How to rent a room in my awesome apartment..

July 22, 2010 4:01 AM

I'm renting an apartment in Somerville, MA. My landlord has given me permission to have a roommate. He seems, however, resistant to the idea of putting said potential roommate on the lease (I suppose it's more work for him..?). How should I approach renting out a room in my place?

Should I draw up a sublease for the room between myself and my potential roommate? Should I use a roommate contract? Should I consult a lawyer in MA?

I've never done this before and I'm unsure of what is the best possible approach. While I trust my potential roommate, I think it's good policy to have SOME sort of written contract between us not only to clarify responsibilities and rights (on both ends), but also to ensure she doesn't violate the terms of MY lease with the property owner (since the landlord doesn't want to add her to the lease).

Is this a situation that people encounter often? Is there some standard way of dealing with it? Or is this whole thing a horrible idea? Should I try to insist that she be put on my original lease?

YANAL. YANML.

Thanks!

posted by LittleKnitting to Law & Government (11 answers total)

Not only am I NAL and NYL, I'm not even an American so the laws I'm familiar with as a renter are completely irrelevant. But, the first thing that springs to mind with this is the question of whether you are protected as far as bond and other legal on-the-hook things goes if your notional new roomie turns out to be a complete deadbeat. Whatever you do, make sure you personally do not carry sole responsibility with the landlord for what happens in/to the house.
posted by russm at 4:27 AM on July 22, 2010

I'd be a little suspicious if I were considering being your roommate and you told me that the landlord didn't want me on the lease.
posted by madcaptenor at 5:08 AM on July 22, 2010

Response by poster: madcaptenor, I feel the same way about it. I don't like the situation at all. I'm just trying to figure out what the best possible solution is here.
posted by LittleKnitting at 5:27 AM on July 22, 2010

Best answer: I've been a landlord, and I'd decline to alter an existing lease, because there's nothing in it for me, except annoyance. I was not a megacorp, just a person with a multi-family house.

Get a roommate, get a deposit from the roommate, sign a reasonable renter's agreement. Document the condition of their room, and the house, and expect the roomie to be a full partner in the upkeep, bills, etc.

Whatever you have in your area for Legal Aid will have a tenant-landlord handbook. It will be really useful to read.
posted by theora55 at 6:33 AM on July 22, 2010

It is more work for a landlord to have more than one person on the lease. For example, in such situations each renter usually assumes that they are only responsible for their share of the rent. So the landlord gets one check on the 1st of the month and the second check doesn't show up until the 5th. Or the 8th. Etc.

It's much easier for the landlord to just deal with one person.
posted by alms at 6:48 AM on July 22, 2010

Best answer: the question of whether you are protected as far as bond and other legal on-the-hook things goes if your notional new roomie turns out to be a complete deadbeat. Whatever you do, make sure you personally do not carry sole responsibility with the landlord for what happens in/to the house.

As I understand it, having the other roomate on the lease won't really help with this, because most leases are written so that you are "jointly and severally" liable for the rent. If the roomate is a deadbeat and you're not, they'll just go after your money anyways, even if he is on the lease and therefore "responsible" for it.

It seems to me that the one who's protected by being on the lease is primarily the roommate, not you.
posted by Jahaza at 6:49 AM on July 22, 2010

Jahaza - since LittleKnitting is (presumably) covering the entire rent right now, having a roomie skip out a month's rent short would suck but not be any worse than the current situation... I was thinking more of bond and cost of repairs for damage to the house... I didn't advocate specifically getting someone on the lease, just having more than a handshake agreement with someone who could potentially damage the place and then take a hike leaving LittleKnitting on the hook for repairs...
posted by russm at 7:30 AM on July 22, 2010

Best answer: Sublets are often informal. In a lot of places you don't need a signed document; an oral agreement is enough. It's not a bad idea to write up a short document just in case, though. It can be really simple: person X is subletting room Y from person Z. All conditions in the attached lease must be followed by the subtenant (e.g. regarding pets, upkeep, noise). Rent is $X, and the following utilities are included/not included. Terms are month to month, or a fixed length. Then attach a copy of your lease.

It is quite common for shared housing that one tenant looks after the lease and the others sublet. One of the main reasons this is beneficial is that roommates can have high turnover and it's a lot easier to maintain continuity (and less work) with only one principle tenant.
posted by PercussivePaul at 8:45 AM on July 22, 2010

I live in a college town. Landlords here who don't want people on leases are trying to circumvent a local regulation about how many unrelated people are allowed to occupy dwellings. The regulation is intended to keep quiet family neighborhoods from being overrun by a single college party house that a dozen people are living in. If there's any such regulation where you are, your landlord may be trying to skirt the law. This would not be a good sign.
posted by donnagirl at 10:14 AM on July 22, 2010

I would describe this as a typical landlord response. They want one rent check, and they gain nothing by changing the lease. I've had a zillion roommates and never added any of them to the lease.

I usually sign a quick agreement with the roommate about the rent payment schedule and apartment rules, the enforceability of which I've never had to test, thankfully. But if they're not on the lease, it's your problem to kick them out if they're behind on the rent. This can be easy or hard... I don't know the tenant laws in MA that well.
posted by zvs at 2:06 PM on July 22, 2010

Response by poster: Thanks for the great answers, everyone! This has been a HUGE help!
posted by LittleKnitting at 9:07 AM on July 23, 2010