Roommate Release

Here we go again!!! My 2nd roommate release request this year. Last year I had about 4. I only have 48 units, so I think that is pretty high.

In almost every case, the roommate remaining can't afford the apartment alone and they are either evicted or break the lease.

I tried a new option on the last one that didn't work very well. So I'm looking at my requirements to be released again.

What system works best for you?

I have decided to try this:

When I get a notice that someone is moving out and wants to be released, I will require the remaining roommate to submit a new application with proof of income. If their income does not meet the minimum, I will not release the roommate from liability.

I thought about just not doing releases at all. It has been that bad, financially, for us.

Any suggestions?

This is exactly the route we take. If the remaining lease holder can prove their income meets the requirements to pay the rent then we will approve the request. Otherwise they are equally responsible through the remainder of the lease.

This is exactly WHY you want proof at the time of application that EACH applicant on the lease can meet the income requirement without the other. In order to avoid fair housing issues; you need to do this not only for roommates, but also married couples (avoiding perceived issues with marital status).

The issue with this is if you are an affordable property and you do consider both incomes; it may disqualify the household for exceeding the maximum income level.

I suppose I live in the real world, the one full of rainbows and color and not just black and white (and no pun intended if you are reading too much into that.) If I am sitting in a Leasing Office and a married couple comes in to apply for an apartment and one spouse is working and the other is not, then, am I understanding this correctly, Johnny, they DON'T qualify because one spouse cannot prove income sufficient should suddenly they split up? Does this also mean that should one or another of a working couple (or not) lose his job then you evict them because one person goes on Unemployment? Could you clarify your position? I would like to understand this. It should not make a difference if this is a couple in a Section 8, Section 42, or any income restricted community or a full onventional community. Also, what do you mean by "perceived issues"?

When you work in property management, you can do things a certain way for years and find that it works pretty well. Then you hit some kind of new issue. For some communities it was when the housing market tanked and people began coming into the apartment communities with bankruptcies and foreclosures on their credit histories. Sometimes, Owners and Property Management Companies have to re-evaluate policies; however, I have not considered married couples to be in the same category as roommates. (In theory or definition.

OK. Let's give two situations:

Bob and Jim are roommates, that meet the income and credit minimums together... just barely; but Bob is the recipient of 2/3 of the total income. All goes well for them for quite some time until Bob gets laid off and unemployment income nets a loss of 1/3 (or more) of the total income. This household no longer has the income needed to meet their obligations unless Jim can make up the balance of the income needed. OR..... Bob gets an employment transfer and must relocate; Jim cannot meet the obligation on his own and they are unable to locate another roommate to step into Bob's place....


Bob and Mary are married; and Mary is a stay at home mom (with no income); but Bob's income is sufficient to meet the income minimum. Things go well until Bob gets terminated and loses his income altogether; and unemployment income is not sufficient and there is no family assistance to help make ends meet. Alternatively, what would happen if they hit a rough patch and Bob either decides to move out, or Mary kicks him out without the income to support the obligation or an agreement that he will pay the rent anyway (because of the child)..... Mary is unable to meet the obligaton.


Since both of these situations represents the potential loss of significant income with no foreseeable change; to treat these any different could be considered a fair housing issue under either marital status or income source.


I am not suggesting eviction due to loss of income, UNLESS they do not approach you and let you know what the issue is and simply lead you to believe the household is blowing off their rent obligation. What I am suggesting is creating an open door policy with the residents to enter into a dialogue with management and come up with a solution that could potentially save their housing situation; even if it means that the household needs to terminate the lease early.

If you are in an affordable property; another wrinkle would be to make sure that both household member's combined incomes does NOT EXCEED your income limit.

Married couples are legally obligated to support one another. They are viewed as a single entity. They are never viewed as roommates. When they lease an apartment they have equal rights and responsibilities under that contract. You do not Release one because they are considered one. If one or the other leaves, the other is still responsible for the lease. This should be explained at the lease signing. In any event, even if a married couple lives as Roommates, it has no bearing. Only those individuals receiving housing subsidies are required to report their loss of earnings or income gains. Conventional market renters who succumb to job loss, wage garnishments, get a raise or promotion or win the lottery are under no such obligation.

I understand that; but just because they are required to, doesn't mean that they will when there is a falling out. And that does not include when things are going well and there is simply a (hopefully temporary) loss of income for whatever reason. If there is a significant loss of income; even though there is a legal obligation to support one another, they simply may not be able to for long (usually when any savings run out).

If there is a loss of income, the best response by the resident is to enter into a dialogue with management to discuss options and come up with a plan of action that avoids additional costs. If it means they must leave before accumulating a large delinquency and possibly legal fees, then that is what it means.

Hello Sandy,

It is hard, but fair! I would support the last position you took as well. It has also been what I have recommended to others who were in a similar position.

There are many comments as to the pros and cons, but when you are running a roommate scenario, this in my professional opinion is the right avenue to take!