So then it’s not really analogous. Here, not only is there no lease, the tenant is paying zero rent. I have to imagine a buyer is going to be much less wiling to “buy” a tenant when the tenant pays no rent and in fact the whole reason they are still there is because the seller couldn’t think of a way to get them out.
All that to say, while your general point is correct (buyer and seller can contract around a tenant so long as the buyer is willing) in this specific case I don’t see it being of much use. The seller will either need to get the tenant out on her own (perhaps with the aid of the legal system) or else sell the place at a greatly diminished price.
IANA lawyer but I am a landlord (NJ FWIW). Different situation but when we purchased our condo it was being used as a rental investment property by the previous owners. Under NJ law a new owner can’t simply evict a tenant just because the property changed. That can, however, evict / not renew their lease if the new owners are using the purchased property as their primary residence (as we were).
I Googled NH law and technically Maria has created a month to month tenant at will situation. That requires a at least 30 day “notice to quit” telling them to GTFO. If they don’t, you then need to go through eviction proceedings and have the sheriff kick them out (you can’t change the locks, etc).
Selling the property is considered “good cause” for a ending a lease.
Maria can theoretically sell the cottage and transfer Cathy’s arrangement to the new tenants if they agree to it. Which they may, like if it’s some rich hedge fund or private equity firm that just wants the property and can just have their legal department deal with Cathy.
Short answer is check with a lawyer and find out the formal procedures for evicting someone and start the process ASAP.
Moral of the story is don’t give free room and board to deadbeats you don’t give a shit about. Not sure why I have to explain that to people.
Well, I was only making the more general point that buying a tenanted property isn’t unthinkable. Regardless of the rent, depending on the state it is quite likely that there is in fact a legal tenant-landlord relationship which will need a lawyer to detail and dissolve,* particular if sporadic repairs are considered some sort of rent-by-barter.
(Edit: which, while I was writing this, msmith537 answered definitively.)
Certainly it’s common. It happens all the time if you are buying a rental property and you are planning on being a landlord. The prospective buyer of this one wants to live there part time from how it sounds. No way would someone want that headache.
Everyone is giving advice that is legally correct if there is a problem down the road. I like to be prepared but I don’t like to deal with a bunch if ifs that may not happen.
Step 1: Approach Cathy and say, “Hey Cathy, I have gotten an offer on the house that I can’t refuse. I am getting older and the money would make a big difference in my life. I appreciate how well you have maintained the place but we need to move forward. Let’s work something out.”
Step 2 entirely depends on what happens at Step 1. She may well not be an asshole. It’s always best to start off nicely. There is no harm in that.
Yeah, I guess Maria is actually the root of all this problem: she’s the one who let Cathy move in, she’s the one who has put up with Dave (for ‘Dad’) being pretty damn passive and invisible when it comes to dealing with his daughter, and she’s the one who has basically let the rent situation just flow along undealt with.
I don’t know all the details of Dave’s financial situation, or the exact mechanics of how they operate financially. He’s retired from a decent career and apparently solvent as far as day to day life goes. From stuff she has said in the past, he apparently pays half the utility bills/grocery bills and such, while she owns the house outright and takes care of property taxes and such ‘ownership’ expenses. This she explains is because she owns the house, and will someday be the one who profits from selling it and so forth, and she’d have to get the roof fixed and heating or electric stuff done anyway, regardless of if he was staying there. They also take trips together every year, and split those costs.
So, I dunno what is ‘fair.’ Obviously Maria would have gotten a lot more money from Cathy if Cathy had ever settled into paying rent regularly, instead of often being between jobs/pregnant/tied down with an infant’s care, and a slew of other reasons she can’t pay “just for now.” OTOH, a few times she (and/or then partners) have made large-ish investments. As in, they bought and installed a new water heater a few years back. They’ve done repairs on the little dock and in fact painted the entire exterior of the house themselves once, which included a ton of little repairs to windows frames and replacing damaged shingles and such, so I dunno. That should probably be counted against the unpaid rent, somehow.
The whole thing is a mess. One thing I didn’t mention: when Maria told Dave about the offer to buy and he realized she was seriously interested: after griping about how much this would disrupt Cathy, her kid and current boyfriend’s lives he actually suggested that maybe she could let all three of them move into her house here in MA with them!
It’s clear Dave/Dad has only one goal: His daughter Cathy continue to be supported by somebody somehow. And homeowner / GF Maria is the most convenient somebody. I strongly suspect she’s the only somebody. Deadbeats tend to attract deadbeats, then the whole dependent colony of deadbeats finds a single non-deadbeat to leech off of.
I don’t know that I’d label Maria the “problem”, but I’d sure label her the “victim”. Of her own passivity in the face of their rampant lazy taker-ism.
When you spend a decade painting yourself into a corner, you’re gonna get messed up getting back out. The fact other people kept handing you a brush and some paint doesn’t alter the fact you took it from them and you put it on the your floor. And now you’re stuck.
In addition to this sage advice:
I’ll add that it is never smart = always stupid to enter into some sort of asymmetrical sharing arrangement w anybody. Even if Cathy and the little house didn’t exist, the situation w Maria & Dave cohabiting with their weird informal cost-sharing and ownership-non-sharing arrangement is simply a time bomb that will explode.
Either they quit getting along, or somebody becomes infirm / helpless or somebody dies. The nature of human life dictates those are the only possibilities. And each of them leads to a nasty mess over the house to clean up.
It happens that GF & I are sorta kinda sidling up to a similar situation as we slide towards cohabitation someplace. I at least am well aware of the pitfalls and it’s handy that our general attitude is to abandon both our current residences and jointly rent, not buy, a single shared residence.
Even then, cost-sharing needs to be clearly spelled out. The lease may say we’re jointly liable for $X per month. But how $X gets paid when all is well and when shit’s going poorly is / will be entirely up to us.
The relative prices of e.g. an HWH and a month’s rent vary hugely between cities, burbs, small towns, and the boonies.
For sure the different labor costs by region tend to offset some of the difference.
But your larger point surely stands: it’s real easy for somebody getting an e.g. $1K gift of free rent every single month to think that an occasional (read maaaaybe annually but probably less) donation of e.g. $200 the other way constitutes a full & even exchange.
Which is especially galling when the donation is just offsetting wear and tear the freeloaders are creating.
Oh yeah. Maria should make it as clear and blunt as possible to Dave that Cathy and family are not allowed to stay in her house, even for a single night. If he starts talking about “their” house, she has her answer as to whose side he is taking. She might have to wind up selling that house too in order to get rid of him.
The problem is that as soon as you allow someone to stay for any length of time in a property you own that isn’t your primary residence you’ve effectively created a “landlord-tenant” situation, even if you aren’t charging them. Which means they can invoke legal rights which makes it more complicated than just tossing them out on the street.
My neighbors went through a similar situation until recently with some family of family staying in part of their Jersey Shore house. I don’t recall all the details but they ultimately sold it.
Hopefully it doesn’t come to a point where courts get involved, but if it does, Maria should find anything in writing about the living situation. Even if there wasn’t a document written from the start, there may be texts or emails to Cathy, Dave, or anyone else where Maria talks about the living situation being temporary (e.g. just till she gets back on her feet). Oral agreements won’t count for much in front of a judge. Anything she has in writing will greatly help her case if it comes to that.
