell without a whole lot more information. However, my guess is, he can't. If he ever does get his legal act together, tell the judge, and you may very well win.

WHAT you'll win, I don't know. You get to stay. Big deal. Who wants to stay with a landlord who is going to cause you trouble every step of the way. At least, should you win (and I think you would), you can look for new lodgings at your leisure.

excon

I think both excon and Chuck have points here. It depends on how your lease was written. The lease could have been written to specify that the premises can only be occupied by immediate family. Or, maybe you are roommates and are allowing a third person to live there.

excon is right that a landlord can't tell you who you can have as a guest, but there are reasonability guidelines to when a guest becomes an occupant.

Then, if the lease has provisions about the number and nature of the occupants, the landlords were acting within their rights. I'm curious as to whether your attorney reviewed the lease before giving you the advice they did. And why you come to us now and not back to the attorney.

I have the feeling that the landlord was proceeding with a legal eviction. I have the suspicion that they know they have the lease behind them. Prior to getting a court order, they have to give a 3 day notice. You made it harder on them, violating the lease by having an unauthorized occupant, which gives them grounds to evict all of you.

Your only hope here is being able to convince a judge that this person was a guest, not an occupant.

Our Lanlords recently sent an eviction notice (letter form) stating that our authorized occupant must leave the premises in 3 days... We were advised by an attorney however that the lanlords needed a court order to evict him... When they showed up 3 days later to enforce his eviction we all stated to the lanlords that they were to present a court order of eviction first.. Now They are claiming they are now not only evicting him but us (the tenants on the lease) as well for non compliance... Is this legal?? Can they evict us even though we can not physically force our authorized occupant to leave?? We have stayed mutual an have not told our authorized occupant to stay either... We are only trying to do whats legal... We were all under the presumption that anyone who is a legal resident anywhere is to be given at least 30 days to vacate the premises... The lanlords are claiming they do not have to give our authorized occupant 30 days because he has no rights under the lease... Please Please Please HELP!!!! I need advice.... Thank you in advance for any suggestions......

Heart, Andrea
Landlords can give you a 21/30 notice to remove occupany or your tenancy is terminated.

This is the legal process in VA and it is called an unlawful detainer.

I feel that chuck was very harsh but maybe because I have not been clear on what I meant by "authorized occupant".. On our lease my brother in law IS listed as "other occupant" (otherwise known as authorized occupant in the Va Lanlord-Tenant Act) along with our daughter who is also listed . Lanlords were completely aware that he would be living in the house with us from day one of our lease. Now they no longer want him in the house claiming he has violated the lease agreement and they have made numerous accusations that are simply not true.. I have read the lanlord -tenant act of virginia in its entirety and find nothing on the eviction of "other occupants".. The attorney we consulted with is on vacation for the next week but we will be retaining an attorney when there is confirmation that our lanlords are actually going to pursue this matter... Lanlords claiming to be sending us a letter from their attorney tomorrow. We believe our landlords have violated our lease agreement in many ways, first being that they have listed the property for rent with an available date of June 1st even though our lease does not end until Nov. 1st... This was done prior to any threat of evictions... The house is also listed for sale with a for sale sign in the yard and a lockbox on the door when our lease clearly states that the house was not to be listed for sale until summer 2007 (not spring). Lanlords claiming we consented to this change when we never did. Then they sent a letter telling us we were to remove our ashtrays from the front porch even though in the lease they asked that we purchase ashtrays for proper exstinguishing of ciggarrettes... In the same letter they tell us we are not allowed to burn candles in the house, another thing that is not in our lease agreement... We feel they do not have the right to just change things and tell us how to live... I just need some advice to clear my mind until we seek proffessional advice.. Im a nervous reck and just want to come to an amicable agreement with them to end our lease in peace and be free of each other... Im a very peacful and loving person and mean to do no harm to anyone.. Im saddened that we have tried to be a blessing in their lives by paying 6 months in advance rent which equaled $12,000 along with an additional $5,000 deposit, only to feel harassed by them and accused of several things.. It hurts my heart that they have not recognized the goodness in us and that we have done almost everything theve asked except agree to evict our other occupant without a court order... Thanks in advance for anymore advice!

Heart, Andrea

First, I don't think Chuck was harsh based on the info you originally gave us. But your new info does change things. If your bro-in-law was listed on the lease, then the landlords have to provide grounds for evicting him. How did he, allegedly break the lease?

But the bottom line here is you have to move. They want you out and it would be better to get out then try to stay. So you need to start looking for a place NOW! If this comes to court you go into court with a defense against their claims against you and your bro-in-law. You can counter sue for their lease violations, but those are no defense against any violations you might have. It would be bood if you can go into court and tell the judge that you have found a place but need until x date to move.

Chuck came across harsh in my eyes by using statements like "was your guest worth it" and "your just using fancy words". It just surprised me coming from a man of god and all... But everyone has a right to their opinion and that's why I'm here, to seek opinions.. I appreciate all the answers I received because even if they have not been what I expected, It still made me research other things, in turn causing me to learn much more than I already know... Scott, Im not sure what exactly you were trying to say in your last response other than "MOVE".. You lost me at the counter sue part... Were you trying to say I don't have a legitament reason to counter sue? Or that maybe compared to their supposed claims of violations we would not win? As you can see I'm just confused.. But again I appreciate the answer anyway! Everything is helpful at this point. I will say I am not going to move until I have been able to dispute their allegations in court.. We have only lived here for 5 months paying a total of 17,000 dollars and a 12month lease agreement. They have no reason to evict us.. Our lanlords are using completely made up reasons to evict my brother in law claiming there has been smoking in the house... First came a written notice only 1 month after we moved in... We responded by saying there has absolutely not been any smoking in this house.. Our daughter has very bad asthma and we have over $1,000 in brand name air purifiers for this reason.. Why on earth would we smoke in the house? Then the lanlord came into the house for some made up reason and claimed yet again the basement where my brother in law lives, smelled like smoke again... I believe The lanlords have never liked my brother in law and have come up with this reason to get rid of him... My brother in law is gay and I believe they have a problem with this... However there is no way to prove this to be true.. Also isn't our $5,000 deposit for the specific reason of any supposed damages?? So why are they whining during our lease agreement if they can always pursue supposed damage costs at the end of our lease? Bottom line is that we did exactly what the attorney told us to do.. Ask for a court order... We will just be seeing them in court I guess...

Thanks again

No, I'm not saying you don't have a legitimate reason to countersue, I'm saying that the landlords violations of the lease are not justifications for you to violate the lease so they shouldn't be used as a defense. If someone slashes the tires on your car, it doesn't justify you to smash his windshield. So, because the landlord violated terms of the lease, doesn't allow you to violate other terms. This means his violations can't be used as a defense for your violations. But it would allow you to countersue.

I know you don't want to move, but an unhappy landlord can make your life very uncomfortable, even without violating the lease. That's why I recommend that you make arrangements to move. If you go to court and you lose (not saying you will, but it's a possibility), then it will be harder to find a place. So I don't think you should wait.