<![CDATA[Baland Law Office, P.L.L.C., (763) 450-9494 - Blog]]>Sat, 18 Nov 2017 08:05:08 -0800Weebly<![CDATA[When Should a Landlord Evict a Tenant?]]>Thu, 21 Sep 2017 14:11:23 GMThttp://balandlaw.com/blog/when-should-a-landlord-evict-a-tenant2065027
​I am often asked when a landlord should evict a tenant. The short answer is that the landlord can bring an eviction as soon as the tenant violates the lease, either by not paying rent or by violating some other term of the lease (staying apartment past the lease and date [the technical term is "holding over"], illegal activity, etc.). Regardless of the reason or reasons the landlord is bringing an eviction, the landlord will be well served to have everything carefully documented in writing.

As it seems there is with everything in the law, there are two exceptions. First, if the landlord is a mobile home park, then special rules apply. Please see my blog post on how a mobile home park eviction differs from a regular eviction. Here is a link to that post:

http://balandlaw.com/blog/what-is-different-about-a-manufactured-home-eviction

Second, if the landlord has accepted rent – even a partial payment – after the date of a violation, that gives the tenant a defense to an eviction, unless the landlord has certain "magic language" in the lease to the effect that the landlord does not waive the right to evict after accepting a partial payment. Here is the "magic language" from the statute:

the parties agree that partial payment of rent in arrears which is accepted by the landlord prior to issuance of the order granting restitution of the premises pursuant to section 504B.345 may be applied to the balance due and does not waive the landlord's action to recover possession of the premises for nonpayment of rent.

Minn. Stat. 504B.291, subd. 1(c).


Whenever I represent a landlord, the first thing I ask is what the landlord wants to have happen. Is the landlord okay with having the tenant pay up and stay, and if so – how much time will the landlord give the tenant to pay?  Perhaps the landlord just wants the tenant to move out. If the eviction has been brought for no other reason then nonpayment of rent, then the tenant has the right to "pay and stay." In other words, if there is no other reason in the complaint to evict other than the nonpayment of rent, then the tenant has the right to stay in the apartment by paying the unpaid rent. The judge can give the tenant up to seven days to do so, especially if the tenant has young children or an obvious physical or mental disability.

Once the landlord files an eviction, for whatever reason or reasons, the Court Administrator will schedule a hearing on that eviction within two weeks. The landlord is responsible for serving the tenant with notice of the eviction at lease seven days prior to the hearing and file proof of service with the Court Administrator.

At the hearing, one of four things can happen:

1. The tenant does not show up and the landlord wins by default;

2. The tenant shows up and the parties – the landlord and the tenant – are able to reach a settlement agreement. Most settlement agreements either involve the tenant paying a set amount of money according to a payment schedule or moving out by a certain date. If the tenant does not meet the requirements of the settlement agreement, then the landlord can get a writ of recovery – the order for the Sheriff to remove the tenant from the property;

3. The tenant shows up, but the parties are unable to reach a settlement agreement. In this case, if the tenant admits the allegations in the complaint, the judge will issue a writ, but can stay that writ for up to seven days; and

4. The tenant requests a trial. If the lease has been brought for unpaid rent alone, and there are no other allegations in the complaint other than unpaid rent, AND the tenant says that the reason they have not been paying rent is the condition of the premises, then the judge can require the tenant to deposit the amount of unpaid rent with the Court Administrator before getting a trial.

If the eviction has been brought for both unpaid rent and for some other reason, then the tenant does not have to pay rent into court to get a trial.

Every landlord – tenant situation is unique, and I recommend that landlords talk to an attorney experienced in evictions and landlord tenant law before taking action based on this blog post.  To that end, I invite landlords to give me a call at 763-450-9494 to discuss their unique situation. The first thing I will ask you is what you want to have happen because, ultimately, the landlord is in control. I have represented many landlords, but typically do not represent tenants.

WARNING: The information contained in this blog post does not constitute legal advice and may not be applicable to your situation.  Tim is licensed to practice law only in Minnesota, and the information contained in this blog post may not apply to jurisdictions outside of Minnesota.  Further, reading this blog post does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and Baland Law Office, P.L.L.C.  You should always discuss your situation with an attorney before taking any action based on what you may read in this blog.  To that end, please call (763) 450-9494 to set up an appointment to discuss your situation.
]]>
<![CDATA[What Does a Landlord Need to Know about Administrative Search Warrants?]]>Fri, 28 Jul 2017 19:24:21 GMThttp://balandlaw.com/blog/what-does-a-landlord-need-to-know-about-administrative-search-warrants
In a recent case, the Minnesota Supreme Court determined that the Minnesota Constitution does not require a higher standard of probable cause for an administrative search warrant than the federal Constitution. Under federal law, an application for a search "satisfies the probable cause requirement in the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution 'if reasonable legislative or administrative standards for conducting an area inspection are satisfied with respect to a particular dwelling.'"  ​In re: Application for a Search Warrant, City of Golden Valley v. Jason Wiebesick et. al., ___ N.W.2d ___, A15-1795 (Minn. 2017), citing Camara v. Mun. Court, 387 U.S. 523, 538 (1967).

In other words, the city has to have a "reasonable legislative or administrative standard for conducting an area inspection." Unlike a criminal search warrant, the city does not have to have probable cause that a particular item or "instrumentality" of a crime will be found either on a particular person or in a particular location - they just need a reasonable purpose.. if a city ordinance says that, in order to get an inspection, the city has to inspect the property to make sure it is up to code, that is good enough for an administrative search warrant.

In Golden Valley, the Minnesota Supreme Court set out the requirements for a city to obtain an administrative search warrant:

Administrative search warrants must

1. be supported by probable cause; not individualized suspicion but “reasonable legislative or administrative standards for conducting an area inspection.” Camara, 387 U.S. at 538.

2. must identify the particular place to be inspected and must be “suitably restricted.” Id. at 539-40.

3. In the absence of a citizen complaint or a need for immediate entry, they must be issued only after entry is refused. Id.

4. are issued by neutral judicial officers, who must ensure that there is authority for the inspection, that reasonable standards exist, and that the inspection is not arbitrary. See Marshall v. Barlow’s, Inc., 436 U.S. 307, 323 (1978).

5. an administrative search warrant . . . does not authorize “a general, exploratory rummaging in a person’s belongings.” Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443, 467 (1971).

Further, the Minnesota Supreme Court cautioned that:"to protect tenants’ privacy interests, administrative search warrant procedures must include notice, an opportunity to be heard, and judicial consideration of reasonable restrictions on the inspection."  Golden Valley, A15-1795.

But enough of this legal mumbo-jumbo – what does the decision in Golden Valley mean for landlords? In Golden Valley, the landlords did not consent to the search of their rental property because the city lacked "individualized suspicion" of a violation of the housing code. However, Golden Valley stands for the proposition that, so long as the city has a reasonable purpose – to ensure public health, welfare, and safety – in searching the rental property, the landlords' opposition to the search warrant application will be denied.

As such, I would probably not oppose an application for an administrative search warrant unless I had a very, very good reason for my opposition.

Every landlord – tenant situation is unique, and I recommend that landlords talk to an attorney experienced in evictions and landlord tenant law before taking action based on this blog post.  To that end, I invite landlords to give me a call at 763-450-9494 to discuss their unique situation. The first thing I will ask you is what you want to have happen because, ultimately, the landlord is in control. I have represented many landlords, but typically do not represent tenants.

WARNING: The information contained in this blog post does not constitute legal advice and may not be applicable to your situation.  Tim is licensed to practice law only in Minnesota, and the information contained in this blog post may not apply to jurisdictions outside of Minnesota.  Further, reading this blog post does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and Baland Law Office, P.L.L.C.  You should always discuss your situation with an attorney before taking any action based on what you may read in this blog.  To that end, please call (763) 450-9494 to set up an appointment to discuss your situation.
]]>
<![CDATA[Do You Need a Estate Plan If You Are a Millennial with Kids?]]>Wed, 26 Jul 2017 14:26:43 GMThttp://balandlaw.com/blog/do-you-need-a-estate-plan-if-you-are-a-millennial-with-kids
The short answer is yes.

If you are a millennial – that is, someone who was born around the year 2000 – and you have kids, you should definitely have an estate plan, especially for your children. If you cannot remember a time without email (at one point, email and the Internet did not even exist), then you probably belong to the Millennial generation, sometimes called Generation Y.

When you are in your 20s and 30s, it is difficult to think about setting up an estate plan, but – if you have kids – it is something you need to do. Why? Because, in addition to taking care of your worldly goods after you die, you can appoint someone – a friend or relative whom you trust – to take care of your children.

A n estate plan consists of a Will, a health care directive, and a power of attorney. The Will controls what happens to your property after your death; the health care directive appoints someone who you know and trust to be your healthcare agent in the event that you are incapacitated and unable to make decisions related to your medical care and treatment by yourself; and the power of attorney appoint someone you know and trust to make decisions and carry on your financial affairs in the event that you are unable to do so on your own.

Sometimes, you need a trust as well, especially if you have a lot of wealth to manage or if you have a child with special needs. However, for most millennials, I do not think that the trust would be appropriate. I have written about trusts and whether you need one before. Here is a link to the article:

balandlaw.com/blog/do-i-need-a-trust

The best way to determine what is right for you is to meet with an estate planning attorney. To that end, I invite you to give me a call at 763-450-9494 to discuss your specific situation. Everybody who calls gets a free 5 minute mini telephone consultation. An in person meeting is $250, and that amount is credited to your account when you retained me to represent you in drafting your Will, healthcare advance directive, power of attorney, and other estate planning documents.

WARNING: The information contained in this article does not constitute legal advice and may not be applicable to your situation.  Tim is licensed to practice law only in the state and federal courts of Minnesota, and the advice that he gives is applicable to that jurisdiction only. Further, reading this blog post does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and Baland Law Office, P.L.L.C.  You should always discuss your situation with an attorney before taking any action based on what you may read in this blog.  To that end, please call (763) 450-9494 to set up an appointment to discuss your situation.
]]>
<![CDATA[Tim Teaches Free CLE/Seminar on Evictions, Abandoned Tenant Property, Security Deposits, and Landlord-Tenant Law]]>Wed, 28 Jun 2017 21:35:03 GMThttp://balandlaw.com/blog/tim-teaches-free-cleseminar-on-evictions-abandoned-tenant-property-and-landlord-tenant-law
Tim is teaching a free CLE/seminar on evictions, abandoned tenant property, and landlord-tenant law. The seminar will be held on Friday, July 21, 2017 at 9 AM at Tim's office, 2140 4th Avenue, Anoka Minnesota 55303. The seminar will last about one hour.

From the description:

In this FREE seminar, we will cover the legal aspects of the landlord-tenant relationship, including how to handle evictions, security deposits, and tenant property remaining in the premises after the tenant moves out.  This seminar is geared for landlords, property managers, and attorneys who represent them.  ATTORNEYS: One standard CLE credit has been applied for.

Space is limited, so advance registration is required. For more information and to register, please visit:

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/what-every-landlord-needs-to-know-about-evictions-security-deposits-abandoned-tenant-property-and-tickets-35771004036

Please call Tim at 763-450-9494 if you have any questions.

Thanks!
]]>
<![CDATA[What Should You Do If a Contract Vendee under a Contract for Deed Does Not Move Out After You Cancel the Contract?]]>Fri, 19 May 2017 13:56:17 GMThttp://balandlaw.com/blog/what-should-you-do-if-a-contract-vendee-under-a-contract-for-deed-does-not-move-out-after-you-cancel-the-contract
What do you do if you have sold real estate someone (the contract vendee) under a contract for deed who refuses to move out or pay up after you cancel the contract. In a contract for deed, the seller (vendor) provides financing to the buyer (vendee), but the vendor retains legal title and legal ownership of the property, but the vendee has equitable title – the right to occupy and be in the property.  Typically, the vendee seems trustworthy and solvent when you sign the contract, but then does not make payments due under the contract for whatever reason – loss of job, medical emergency, or some other reason.

The question becomes what do you do if a contract vendee is not making the payments due under the contract? The short answer is that the vendor has to cancel the contract for deed. There is a statutory notice of cancellation that gives the vendee 60 days to pay up, but the next question is what happens after those 60 days are up and the vendee has not paid up or moved out?

The contract vendor has to bring an eviction action against the contract vendee to remove the contract vendee from the property. Basically, the eviction complaint says just that – that the vendee is still on the property after 60 days from the date of cancellation.

After you file and serve the eviction, a hearing will be scheduled within 2 weeks. It is your responsibility as contract vendor to have the eviction served within one week of the date of the hearing. At the hearing, one of 4 things will occur:

1. The vendee does not show up, and you win by "default." In other words, you win because the vendee did not appear. In that case, the judge will issue a Writ of Recovery of the premises, which is an order of the court for the Sheriff to remove the vendee from the property.

2. 
The vendee does show up, and you are able to work out some sort of agreement – typically whereby the vendee either agrees to pay everything that they owe on an acceptable schedule to you or the vendee agrees to move out by a certain date that is acceptable to you.

3. The vendee does show up, and you are not able to work out any kind of agreement. In that case, you will appear before a judge. If the vendee admits that they were given proper notice and are still in the property, the judge will issue an order kicking them out (the writ of recovery). The judge has the authority to stay the writ of recovery for up to 7 days if there is a finding of substantial hardship – typically minor children or an obvious physical or mental disability. In practice, most judges will stay the writ for 7 days, although that varies from county to county.

4. The vendee shows up and asks for a trial on the validity of your cancellation. Basically, the vendee would argue (and would have to prove) that the notice you gave did not meet with the requirements of the statute authorizing you to cancel the contract for deed.

I generally advise clients not to enter into contracts for deed. What do you do if you have sold real estate someone (the contract vendee) under a contract for deed who refuses to move out or pay up after you cancel the contract. In a contract for deed, the seller (vendor) provides financing to the buyer (vendee), but the vendor retains legal title and legal ownership of the property, but the vendee has equitable title - the right to occupy and be in the property.  Typically, the vendee seems trustworthy and solvent when you sign the contract, but then does not make payments due under the contract for whatever reason - loss of job, medical emergency, or some other reason.

The question becomes what do you do if a contract vendee is not making the payments due under the contract? The short answer is that the vendor has to cancel the contract for deed. There is a statutory notice of cancellation that gives the vendee 60 days to pay up, but the next question is what happens after those 60 days are up and the vendee has not paid up or moved out?

The contract vendor has to bring an eviction action against the contract vendee to remove the contract vendee from the property. Basically, the eviction complaint says just that - that the vendee is still on the property after 60 days from the date of cancellation.In other words, the vendee is "holding over" on real property and can be evicted for that.

After you file and serve the eviction, a hearing will be scheduled within 2 weeks. It is your responsibility as contract vendor to have the eviction served within one week of the date of the hearing. At the hearing, one of 4 things will occur:

1. The vendee does not show up, and you win by "default." In other words, you win because the vendee did not appear. In that case, the judge will issue a Writ of Recovery of the premises, which is an order of the court for the Sheriff to remove the vendee from the property.

2. The vendee does show up, and you are able to work out some sort of agreement – typically whereby the vendee either agrees to pay everything that they owe on an acceptable schedule to you or the vendee agrees to move out by a certain date that is acceptable to you.

3. The vendee does show up, and you are not able to work out any kind of agreement. In that case, you will appear before a judge. If the vendee admits that they were given proper notice and are still in the property, the judge will issue an order kicking them out (the writ of recovery). The judge has the authority to stay the writ of recovery for up to 7 days if there is a finding of substantial hardship – typically minor children or an obvious physical or mental disability. In practice, most judges will stay the writ for 7 days, although that varies from county to county.

4. The vendee shows up and asks for a trial on the validity of your cancellation. Basically, the vendee would argue (and would have to prove) that the notice you gave did not meet with the requirements of the statute authorizing you to cancel the contract for deed.

I generally advise clients not to enter into contracts for deed. If the potential buyer is unable to obtain financing from a third-party such as a bank, credit union, or other mortgage provider, there is probably a good reason why they were unable to obtain such financing. You are not a lender – rather, you are a seller.  You should not provide financing to a potential buyer who cannot obtain financing from a third-party lender.

However, there are some circumstances when it makes sense to enter into a contract for deed. I would recommend that you vet any potential contract for deed vendee to make sure they have a long employment history and solid credit score. If you are going to provide the financing, you want as little risk as possible.

If you have a contract for deed vendee who is not making payments, or if you have canceled a contract for deed according to statute but the vendee is still in the property, then I recommend that landlords talk to an attorney experienced in evictions before taking action based on this blog post.  To that end, you should give me a call at 763-450-9494 to discuss your situation. The first thing I will ask you is what you want to have happen because, ultimately, the you are in control..

WARNING: The information contained in this blog post does not constitute legal advice and may not be applicable to your situation.  Tim is licensed to practice law only in Minnesota, and the information contained in this blog post may not apply to jurisdictions outside of Minnesota.  Further, reading this blog post does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and Baland Law Office, P.L.L.C.  You should always discuss your situation with an attorney before taking any action based on what you may read in this blog.  To that end, please call (763) 450-9494 to set up an appointment to discuss your situation.


]]>
<![CDATA[Tim Teaches Free Seminar on What Every Landlord Needs to Know about Evictions, Security Deposits, Abandoned Tenant Property, and Landlord-Tenant Law]]>Thu, 04 May 2017 15:44:42 GMThttp://balandlaw.com/blog/tim-teaches-free-seminar-on-what-every-landlord-needs-to-know-about-evictions-security-deposits-abandoned-tenant-property-and-landlord-tenant-law
Tim is teaching a free seminar on what every landlord needs to know about evictions, security deposits, abandoned tenant property, and landlord-tenant law. The seminar will be held on Thursday, May 18, 2017 from noon – 1 PM at Tim's office, 2140 4th Avenue North, Anoka Minnesota 55303.

This seminar is intended for landlords, property managers, attorneys who represent them, and anyone interested in knowing more about landlord-tenant law. From the event description:

In this FREE seminar, we will cover the legal aspects of the landlord-tenant relationship, including how to handle evictions, security deposits, and tenant property remaining in the premises after the tenant moves out.  This seminar is geared for landlords, property managers, and attorneys who represent them.  ATTORNEYS: One standard CLE credit has been applied for.

For more information and to register, please visit:

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/what-every-landlord-needs-to-know-about-evictions-security-deposits-abandoned-tenant-property-and-tickets-34323536622

Thanks!
]]>
<![CDATA[WARNING: Attorneys Who Represent Landlords Being Sued under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act]]>Tue, 25 Apr 2017 20:04:08 GMThttp://balandlaw.com/blog/warning-attorneys-who-represent-landlords-being-sued-under-the-fair-debt-collection-practices-actPicture
Attorneys who represent landlords and eviction hearings in Minnesota are being sued under the fair debt collection practices act, or FDCPA for short. However, there are several steps that attorneys can take to protect themselves from an FDCPA lawsuit.

A complete discussion of the requirements of the FDCPA is beyond the scope of this article. However, the FDCPA requires that a third-party attempting to collect a debt provide a "mini-Miranda" warning at an initial meeting with the debtor and follow-up with a 30-day validation letter within five days.

The "mini-Miranda" should say something to the effect that the debtor is having a communication with a debt collector and that any information obtained can and will be used to collect the debt owed. Within five days of the date of the initial communication, you should follow up with a 30-day validation letter, giving the debtor 30 days to dispute the validity of the debt, or to request confirmation of the identity of the original creditor, if it is not already been provided.

The FDCPA does not apply to landlords attempting to collect their own debt. In other words, the landlord does not have to comply with the FDCPA is the landlord issues its own notices, demands, etc. However, if the landlord has hired a collection agency to collect unpaid rent or a property management company to manage the properties, collect rent, etc., then that collection agency or property management company is a third-party and must comply with the FDCPA.

Based on the research I have done so far, this theory of liability originated in a case decided by the Federal District Court in the Southern District of New York, and subsequently affirmed by the Second Circuit Appeals Court in 
Romea v. Heiberger & Associates, 163 F.3d 111 (2d Cir. 1998)

For attorneys who represent landlords in eviction hearings, the theory is that the preliminary court hearing in the eviction is a "communication" with the debtor. Attorneys who represent landlords potentially violate the FDCPA, the theory goes, by not providing the "mini-Miranda" warning or by following up within five days with a 30-day validation letter.

I think there is a good argument to be made that:

1. Romea only applies to evictions in the Second Circuit and does not apply to Minnesota evictions;
2. evictions are all about the right to possession, not money – and therefore the FDCPA does not apply; and
3. the payment or nonpayment of rent in Minnesota and the Minnesota eviction action does not affect interstate commerce in the least, and that therefore Congress – and the Minnesota federal courts – are without jurisdiction.

Brighter minds than mine will figure this out, but in the meantime, I am – out of an abundance of caution – going to comply with the FDCPA by providing a "mini-Miranda" warning at the court hearing and by following up within five days with a 30-day validation letter.. I do not want to risk an FDCPA lawsuit.

 Remember – the FDCPA does not apply to a landlord attempting to collect its own debt. As such, assuming that the landlord is the owner of the property, the landlord can continue to send notices and demands as always. The FDCPA comes into play only if the landlord hires a third-party, such as a property management company or debt collection agency.  Landlord attorneys who are served with an FDCPA lawsuit should immediately notify their malpractice carrier, and not attempt to defend the lawsuit on their own.

For more information about evictions and the FDCPA, I recommend that you visit:

https://sites.google.com/site/mnhousinglaw/ud-defense-manual/chapter-vi-defenses/e-nonpayment-of-rent/34-fair-debt-collection-practices-act-defenses

Thanks!

Every landlord – tenant situation is unique, and I recommend that landlords talk to an attorney experienced in evictions and landlord tenant law before taking action based on this blog post.  To that end, I invite landlords to give me a call at 763-450-9494 to discuss their unique situation. The first thing I will ask you is what you want to have happen because, ultimately, the landlord is in control. I have represented many landlords, but typically do not represent tenants.

WARNING: The information contained in this blog post does not constitute legal advice and may not be applicable to your situation.  Tim is licensed to practice law only in Minnesota, and the information contained in this blog post may not apply to jurisdictions outside of Minnesota.  Further, reading this blog post does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and Baland Law Office, P.L.L.C.  You should always discuss your situation with an attorney before taking any action based on what you may read in this blog.  To that end, please call (763) 450-9494 to set up an appointment to discuss your situation.




]]>
<![CDATA[Tim Teaches Sections on Evictions and Companion Animals at April 19, 2017 Landlord-Tenant Seminar Organized by Sterling Education Services]]>Thu, 13 Apr 2017 15:15:21 GMThttp://balandlaw.com/blog/tim-teaches-sections-on-evictions-and-companion-animals-at-april-19-2017-landlord-tenant-seminar-organized-by-sterling-education-servicesPicture
Tim is teaching the sections on evictions and companion animals at the landlord-tenant seminar organized by Sterling Education Services. The seminar will be held on April 19, 2017 at the Minneapolis Hilton Downtown (1101 4th Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN) from 8:30 AM – 4:30 PM.

From the program description:

Home ownership and rental vacancy rates haven’t been as low as they currently are for more than thirty years. That can be great news for landlords, but it also means that finding the best tenants for your property (and protecting yourself when bad tenants slip in) is more important than ever. Uncertain economic conditions and the influx of more baby boomers and families into the rental market mean that you and your clients need strategies in place to write solid leases, provide accommodations, and evict when necessary. Our faculty are familiar with the issues you’re facing every day, so put their knowledge and experience to work and make the most out of the growing rental markets. 

For more information and to register, please visit:

http://store.sterlingeducation.com/seminar/17MN04072-Landlord-Tenant-Law-Lease-Agreements-Defaults-and-Collections-Minneapolis-MN

Thanks!

]]>
<![CDATA[Tim Teaches "Landlording 102" Community Education Course]]>Fri, 17 Feb 2017 18:00:25 GMThttp://balandlaw.com/blog/tim-teaches-landlording-102-community-education-coursePicture
Tim is teaching a class called "Landlording 102" through Anoka Hennepin Community Education. The class will be held on Tuesday, February 28, 2017 at 6:30 PM at the Staff Education Center (enter through door 7) at 2727 Ferry St., Anoka, MN 55303.

From the course description:

Discuss evictions and landlord-tenant law, including security deposits, lockouts, and abandoned tenant property. Interactive class, with plenty of time for questions, for new as well as more experienced landlords, property managers, and anyone else interested in learning more about being a landlord. Instructor is an attorney who represents primarily landlords and specializes in evictions and landlord-tenant law.Class fee: $25.

For more information and to register, please visit:

https://anokahennepin.cr3.rschooltoday.com/public/costoption/class_id/22698/public/1/sp/

]]>
<![CDATA[Should A Landlord Feel Badly about Evicting a Tenant?]]>Tue, 07 Feb 2017 20:11:44 GMThttp://balandlaw.com/blog/should-a-landlord-feel-badly-about-evicting-a-tenantPicture
I am often asked if a landlord should feel badly about evicting a tenant. The short answer is no. After all, the landlord is in the business of providing housing in exchange for the payment of rent, and the tenant signed a contract saying that they were going to pay rent in exchange for a place to live.

As such, I have absolutely no hesitation in recommending that a landlord evict a tenant who is not paying rent. If the tenant is not paying rent, then the tenant is of no use to the landlord.It is important for all landlords to remember that being a landlord is a business. A tenant who does not pay rent is taking advantage of the landlord's generosity, and that is something that I do not tolerate.

In Minnesota, a judge can give a tenant up to 7 days to pay up or move out – but the judge has to find that the tenant will suffer substantial hardship before granting extra time.  However, the landlord and tenant can agree on a longer period of time – more than 7 days –for the tenant to pay up or move out. If the landlord and tenant agree, a judge will probably sign off on that agreement.

Every landlord – tenant situation is unique, and I recommend that landlords talk to an attorney experienced in evictions and landlord tenant law before taking action based on this blog post.  To that end, I invite landlords to give me a call at 763-450-9494 to discuss their unique situation. The first thing I will ask you is what you want to have happen because, ultimately, the landlord is in control. I have represented many landlords, but typically do not represent tenants.

WARNING: The information contained in this blog post does not constitute legal advice and may not be applicable to your situation.  Tim is licensed to practice law only in Minnesota, and the information contained in this blog post may not apply to jurisdictions outside of Minnesota.  Further, reading this blog post does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and Baland Law Office, P.L.L.C.  You should always discuss your situation with an attorney before taking any action based on what you may read in this blog.  To that end, please call (763) 450-9494 to set up an appointment to discuss your situation.

]]>