Hello:

The previous antics notwithstanding, I STILL want to know the law.

I understand that there is a difference between someone who rents a room in someone’s house and one who rents an apartment that may be part of someone’s house.

Are there states that treat them as tenants? Which ones? Cite your source, please. Are there states that treat them as something else? Which ones? Cite your source, please.

Does a person who rents a room or rooms, in their own house, need a certificate of occupancy? Is that the same in every state? Cite your source, please.

In states or cities that don’t address the issue directly, do the zoning laws cover it? Please, cite your source.

It doesn’t do me any good if I just hear a yes or a no. I want to know where I can read it too.

excon

Hi excon!

I can't respond to all of your questions but I can tell you that, in NJ, the question of whether a certificate of occupancy is required for renting an apartment or even a room is determined at the municipal level. Some towns require a CO each time a new tenant moves in. Other towns require a CO only upon completion of initial construction and never again. The prospective landlord needs to contact the town's office of Code Compliance to find out what applies to their property.

I realize that this is just for NJ but I get the impression that the need for a CO would be determined at the municipal level in other states as well.

All of the above may vary from state to state, as there is no National Landlord-Tenant Code. This is why questions like this are so difficult.

Here we read, from an apparently reputable source, "The legal distinction between a tenant and a roomer means that a tenant, who possesses and controls the space he rents, has procedural rights under the Landlord and Tenant Act that a roomer technically does not have. In order to remove a tenant from a rented space, the owner must have a rental license, must give written notice required by the lease or by law, and must file an eviction complaint in Landlord and Tenant Court. Technically, a roomer is not entitled to these procedural protections. He may stay only as long as he has the permission of the homeowner."

... BUT even this is not always true. In Ohio, for example, the law defines the Tenant as one entitled by the agreement to occupy and use the Residential Premisesfully true in all cases. In Ohio, for example, a "roomer" IS subject to Landlord-Tenant law.

Typically, landlord-tenant laws of each state define the parties that are subject to it - and further define what type(s) of "premises" are excluded.

I know it's not the answer you're looking for, but since each state varies, the only way to give you what you want is to root through them to address each issue. A huge undertaking I'm sure you can see :o

PS. In short, almost never can blanket statements be made about landlords or tenants or their rights or responsibilities. The applicable state law must be consulted.

Black's Law Dictionary defines "lodger" as an occupant who has mere use without actual or exclusive possession; a tenant of part of another's house; one who for the time being has his home at his lodging place; one who inhabits a portion
Of a house of which another has general possession and custody; one who lives at board or in a hired room.
This definition has two distinct components. First, a lodger is one who "inhabits" a portion of a house of another who has general possession and control. Black's Law Dictionary defines "habitancy" as that fixed place of abode to which a person intends to return habitually when absent. It is a settled dwelling in a given place. Therefore, a lodger is one who has a fixed place of abode that he intends to return to habitually but does not have general possession or control of this place. Second, the concept of a contractual relationship normally exists between lodger and the owner/operator/

In Santa Cruz CAlifornia; Note the law is only applicable to a single lodger owner occupied home.

TENANT AND LANDLORD INFORMATION

EVICTION OF TENANTS RESIDING WITH OWNER
Landlords who rent just one room in their homes are protected by this law in the event than an eviction becomes necessary. This law applies only to an owner occupied home where no more than one lodger/tenant lives. This law does not apply unless the landlord actually owns the property (he/she cannot be renting it from someone else). It also does not apply if the owner rents out to more than one tenant.
Civil Code section 1946.5(a) (see below) requires that the landlord (property owner) give the tenant a standard three or thirty day notice in writing and served properly (see Instructions For Serving 3-Day and 30-Day Notices). If the lodger/tenant does not move out at the end of the notice period, the landlord/property owner may call law enforcement to assist. The lodger/tenant's removal from the property is pursuant to Penal Code 602.3 (see below). The owner may make a citizen's arrest.

California Civil Code Section 1946.5
(a) The hiring of a room by a lodger on a periodic basis within a dwelling unit occupied by the owner may be terminated by either party giving written notice to the other of his or her intention to terminate the hiring, at least as long before the expiration of the term of the hiring as specified in Section 1946. The notice shall be given in a manner prescribed in Section 1162 of the Code of Civil Procedure or by certified or registered mail, restricted delivery, to the other party, with a return receipt requested.
(b) Upon expiration of the notice period provided in the notice of termination given pursuant to subdivision (a), any right of the lodger to remain in the dwelling unit or any part thereof is terminated by operation of law. The lodger's removal from the premises may thereafter be effected pursuant to the provisions of Section 602.3 of the Penal Code or other applicable provisions of law.
(c) As used in this section, "lodger" means a person contracting with the owner of a dwelling unit for a room or room and board within the dwelling unit personally occupied by the owner, where the owner retains a right of access to all areas of the dwelling unit occupied by the lodger and has overall control of the dwelling unit.
(d) This section applies only to owner-occupied dwellings where a single lodger resides. Nothing in this section shall be construed to determine or affect in any way the rights of persons residing as lodgers in an owner-occupied dwelling where more than one lodger resides.
California Penal Section 602.3
(a) A lodger who is subject to Section 1946.5 of the Civil Code and who remains on the premises of an owner-occupied dwelling unit after receipt of a notice terminating the hiring, and expiration of the notice period, provided in Section 1946.5 of the Civil Code is guilty of an infraction and may, pursuant to Section 837, be arrested for the offense by the owner, or in the event the owner is represented by a court-appointed conservator, executor, or administrator, by the owner's representative. Notwithstanding Section 853.5, the requirement of that section for release upon a written promise to appear shall not preclude an assisting peace officer from removing the person from the owner-occupied dwelling unit.
(b) The removal of a lodger from a dwelling unit by the owner pursuant to subdivision (a) is not a forcible entry under the provisions of Section 1159 of the Code of Civil Procedure and shall not be a basis for civil liability under that section.
(c) Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 1980) of Title 5 of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code applies to any personal property of the lodger which remains on the premises following the lodger's removal from the premises pursuant to this section. (d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the owner' s right to have a lodger removed under other provisions of law.
(e) Except as provided in subdivision (b), nothing in this section shall be construed to limit or affect in any way any cause of action an owner or lodger may have for damages for any breach of the contract of the parties respecting the lodging.
(f) This section applies only to owner-occupied dwellings where a single lodger resides. Nothing in this section shall be construed to determine or affect in any way the rights of persons residing as lodgers in an owner-occupied dwelling where more than one lodger resides.



http://sccounty01.co.santa-cruz.ca.u...r_occupied.asp

1. Remember that definitions can vary from state to state... and that the laws will vary from state to state as to the rights and responsibilities of all parties to a residential dwelling or part of dwelling.

2. Thank you for supplying the applicable Code for California.

In most states, COs are only issued one time... in states with rent control/stabliization or other onerous L-T laws, a CO may mean something else and be used as "revenue enhancement". In most states, a CO, as defined by the Uniform Housing Code, is only issued 1 time - at the completition of the building as evidence it is cleared for occupancy.

Hello Cvill:

Glad you're being civil. I agree. A Certificate of Occupancy is issued one time and it means that the building has been completed and is fit for occupancy.

That would matter only if the homeowner added to, or remodeled his home to accommodate tenants. Indeed, I see now, that simply having a CO doesn't address the issue of whether the homeowner can legally rent rooms.

So, please disregard my question about CO's.

excon

OP is using room renting as a "stop gap" while she gets the home sold - it is not the reason she purchase the home and OP has not indicated she made any improvements to the home that would necessitate a CO or PERMIT for rennovations of any kind.

Roomers or lodgers in a home where the property owner resides are not covered by landlord-tenant laws... which is why finding information on this situation is a tail-chasing effort since it does not exist.

Most states allow the property owner to EJECT non-paying residents without any of the regular L-T niceities - indeed, local police often escort the offending deliquent lodger from the property.

If you want proof in your state, search under "innkeeper" laws as police eject under the "defrauding an innkeeper" statutes in most jurisdictions... municipalities charge transient taxes and there was a trade off with innkeepers when these were enacted which gives these innkeepers perks like getting rid of lodgers and keeping any belongings until their bill is paid... a lodger paying by the week or month may well fall under these rules and property owner perks.

Ditto Cville above post.

Nothing is absolute. In addition to requiring a CO during any major construction/alteration of a specific property, CO's can also be required whenever the building is sold. Many counties now look to the certificate of occupancy as a revenue generating tool and are requiring that homeowners intending to rent or have someone other than the family member occupy their property (particularly multiplex units) to apply and pay a fee for the privilege.