Giving a Reference

[Kyra_Eleison]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

Our tenants, who were actually really great for 2.5 years, have turned into complete nightmares within the past few months. A branch from a city tree fell and knocked the power mast off the home in late June. Although we had the damage completely fixed within 48 hours, it took another week for the power to go back on because of the permit process with the city. They are suing us for almost $5,000 for the time the power was out, even though we put them in a hotel of their choice, at our expense, for the entire time (at a cost of $800 to us), and allowed them to deduct an additional $175 off July's rent for meals eaten out and food spoilage. Their lawsuit is ridiculous and actually, I think, flat-out abusive. (It has yet to be resolved; the court date is Thursday.)

Around the time of this incident the wife also began making personal attacks on me via texting and facebook.

They still have 7 months to go on their lease.

Yesterday received a voicemail from a property management company asking for a reference for them! WOW! So my question is, how much of what's been going on am I permitted to tell when I call back? Can I tell about the lawsuit? The grossly inappropriate personal attacks? The fact that they have SEVEN MONTHS left on their lease, so if they're applying to rent elsewhere they are obviously contemplating breaking it? As a landlord I'd definitely want to know if prospective tenants were going to be breaking their current lease in order to move into my property; because if they'll break one lease, they'll break any lease.

Or do I just say yes, they pay the rent on time but no, I wouldn't rent to them again, and leave it at that? There's a part of me that wouldn't mind them going off to be someone else's problem... but there's another part of me that feels they should be held accountable for their actions.What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

 

[justalayman]

So my question is, how much of what's been going on am I permitted to tell when I call back?

there is nothing you can't tell, if that is your choice. Remember, you are wanting these people to leave so what you say may prevent them from obtaining housing elsewhere. Do not lie and give them a better reference than they deserve though. It may come back to bite you if the new landlord believes you intentionally hid problems that are now his problems.

You also do not want to slander their reputation either. That could cause you problems as well.

The fact that they have SEVEN MONTHS left on their lease, so if they're applying to rent elsewhere they are obviously contemplating breaking it?

I disagree. That may be nothing more than simply thinking ahead. It can take considerable time to look for a place and go through the entire process of obtaining housing (search, application, approval, and signing a lease, which does not mean the lease cannot start some time in the future). Seven months is a bit on the lengthy side but not beyond being realistic with the time required to complete the process.

You could say something such as:

their current lease runs through <whatever month>. I have no knowledge of their intent to leave prior to that time.

along with whatever other information you choose to divulge.

The prospective landlord can figure out if the prospective tenants would be breaking their lease by the date they told them they were needing housing by.

 

[Kyra_Eleison]

Thank you! I just wanted some clarification because in addition to being a landlord I'm also an employer who runs a small business and I know that when someone calls looking for a reference for a former employee, by law I am not permitted to say anything negative about that person, even if they were the worst employee in the world. The most I can say is that I would not consider them eligible for re-hire. So I wondered if the laws were the same or different regarding tenant references.

Sounds like legally I can say as much as I wish about the issues we're having. Now I just have to decide whether that's the wisest course. Thanks again for your reply.

 

[HomeGuru]

Thank you! I just wanted some clarification because in addition to being a landlord I'm also an employer who runs a small business and I know that when someone calls looking for a reference for a former employee, by law I am not permitted to say anything negative about that person, even if they were the worst employee in the world. The most I can say is that I would not consider them eligible for re-hire. So I wondered if the laws were the same or different regarding tenant references.

Sounds like legally I can say as much as I wish about the issues we're having. Now I just have to decide whether that's the wisest course. Thanks again for your reply.

**A: as an employer, you can say anything about the employee's performance as long as it is true.

 

[cbg]

I know that when someone calls looking for a reference for a former employee, by law I am not permitted to say anything negative about that person, even if they were the worst employee in the world. The most I can say is that I would not consider them eligible for re-hire.

That is not even remotely true. There is no law anywhere in the US that says that. You are absolutely free to give whatever truthful reference you wish. NOWHERE does the law in CA or any other US state say that you are not allowed to say anything negative about an employee if that is the truth.

 

[John_DFW]

I know that when someone calls looking for a reference for a former employee, by law I am not permitted to say anything negative about that person, even if they were the worst employee in the world. The most I can say is that I would not consider them eligible for re-hire.

That is not even remotely true. There is no law anywhere in the US that says that. You are absolutely free to give whatever truthful reference you wish. NOWHERE does the law in CA or any other US state say that you are not allowed to say anything negative about an employee if that is the truth.

It may not be a state law, but it is a very common HR practice and in many employee handbooks.

Stick to the facts that you can prove.

I'm curious how they came up with the $5000 amount, are they trying to claim constructive eviction for failing to turn the power back on?

 

[FarmerJ]

Your current tenant may be a ROYAL pita but keep it professional since your tenant may attempt to pull a stunt and get a friend to call you claiming to be a potential LL following up on a application, you can safely state rent is current if asked , you can verify a lease end date if they already have it and say tenant listed current end of lease date as ____- if asked if you know why they are leaving your free to say ` I dont ask tenants since this is why they rent so if they need to be closer to jobs or want more or less space they can chose that` I have told other LLs when asked if i would re rent to a tenant `no since my unit was not able to meet tenant needs as the tenants children grew older`

 

[FlyingRon]

As stated you can:

1. Tell the truth
2. Remain silent.

I have only once ever had to give a negative recommendation as I thought the person's conduct was so egregiously contrary to good practice (he made reckless disclosures of confidential information as well as making sexual comments about one customer to another) that I couldn't in good faith not.

Other guys who just were not very good programers I just figured they'd had the good sense not to use me as a reference. I did have one however:

ME: Good Morning.
HR: This is Judy Smith, HR from Megalo company. Mr. Jones gave you as a reference.
ME: Oh, he did, did he?
HR: Umm...would you like to give a reference?
ME: It would most likely be better for him if I didn't.
HR: OK, Thank you.

 

[cbg]

It may not be a state law, but it is a very common HR practice and in many employee handbooks.

Having been in HR for 30 years I am well aware of that. I am also aware that there are some situations when an employer can face legal liabilty if they do NOT give an accurate reference, even if negative.

And who said anything about stating facts you can't prove?

 

[Kyra_Eleison]

In response to the question about how they came up with the amount:

They want to be able to deduct rent for the days they were out of the home. That MIGHT have been reasonable had we not paid for their hotel, which cost about twice per night as their rent would have, if broken down to a daily amount. You don't get free rent AND a free hotel stay; that's absurd. It's like an all-expense-paid vacation from reality!

They want reimbursement for food spoilage and meals eaten out over and above the amount we already allowed them to deduct. That amount was agreed upon by all parties and we feel it was fair. Plus they selected the hotel they went into; they could easily have chosen an extended-stay or studio-type hotel where they could have brought their food from home and cooked it, thereby avoiding both spoilage and cost of restaurant dining. They opted not to. Also, isn't their food technically a possession of theirs that should be covered under renter's insurance? I don't know if they have renter's insurance or not. If they're not responsible enough to have gotten a policy, that's not my problem!

They want gas money and mileage to and from the hotel. I did mention that THEY chose the hotel, right? They chose a hotel one city over (house is in Oakland and they opted to stay in Emeryville.) There were many hotels closer to the home. They wanted waterfront. I'm not going to pay them gas and mileage going back and forth from the hotel they chose.

They want laundromat money. Uhhhhm, the power was out at the house, not the WATER. They had pets there that they went to check on/spend time with every single day. There's not a reason in the world that they couldn't have done laundry at home.

They want time spent away from work. I TOLD them specifically to stay at work because all damage was exterior. The repairmen never needed access to the inside of the home, and even if they had, the property manager was on hand to grant it. They chose to miss work anyway, to sulk around the house and harass the repairmen. Not only was their presence unnecessary, but it was counter-productive and only served to muddy the waters further. I'm not paying them for that!

And then a bunch of other garbage about disruption of their lives, inconvenience because they'd planned to host friends that weekend (boo hoo, how about hosting them in that free waterfront hotel room?), legal fees etc.

Their sneaky, immoral nature is also evident in the way they went about suing us - we never knew there was a case until we received paperwork from the court stating that there had been a judgment in their favor because we didn't show up for the hearing. Turns out they "accidentally" had papers served to an incorrect address. 2.5 years they've been sending the rent to the same address without incident and then, oooops, they left out a digit of our house number when it came time to have us served. But I guess they made sure the court had our correct address to tell us there'd been a judgment. What a coincidence, huh? So we had to move to vacate the original ruling.

Can you tell I'm a little upset by all this... feels good to vent, though, so thanks for asking!

 

[justalayman]

I do not believe they have a claim for anything actually. This was not your fault and you took all actions necessary to remedy the problem as expeditiously as possible including putting them up, at your own expense (which I do not believe your were required to do). Depending on the condition of the tree and what the city was aware of, this is either the cities liability or an act of God. God tends to ignore attempts to serve him so if it was an act of God, they might as well give it up now.

If it was the cities liability, they need to be suing the city for their losses.

They want laundromat money. Uhhhhm, the power was out at the house, not the WATER. They had pets there that they went to check on/spend time with every single day. There's not a reason in the world that they couldn't have done laundry at home.

It's not that I am supporting their claim but what do you think makes the washer and dryer go 'round and 'round?

 

[Kyra_Eleison]

lol about the washer and dryer - I guess you're right! I needed that laugh.

Oh, and they keep requesting over and over that we cut down the tree. They know it's the city's tree. They've admitted they know it's the city's tree. What in the heck is wrong with these people? It's like they've completely taken leave of their senses. I have enough of a headache to deal with, caused by this baseless garbage they call a lawsuit. I'm not going to compound my problems by doing something that will cause the city to file a VALID one!