My landlord's girlfriend moved in 3 weeks after I moved into a 6 month lease. He initially said she would not be living here (he live on the top floor, and I and another renter live on the bottom floor).
Each month, I asked for the utilities breakdown, and he would say he was getting it together. Eventually I thought he would charge for utilities to compensate for his loud annoying girlfriend living there without a job. At the beginning of the 6th and final month of the lease he left the utilities breakdown on the table detailing what I owed for 5 MONTHS! Of utilities. I was outraged by the lump sum allotment, but further outraged that the utilities were only divided by three, and did not account for his girlfriend.
When I addressed the situation he said "she is not technically a resident" I guess because she hadn't signed an agreement. I reviewed my lease and it clearly states any person staying in the rental for more than 10 days over a 6 month period is considered a resident. Furthermore it states that I agree to pay an equal share of utilities based on OCCUPANCY, which she counts as since she has lived here 5 months rent free.
I am in the process of resolving this, I believe I have a good case for the utilities, does anyone have anything else to help bolster my argument? Do I have any recourse to argue that my rent should be lower or receive a portion back since she lives there.
Not to mention, they both fight and drink, they are loud losers, they toned it down a little after I told them their fighting woke me up 4 times a week, but they are still obnoxiously loud.
Thankfully my lease is up, but I have held off paying my last months rent because I don't trust him to return my security deposit.

Does anyone have any advice?

You are sharing the living unit with your landlord and you have a written lease? That is peculiar. Normally, a lease provides for exclusive occupancy of the unit.

I guess it depends on exactly what the lease says about utilities. Can you copy the pertinent language into your response please? And how does it define "occupancy"?

Also, of course, it may help if you will tell us which state or country you are in.

Figure out what you think your share will be and pay that. Let them take you to court for the balance. If they try to take it out of your deposit, you can then take them to court.

I think you do have a good case.

You are in a gray area of defining who or who isn't an occupant of the whole house according to the terms of your lease. I suspect that he doesn't separate living quarters because it would be an illegal apartment.
But of course you are right that it isn't 'fair' regardless of what he can get away with legally.
I would not pay this month's rent, and give notice, and pay something less than 1/3 utilities. Multiply the amount he says you owe by 3 and divide by 4.
(By law you can't use your security deposit as last month's rent. So I shouldn't have said that.)

Thank you for your replies,

I checked NJ tenancy rights/laws, and it stipulates that if the property owner fails to notify in writing or include on the lease what bank the security deposit is held in then the tenant is within his rights to elect to use the deposit for rent, by providing a letter to that effect.

See http://www.lsnj.org/pdfs/tenantsrightslsnjorg.pdf page 12 security deposit

This is the letter I just sent

Jason,
This is what's up.

You have your rights as a lessor, and it is your right to exercise them.

I want to know what my rights as a tenant are, so I'm doing a little research and waiting on advice from a friend who is a real estate lawyer. I am not doing this out of malice or for the sake of argument, I am only looking out for my best interests(personal differences aside), as you do for your own, and am searching for a fair and balanced resolution.

As I expressed I feel that having your girlfriend move in changes our living arrangement, and I feel she should be liable for, at minimum, a share of the utilities. As such, I am checking to see if this alteration affects our legal agreement in any way, and what statutes exist dealing with our situation. Your stance as you presented it to me is that Kristin isn't technically a resident and that the lease agreement is between the three of us. I contend otherwise. The agreement is between 3 people, adding a fourth should, without saying, alter the arrangement. Were I notified prior to her moving in in writing and the lease amended, to deal with the subsequent changes in living arrangement and what each resident was liable for, then there would be no questions. However this matter was not addressed or dealt with at the time, and when I addressed it recently you dismissed the issue, so I must address it now.
Per the lease agreement you furnished for me to sign, under article 6: Occupants, it stipulates that any person "staying in the rental for more 7 consecutive days, or a total of 10 days in any 6 month period, is considered a RESIDENT" Although the verbiage is directed towards guests of lessees, it for all intents and purposes gives us a clear definition of a resident within the terms of the agreement, a definition that Kristin falls well within.
Furthermore, in article 5: Utilities: It says "Resident agrees to pay equal share of all utilities...based on OCCUPANCY of the premises." Thus based solely on the lease agreement, the burden of her share of expenses may not fall on myself or Dan.

I am not a confrontational person, and perhaps I was too passive with regards to our differences and disagreements. I was bothered by the fact that Kristin moved in without notice. I was further perturbed when you presented the utilities break down for five months at the same time; I did not feel this was reasonable. I requested the amounts monthly. After months of not receiving any kind of breakdown I was lulled into thinking you were making a fair/gentlemanly gesture and were waiving our share of utilities to offset Kristin living here.
These things being said, I don't feel comfortable giving you another $950 rent + $750 utilities, on top of the $1450 security deposit in your possession that is not guaranteed to be returned to me.

To date my options are as follows:

A). Pay all monies demanded, and allow my security deposit to be withheld if you chose to do so. I am not in favor of this option.

B). Withhold this months rent and notify you in writing that I elect to use my security deposit for rent (per my right by NJ tenancy law). Thereby preventing further loss of funds, while fulfilling the terms of our agreement. (According to NJ Tenant rights manual I may do this). And request that you revisit, at minimum, the division of utilities I think this option would be close fair. I have a written letter prepared to this effect, to notify of my intent, if I intend to do so. If I present the letter to you, rent would not be considered late.

C). Seek a rent abatement by NJ Tenancy rights, by making a case that changes in living arrangement, or discrepancy in room sizes, or house occupancy, warrant a lowered rent, or that rent should be equally divided. A judge may rule that rent/utilities must be retroactively reduced, in which case I would have overpaid, and would be owed restitution. Like I said I am not confrontational, and getting litigious, or drawing out this process of moving out does not hold much appeal for me.
Additionally I came to find Dan pays 50 dollars less for a larger room ($300 over 6 months), you led me to believe both rooms were the same price. The fact that I am paying more for less space bothers me (especially since I barely use common areas). If I sought a rent abatement the price per square foot of Dan's room vs my room might be a used as a standard, without out regard to total house occupancy. The difference in rent almost covers what I "owe" for utilities.

I understand people rent out rooms to subsidize their mortgage and expenses, however I do not feel comfortable subsidizing your live-in jobless,girlfriends existence, or paying more for lesser amenities. To my understanding she is not working and is now going to school, which makes me feel like I'm paying for her to continue her education and waiting for her to finish her laundry, for which she does not pay. I understand a renter's goal is to get as much as you can from who you can get it from. As a consumer it is my responsibility to investigate and protect my interests, and it is your right to do the same for your own.

I have resorted to email, because when I have addressed issues in the past, you have dismissed or ignored the issue while raising your voice or citing unrelated issues, and creating an uncomfortable atmosphere for discussion. I would like you to respond to these issues in writing, in a calm and rational manner, relating only to the matters at hand.

Please do not misconstrue this as a personal attack or dereliction of duties, this is purely a business transaction, I only want what is fair, all else aside.

Thank you for the opportunity to live in your home, and abiding my residence. I wish you health, wealth, and happiness.

Let this serve additionally as written notice of my 30 day notice of intention to vacate premises. I mentioned it last week, but just in case you did not remember.

Sounds good to me.
Your deposit is just about a month's rent plus 1/4 utilities.
(I wonder if he is declaring the income from all these rents on his taxes?)

Sounds good to me.
Your deposit is just about a month's rent plus 1/4 utilities.
(I wonder if he is declaring the income from all these rents on his taxes?)

Thanks.
How's my wording?

I'm awaiting his response, should be fun, he's a blow hard.

Good letter.

Although clearly, in my opion, a letter transmitted by e-mail meets the "written" requirement, who knows, some judge may disagree. To be safe about the 30-day notice, print the letter out and hand it to him.

If I understand you this is an owner occupied private home with one other unit that is being shared. If so, the law you cite doesn't apply and since you didn't wrote a letter within 39 days of moving in, I believe you lost your window of opportunity.

Check this with your real estate attorney friend. I'm not saying to not proceed with your stated course of action, but be aware that the law you are citing may not support your use of it.

Thanks again for responses.
The law Im citing can be found on page 12 of the NJ tenancy rights http://www.lsnj.org/pdfs/tenantsrightslsnjorg.pdf at this link,
It states that if the landlord does not notify the resident in writing which bank the deposit in , then the tenant has the right to elect to use it for rent.

Are you saying that because I didn't write the letter 30 days until my moveout date that I lost my window? Or that I will be resposible for prorated rent for the days into the coming month?
Yes it is an owner occupied home, with two renters, and a freeloading girlfriend with an IQ about as high as her height in inches.

I will print the letter to cover my bases, thanks!

I spoke with my landlord last night, and he insists that the occupancy definition is solely in reference to guests of renters. I contend that as a corollary by defining a an occupant he has reinforced the definition of occupancy and since the utilities must be shared equally according to occupancy, they must use the definition set out by the agreement and not by the number he chooses. Any thoughts?

It could be that the lease doesn't define the term with respect to the lessor's guests, but then a court would have to interpret the lease to acertain how the shared cost of utiltities is intended to work if the LL has guests. In other words, if the document doesn't define it, one has to use a common-sense approach. Withouit reading the lease, I suspect that a court would rule in your favor.

Are you saying that because I didnt write the letter 30 days until my moveout date that I lost my window? Or that I will be resposible for prorated rent for the days into the coming month?
Yes it is an owner occupied home, with two renters, and a freeloading girlfriend with an IQ about as high as her height in inches.


I'm saying that the law you are citing does not apply to an owner occupied dwelling with 2 or less units. But that law could be made applicable if the renter sends a letter within 30 days of giving the deposit stating that it is applicable. You didn't do that from what I gather. So you may have lost that ability. This is the actual text of the law:

46:8-26. Application of act
The provisions of this act shall apply to all rental premises or units used for dwelling purposes except owner-occupied premises with not more than two rental units where the tenant has failed to provide 30 days written notice to the landlord invoking the provisions of this act.

The thing that is unclear here is what the 30 day period is. It could be 30 days prior to the period where you want to the deposit to be used. In which case you are good. Or it could be 30 days from move in. I'll admit I'm not sure, it could go either way.

In terms of your definition of occupancy, I think a court will side with you.