Check out some similar questions!

darthsinister · May 13, 2009, 05:46 PM

I live in a 6 apartment building that was just taken over by a new owner.The mortgade co. had forclosed on the previous owner. 3 of the apartments have pets and have had them for years. The new owners said we have to get rid of them within 30 days. Or face eviction. Is this legal or do we have the right to keep our pets? We live in Ct.

Fr_Chuck · May 13, 2009, 05:51 PM

Since it foreclosed, it would void all lease. So yes with a 30 day notice they can change the rules.

ScottGem · May 13, 2009, 05:51 PM

Depends on the terms of your lease. If the lease allows or does not prohibit pets, then you can't be forced to get rid of them until your lease expires. The new owner is required to honor the terms of existing leases. However, if you are on a month to month lease, then the lease exires in 30 days.

I would also suggest that the 3 pet owners band together to consult a Real Estate attorney. There MAY be something in CT law that requires the grandfathering of existing pets.

ScottGem · May 13, 2009, 05:53 PM

I'm not sure that the voiding of a lease due to foreclosure applies to an apartment building, which a 6 unt buliding would qualify as.

ballengerb1 · May 13, 2009, 06:12 PM

After reading both posters I am on the fence with this. A home lease foreclosure does void out the lease but an apartment building is not within my experience. Can't wait for this to pan out.

LisaB4657 · May 13, 2009, 07:02 PM

Apartment buildings are usually financed commercially. That means that the lender will require an Assignment of Rents and Leases to be signed as part of the financing. That documents says that in the event of a default by the owner all rents and leases are assigned to the lender and the lender takes over as the landlord, collecting the rent and applying it to the loan.

If the leases were assigned to the lender then the lender must honor them. If the lender then sells the property to someone else then the new owner must honor them.

ballengerb1 · May 14, 2009, 01:39 PM

So there you have it, your pets should be able to stay, maybe the new owner was pulling a bluff or just did not know.

ScottGem · May 14, 2009, 01:47 PM

Originally Posted by ballengerb1

So there you have it, your pets should be able to stay, maybe the new owner was pulling a bluff or just did not know.

Not quite. They can stay ONLY until the lease expires for each unit. Once the lease expires, the landlord can choose to not renew it if they don't get rid of the pet.

ballengerb1 · May 14, 2009, 01:53 PM

True but the original question was about them being evicted which can't be done for having a pet after 30 days. A new lease can say pretty much whatever the newer owner wants; no smoking, no pets, etc...

ScottGem · May 14, 2009, 01:56 PM

Originally Posted by ballengerb1

True but the original question was about them being evicted which can't be done for having a pet after 30 days.

True, but ;) it would seem that many tenants have been there for a while and it is likely they are on a month to month basis.

ballengerb1 · May 14, 2009, 02:00 PM

You may be correct, I reread the post and don't see any clarification one way or another about a lease or month to month tenants. With no lease then a 30 day notice is all that is required to change the terms of a month to month tenant. If darth would come back and clarify that for us it would be nice but darth is the only one not responding.

darthsinister · May 14, 2009, 03:17 PM

The original lease didn't say anything about pets one way or the other. One of the tenants with a small dog has been there over 20 years.
The old landlord didn't have me sign a new lease this year but he lost the building in Jan. and my lease would have been up in March.

ScottGem · May 14, 2009, 03:49 PM

Well there is your answer. The landlord cannot make these changes until the lease expires. Since a month to month lease expires each month, he can require a change.

You can require that he issue a new lease stating no pets. But he will do that.

So your only hope, is to see if CT law has a grandfather clause in these situations as I said earlier

AK lawyer · May 16, 2009, 09:53 AM

One must assume that the OP has a lease, instead of a month-to-month tenancy. Otherwise it's a non-issue and the LL can kick out with 30 day notice (for any or no reason, basically).

ballengerb1 · May 17, 2009, 06:39 PM

We never assume anything here. The closest we get to assuming is we assume the OP did not know the answer either way, with or without a lease. We would eventually get to that part and explain it to the OP.