can a landlord refuse to add/allow a spouse?

[D909R]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA
City: Glendale (Los Angeles)

My wife and I have been having marital problems and we were going towards separation, ending our month-to-month tenancy, and each of us finding new living accommodations. She already found a new place, which has two bedrooms and is over 1000 square feet. Her credit is excellent and she makes over six figures. I am having a much more difficult time due to my extremely poor credit (considering bankruptcy) and inability to document my income, which hasn't been all that great as I recently graduated from grad school. On a side note, our assets have never been commingled. Anyway, she asked the landlord if I could move in about a week after she signed the lease and gave the deposit, and the landlord said no and seemingly joked it would cost too much... Her move in date is next week. Is this legal? Can a landlord refuse a spouse? Granted, the landlord didn't know anything about the situation and there are provisions in the lease limiting "guest(s)" sleeping over more than a certain number of nights and sub-tenants, but my wife seems willing to give it one last shot, though, she really only wants her name on the one year lease. Are there any laws, codes, regulations, or case law that offer any glimmer of hope? Also, this isn't under rent control. What should we do -- move-in and risk eviction? I don't want to do anything that would damage her credit or ability to get a another place.

Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance for your time and any assistance you might offer.

 

[JETX]

Anyway, she asked the landlord if I could move in about a week after she signed the lease and gave the deposit, and the landlord said no and seemingly joked it would cost too much... Her move in date is next week. Is this legal? Can a landlord refuse a spouse?

Yes. A landlord can restrict a tenancy to only those persons who are on the lease.
Simply if you want the 'right' to stay there for any period longer than that allowed in the lease, you need to fill out an application and sign a lease.

 

[MIRAKALES]

The month-to-month tenancy agreement would only be applicable to tenants noted on lease, in accordance with terms and conditions of lease. The move-out date would be based upon a full month of tenancy and not the one week extension requested by tenant.

LL is not “refusing a spouse” to their rights to dwell at the premises. LL is requesting adherence to the original lease agreement. Written notice of anticipated move-out date should be provided to LL, if not already given. The notice of lease termination should reflect the date of move-in and be signed by both tenants. Move-out should occur on the date before original move-in.

 

[xylene]

California law does not allow the landlord to exclude the spouse.

If the woman signing the lease was qualified, then the the spouse is in.

Unless this is a rooming-house situation, the landlord has no basis to object legally.

 

[Alaska landlord]

California law does not allow the landlord to exclude the spouse.

If the woman signing the lease was qualified, then the the spouse is in.

Unless this is a rooming-house situation, the landlord has no basis to object legally.

Bullcrap!

If landlord has reason to disqualify landlord based on criteria, then spouse is out!

Criminal history comes to mind.

 

[HomeGuru]

I general, if the spouse qualifies, landlord can not restrict the spouse as a tenant.

 

[Alaska landlord]

Discrimination on marital status is generally intended to protect unmarried couples from discrimination. Most landlords PREFER to rent to married couples. They are generally more financially stable and tend to rent for longer periods. If the landlords criteria for the incoming spouse are not met, then the landlord can reject. When rejecting a married incoming tenant, landlord has to be careful that he has solid reasons for the rejection.

 

[xylene]

Discrimination on marital status is generally intended to protect unmarried couples from discrimination. Most landlords PREFER to rent to married couples. They are generally more financially stable and tend to rent for longer periods. If the landlords criteria for the incoming spouse are not met, then the landlord can reject. When rejecting a married incoming tenant, landlord has to be careful that he has solid reasons for the rejection.

This is why you are an incorrect in spouting landlord folk wisdom as legal gospel

Marital status discrimination law cuts BOTH WAYS.

 

[Alaska landlord]

This is why you are an incorrect in spouting landlord folk wisdom as legal gospel

Marital status discrimination law cuts BOTH WAYS.

We've had this discussion before. You were wrong then you are wrong now. Can you provide any documentation to support your argument that a landlord MUST accept an incoming spouse regardless of his rental, credit, criminal history? When interviewing married couples a landlord should permit them to apply as one and then base acceptance on their ability to meet his criteria. NO MAS!

You can also forget about trying to tie this into familial discrimination as the two have nothing to do with each other.

 

[MIRAKALES]

First and foremost, tenants are not being denied application or right of rental based upon marriage. The issue is exclusively related to a presumed contract dispute, in which tenant wants to modify the original lease agreement without consent of LL. This case scenario is neither a case of landlord discrimination or housing discrimination, especially not related familial relationships.

When tenants have a change of lifestyle (whether it be related to employment, education, relationship, buyer’s remorse, etc.) there is an unjustified belief that the lease agreement becomes null and void. Tenants were qualified for rental based upon dual occupancy (presumably based upon wife’s majority income). When the lease terminates both tenants will be required to move. Remaining Tenant (husband) does not have the financial resources to manage rental without wife’s majority income. The minority tenant does have the right to submit an individual rental application for the existing rental or for consideration of another rental.

Minority tenant has advised that his income level does not support the cost of the rental. Therefore, LL has no reason to negotiate with minority tenant which may potentially lead to an unnecessary holder over proceeding.

 

[JETX]

California law does not allow the landlord to exclude the spouse.

Where does the California Code say that?? Provide specific cite.

 

[xylene]

Where does the California Code say that?? Provide specific cite.

The California Department of consumer affairs cites

Government Code Sections 12926(p), 12927(e), 12955(a),(d). See Fair Employment and Housing Act, Government Code Section 12900 and following; federal Fair Housing Act, 42 United States Code Section 3601


The landlord cannot charge a higher rent for a married couple then for a single person - which per the poster is what the landlord is attempting

As to the concerns of other posters Hypotheticals about criminal records and pedophiles don't change anything about the fact that a landlord can't restrain a married couple just because they would prefer to charge more.

 

[JETX]

The California Department of consumer affairs cites

Government Code Sections 12926(p), 12927(e), 12955(a),(d). See Fair Employment and Housing Act, Government Code Section 12900 and following; federal Fair Housing Act, 42 United States Code Section 3601


The landlord cannot charge a higher rent for a married couple then for a single person - which per the poster is what the landlord is attempting

You claimed "California law does not allow the landlord to exclude the spouse."

When asked to provide proof.... you come up with some crap that clearly does NOT support your claim.
Clearly, you are WRONG AGAIN!!!

 

[Cvillecpm]

Rent in a roommate situation, move back home with parents - clean up your credit.

 

[xylene]

You claimed "California law does not allow the landlord to exclude the spouse."

When asked to provide proof.... you come up with some crap that clearly does NOT support your claim.
Clearly, you are WRONG AGAIN!!!

You blowing your stack clearly indicates that I am on the right track.

The landlord can't exclude the spouse. Not by claiming that if he lives there the rent would be more or by having more stringent criteria for income / creditworthiness for a married couple (or couple of any stripe) than for a single person, or by any other subterfuge that the poster did not mention.

While I appreciate that to those on the right wing, a concise and authoritative source from a governmental agency of the State of California amounts to "some crap", I think that the regulatory agency with charter for enforcing anti-discrimination constitutes adequate proof.