Fourteen Days Notice to Quit For Nonpayment of Rent in Massachusetts

Worcester_District_Court_-_DSC05741

By Robert Nislick

You are a Massachusetts landlord. Your tenant is not paying rent. You want to evict him. What can you do to get the eviction process started?

Most landlords know that before you can evict a tenant for nonpayment of rent, the landlord must serve, and the tenant must receive, a fourteen-day notice to quit for nonpayment of rent.

If all you are looking for is a form, then here is a link to a form that is available on the Massachusetts Court System web site:

http://www.mass.gov/courts/docs/lawlib/docs/notice-quit-14.pdf

Here is a link to another form that is available on the Plymouth County Sheriff’s Department web site:

http://www.pcsdma.org/Forms/14%20Day%20Notice%20to%20Quit.pdf

Here is a link to another form that is available on the Suffolk County Sheriff’s Department web site:

http://www.suffolksheriffma.com/14_Day_Notice_To_Quit.pdf

Even though these forms are available to use for free, there is no substitute for having an experienced Massachusetts landlord-tenant lawyer handle the eviction from start to finish. This includes drafting the notice to quit. Some landlords think they can do an eviction on their own, or maybe do the notice to quit themselves, and then hire an attorney to show up at court on the day of trial. I would not recommend that approach.

Even if one of these forms might work, it might be completely inappropriate to use one of them. Although I am providing links to these forms, I am certainly not advising that everyone or anyone use them. Something slightly different or completely different might be necessary based on the specific facts. It may be that your case is a simple nonpayment of rent case, and the service of a 14-day notice to quit would be best. It might not be, however. It is common for landlords to have misconceptions about how to terminate a tenancy and how best to move the ball down the field.

An experienced landlord-tenant attorney may see your case differently. There are various situations in which I may advise proceeding with a 7-day notice to quit, or a 30-day notice to quit, or a 90-day notice to quit, or an immediate termination, or a notice that provides a holdover tenant less than seven days to vacate.

The circumstances might be such that serving any notice to quit would be less than prudent, and an alternative course of action would be better. Additionally, issues of timing in the eviction process are important, and are too numerous to discuss in this article.

Robert Nislick is a Massachusetts landlord-tenant lawyer who practices in Boston Housing Court, Worcester Housing Court, Northeast Housing Court, Southeast Housing Court, Western Housing Court, and the summary process session of the District Court.

Framingham Landlords Must Obtain Inspection and Certification of Rental Units

1024px-Framingham_Memorial_-_Framingham,_MA_-DSC00228By Robert Nislick

Pursuant to the Framingham Health Department’s Rental Unit Certification Regulation, most landlords of residential properties in Framingham are required to apply for and obtain a certificate from the Board of Health before commencing any new tenancy or occupancy in a rental unit.

The regulation is, “intended to protect the public health and general welfare, and the health, safety and well-being of the occupants of rental housing.” (See Regulation, § A).

The landlord has to file an Application for a Dwelling Unit Certificate and pay a non-refundable $75.00 fee, at the Memorial Building, 150 Concord Street, Framingham. The Health Department will then inspect the “rental unit to assure compliance with Minimum Standards of Fitness for Human Habitation, as set forth in the State Sanitary Code, and Housing Standards and regulations, as adopted by the Framingham Board of Health.” (See Regulation, § D).

“The Director of Public Health . . . shall issue a Rental Unit Inspection Certificate for each unit found to be in compliance or, if a rental unit fails to meet the minimum standards . . . shall issue a Housing Inspection Report and an Order to Correct Deficiencies. Said order shall establish the date by which corrections must be completed and shall provide notice that proper permits must be obtained for any work done under the order.” (Regulation, § D).

If an Order to Correct Deficiencies has been issued, the owner may request a re-inspection, and pay a $25.00 re-inspection fee. (See Regulation, § D).

“Upon completion of the required corrections and verification that proper permits have been obtained, a Rental Unit Inspection Certificate shall be issued.” (Regulation, § D).

Landlords in Framingham would be well advised to go through the inspection and certification process before renting their units. The Health Department’s inspection criteria matches with the State Sanitary Code, with which every landlord is obligated to comply. One benefit to landlords is that if the inspector comes out and certifies that the premises are fine, the landlord will have a benchmark in the event that a tenant complains later about bad conditions.

The MetroWest Daily News wrote a good article titled, “New Rules Set for Framingham Landlords”, when this important program was first announced in 2014.

Robert Nislick is a Massachusetts landlord-tenant lawyer who practices regularly in the Framingham District Court, and also in Boston Housing Court, Worcester Housing Court, Northeast Housing Court, Southeast Housing Court, and Western Housing Court.

Stays of Execution in Massachusetts Landlord and Tenant Cases

By Robert Nislick

You are a Massachusetts landlord and you are trying to evict your tenants. You have already terminated their tenancy, served them with a summons and complaint, entered the case in the Housing Court or District Court, and appeared on the day of trial.

You tried your case and the court found that you are entitled to a judgment and execution for possession, or perhaps you entered into a Summary Process Agreement for Judgment with your tenants, which requires them to vacate by a certain date.

A couple of weeks pass and the tenants still have not moved out. They have no intention of leaving. In fact, the tenants want to stay even longer. The tenants file a Motion to Stay Execution. Essentially, the tenants are asking the court to give them even more time to move.

Do the tenants have any grounds for seeking more time, even though they have already lost their case?

If the eviction was a no-fault eviction, rather than an eviction for nonpayment of rent, then the court can grant the tenant a six-month stay, or if the tenant is handicapped or at least 60 years old, then the court can grant the tenant a twelve-month stay. See G. L. c. 239, § 9.

The tenant must demonstrate that he, “cannot secure suitable premises for himself and his family elsewhere within the city or town in a neighborhood similar to that in which the premises occupied by him are situated; that he has used due and reasonable effort to secure such other premises; that his application is made in good faith and that he will abide by and comply with such terms and provisions as the court may prescribe; or that by reason of other facts such action will be warranted”. See G. L. c. 239, § 10.

How can the landlord oppose the tenant’s efforts?

Let me first digress to say that, in my opinion, a landlord should always hire an attorney to handle the eviction from start to finish. I have heard way too many stories from landlords who thought they could save a few bucks by doing it themselves, only to find that they have made mistakes that cost them time and money. The experienced lawyer can anticipate obstacles that may arise, and also avoid traps for the unwary.

Primarily, the landlord will want to point out that if the eviction was brought for nonpayment of rent, the tenant is not entitled to a stay, as a matter of law. If the eviction was a no-fault eviction, however, the landlord will need to counter the tenant’s arguments that he meets the criteria for a stay.

In any event, if the court grants a stay, G. L. c. 239, § 11, requires essentially that a stay shall be conditioned upon the tenant’s depositing into court for occupation of the premises during the stay the amount he was paying for rent previously, any additional amount the court deems reasonable, and all unpaid rent prior to the stay. The statute also provides that the court to shall pay to the landlord the amounts deposited into court.

Robert Nislick is a Massachusetts landlord-tenant lawyer who practices in Boston Housing Court, Worcester Housing Court, Northeast Housing Court, Southeast Housing Court, Western Housing Court, and the summary process session of the District Court.

But If You Do – Things to Remember When Taking a Security Deposit in Massachusetts

By Robert Nislick

You are a Massachusetts landlord. A new tenant is about to lease your house or apartment from you. You would like to take a security deposit from this person.

Allow me to talk you out of it. Read my companion article, “Don’t Do It – The Case Against Taking a Security Deposit in Massachusetts”.

Let’s say you still want to take a security deposit. The landlord should familiarize himself or herself with the statute, G. L. c. 186, § 15B, and the Attorney General’s Regulations, 940 Code Mass. Regs. § 3.17 (4).

If you read the statute and regulations and have a hard time understanding them, then you may be better off deciding not to take a security deposit. You should consider seeking the advice of counsel, in any event, especially if you are an inexperienced landlord. There are so many ways you can lose money when renting property. This article highlights certain things the landlord should or should not do, rather than emphasizing the penalties for noncompliance. A good lawyer can help you to understand the risks and take steps to reduce your exposure to them.

The amount of the security deposit cannot exceed the first month’s rent. See G. L. c. 186, § 15B (1) (b) (3).

The landlord must provide a receipt to the tenant at the time of receiving it. See G. L. c. 186, § 15B (2) (b). The receipt must indicate, “the amount of such security deposit, the name of the person receiving it and, in the case of an agent, the name of the lessor for whom such security deposit is received, the date on which it is received, and a description of the premises leased or rented. Said receipt shall be signed by the person receiving the security deposit.” See id.

Additionally, the landlord must provide a statement of present condition to the tenant, upon receipt of the security deposit, or within ten days after commencement of the tenancy, whichever is later. See G. L. c. 186, § 15B (2) (c). The security deposit law specifies that the statement must contain a comprehensive listing of any damage then existing in the premises. The landlord or his agent must sign the statement. The statement of condition must also provide a certain notice to the tenant, that the tenant must either sign in agreement that the list is correct and complete, or attach a separate signed list of damage that the tenant believes exists in the premises. See id.

Additionally, the landlord must place the security deposit in a separate interest-bearing account in a bank located within Massachusetts. See G. L. c. 186, § 15B (3) (a). The account must place the deposit beyond the claims of the landlord’s creditors. See id. The account must also have the ability to be transferred to a subsequent owner of the property. See id.

The landlord must also give the tenant, within thirty days after receiving the deposit, a receipt that indicates, “the name and location of the bank in which the security deposit has been deposited and the amount and account number of said deposit.” See id.

Additionally, the landlord must maintain a record of all security deposits received. See G. L. c. 186, § 15 (2) (d). The landlord must make the record available for inspection upon request of a tenant or prospective tenant. The record applies not just to the specific unit that the tenant is renting. The statute actually allows the tenant to inspect the record for each dwelling unit or premises for which the landlord has accepted a security deposit.

Let’s say that the landlord takes a security deposit from a tenant who has signed a multi-year lease. At the end of each year of a tenancy, the landlord shall pay to the tenant the interest that has been received from the bank where the security deposit has been held. See G. L. c. 186, § 15B (3) (b). Also, at the end of each year of tenancy, the landlord shall give the tenant a statement that indicates “the name and address of the bank in which the security deposit has been placed, the amount of the deposit, the account number, and the amount of interest payable by such lessor to the tenant.” See id. The landlord also shall notify the tenant that he or she may deduct the interest from the tenant’s next rental payment.

What happens when the tenancy ends? Within thirty days, the landlord must return the security deposit, or the balance thereof, to the tenant. The security deposit law specifies three types of deductions that the landlord may make. In a nutshell, deductions are permitted for unpaid rent or water charges; an unpaid increase in real estate taxes which the tenant is obligated to pay pursuant to a tax escalation clause; and a reasonable amount necessary to repair any damage, reasonable wear and tear excluded. See G. L. c. 186, § 15B (4).

Note that if the landlord wishes to deduct for damage, he must provide to the tenant within such thirty days, “an itemized list of damages, sworn to by the lessor or his agent under pains and penalties of perjury, itemizing in precise detail the nature of the damage and of the repairs necessary to correct such damage, and written evidence, such as estimates, bills, invoices or receipts, indicating the actual or estimated cost thereof.” See G. L. c. 186, § 15B (4) (iii).

The statute also details what must happen when a landlord who is holding a security deposit transfers the property. See G. L. c. 186, § 15B (5).

The statute also details that the landlord shall forfeit his right to retain the security deposit if he fails to deposit the funds as required; fails to furnish to the tenant an itemized list of damages within thirty days after the termination of the occupancy; uses in a lease any provision which conflicts with the security deposit law, or seeks to obtain a waiver from it; fails to transfer the security deposit to a new owner; or fails to return to the tenant the security deposit or balance thereof to which the tenant is entitled after deducting therefrom any sums in accordance with the provisions of this section, together with any interest thereon, within thirty days after termination of the tenancy. See G. L. c. 186, § 15B (6).

About the author: Robert Nislick is a Massachusetts real estate lawyer who handles residential and commercial landlord-tenant matters. For more information, call him at (508) 405-1238, or e-mail him at rob@nislick.com.

Don’t Do It – The Case Against Taking a Security Deposit in Massachusetts

By Robert Nislick

You are a Massachusetts landlord. A new tenant is about to lease your house or apartment from you. You would like to take a security deposit from this person.

In the event that the tenant damages the property or fails to pay rent, the idea of having a security deposit available to cover these costs may seem like a good idea. Most landlords probably don’t appreciate the irony that taking a security deposit, in reality, subjects them to a great deal of risk.

If you knew that you could make an honest mistake and still end up having to pay the tenant three times the security deposit, five percent interest, court costs, and the tenant’s attorney’s fees, would you still take one?

Let’s say you took a $2,000.00 security deposit. For whatever reason, you failed to place these funds in a separate bank account. Alternatively, you failed to return the security deposit to the tenant within thirty days after the end of the tenancy.

Under these scenarios, the security deposit law states that, “the tenant shall be awarded damages in an amount equal to three times the amount of such security deposit or balance thereof to which the tenant is entitled plus interest at the rate of five per cent from the date when such payment became due, together with court costs and reasonable attorney’s fees.” See G. L. c. 186, § 15B (7).

The landlord could easily have to pay the tenant more than $7,000.00. Additionally, once a judgment enters, it grows at 12% per year.

Let’s say the tenant sues the landlord to recover her security deposit. Suppose the tenant has damaged the premises. The statute sets forth five separate situations in which the landlord would be barred from filing a counterclaim for damage to the premises. See G. L. c. 186, § 15B (6). The landlord, however, would not be entirely without a remedy. He would have to file a separate civil suit against the tenant to recover for property damage. Nevertheless, the statute forces the landlord to take a more convoluted procedural route than a defendant, in most other kinds of cases, normally has to take.

Suppose the tenant files a small claim against the landlord to recover a security deposit and wins. The landlord wishes to appeal. Under G. L. c. 218, § 23, the landlord would have to provide a bond in an amount roughly equal to the amount of the judgment that entered against him, in order to appeal and have a new trial.

Let’s back up for a moment. Imagine that a tenant who just moved out has wrecked the place. The landlord wants to deduct from the security deposit to repair damage caused by the tenant beyond reasonable wear and tear. Even if the landlord follows the statute to the letter in making the deduction, the tenant may still disagree and choose to file suit. A landlord could easily find himself forced to expend time and resources defending against what appears to be a frivolous or meritless lawsuit.

Under all the circumstances, why would a landlord still want to take a security deposit? It is true that not every landlord gets burned. But if the decision to take a security deposit carries with it a substantial risk of suffering an expensive and unjust outcome, then wouldn’t the landlord simply be better off not taking one to begin with?

About the author: Robert Nislick is a Massachusetts real estate lawyer who handles residential and commercial landlord-tenant matters. For more information, call him at (508) 405-1238, or e-mail him at rob@nislick.com.

Commercial Tenants’ Rights and Remedies in Massachusetts

By Robert Nislick

You are a Massachusetts commercial tenant. Your company leases space and pays a handsome rent to your Massachusetts commercial landlord. Unfortunately, the landlord utterly fails to maintain the leased premises. The condition of the space is so poor that it affects your ability to operate your business. What can you do?

One question a commercial tenant might ask is whether there is a right to withhold rent. The answer is no. In sharp contrast with the law governing residential tenancies, Massachusetts law recognizes no right of a commercial tenant to withhold rent.

Suppose that a commercial tenant stops paying rent because the conditions of the leased premises are defective. The landlord terminates the tenancy and commences a summary process action. In addition to attempting to assert a rent withholding defense, the commercial tenant also files counterclaims based on the bad conditions.

In this situation, a court is highly likely to dismiss the tenant’s counterclaims. “[T]he summary process statute precludes counterclaims in commercial actions”. Fafard v. Lincoln Pharmacy of Milford, Inc., 439 Mass. 512, 515 (2003). Moreover, a tenant’s argument that the landlord breached the lease “does not justify withholding rent”. See Fafard, 439 Mass. at 516.

What if the commercial tenant simply stops paying rent? Unless “the breach of contract has an extortionate quality”, “a failure to perform obligations under a written lease, even though deliberate and for reasons of self-interest, does not present an occasion for invocation of c. 93A remedies. Conventional damages achieve the goal of compensation, particularly because written leases often, as here, provide that the landlord may recover the legal expenses of pursuit, plus interest at the rate of twelve percent.” Atkinson v. Rosenthal, 33 Mass. App. Ct. 219, 226 (1992). This case generally stands for the idea, even if the tenant’s breach is intentional, the tenant will probably not be liable to the landlord under G. L. c. 93A, but still may have to pay the landlord’s attorney’s fees if the lease provides for it, in addition to the rent owed, and interest. Note that it is not recommended that any party, landlord or tenant, breach its contractual obligations.

If the landlord terminates the tenancy, will the tenant still have to pay rent? “It is well settled in the Commonwealth that when a landlord terminates a lease following the default of a tenant, the tenant is obligated to pay the rent due prior to the termination but has no obligation to pay any rent that accrues after the termination unless the lease otherwise provides.” 275 Washington Street Corp. v. Hudson River Int’l, LLC, 465 Mass. 16, 21 (2013).

The tenant will still most likely have financial obligations to the landlord even after the lease is terminated, such as “payments in an amount equal to the rent he had been paying”, or liquidated damages, rent acceleration, or indemnification. See 275 Washington Street Corp., 465 Mass. at 21-22.

Do any viable remedies exist for the commercial tenant? A commercial tenant may be able to terminate the lease based on the landlord’s failure to keep the building in proper repair.

In Wesson v. Leone Enters., Inc., 437 Mass. 708 (2002), the Court adopted the rule of mutually dependent covenants as contained in the Restatement (Second) of Property (Landlord and Tenant) § 7.1 (1977), such that:

“Except to the extent the parties to a lease validly agree otherwise, if the landlord fails to perform a valid promise contained in the lease to do, or to refrain from doing, something . . . and as a consequence thereof, the tenant is deprived of a significant inducement to the making of the lease, and if the landlord does not perform his promise within a reasonable period of time after being requested to do so, the tenant may (1) terminate the lease . . . .” Wesson, 437 Mass. at 720.

Another potential theory the tenant may pursue is based on constructive eviction. It is difficult, however, to prove constructive eviction in the commercial context. The tenant would need to prove that the defects made “the premises untenantable for the purposes for which they were used. See Wesson, 437 Mass. at 715.

A commercial landlord does have a statutory duty to correct unsafe conditions. “[T]he statutory duty of a landlord under G. L. c. 186, § 19, to exercise reasonable care to correct an unsafe condition described in a written notice from a tenant applies to commercial leases.” Bishop v. TES Realty Trust, 459 Mass. 9, 11 (2011).

G. L. c. 186, § 19, states in pertinent part:

“A landlord or lessor of any real estate . . . shall, within a reasonable time following receipt of a written notice from a tenant forwarded by registered or certified mail of an unsafe condition, not caused by the tenant . . . exercise reasonable care to correct the unsafe condition described in said notice . . . . The tenant . . . injured as a result of the failure to correct said unsafe condition within a reasonable time shall have a right of action in tort against the landlord or lessor for damages.”

G. L. c. 186, § 19.

Nevertheless, in Humphrey v. Byron, 447 Mass. 322 (2006), the Court rejected a request to impose a duty on commercial landlords “to exercise reasonable care to assure that others legitimately on the leased premises were not subject to an unreasonable risk of harm.” Humphrey v. Byron, 447 Mass. 322, 323 (2006).

About the author: Robert Nislick is a Massachusetts real estate lawyer. He can be reached at (508) 405-1238, or by e-mail at rob@nislick.com.

Late Fees in Massachusetts Residential Leases

You are a Massachusetts landlord. You are leasing an apartment to a tenant. In the event that the tenant pays rent late, you want to be able to collect a late fee from him or her.

Can the landlord impose a late fee against a tenant who pays rent late?

“No lease or other rental agreement shall impose any interest or penalty for failure to pay rent until thirty days after such rent shall have been due.” G. L. c. 186, § 15B (1) (c).

Under this statute, the landlord can include a lease provision that requires the tenant to pay a late fee, but only if the late fee is imposed after the rent has been late for thirty days.

If the lease contains a provision that imposes a late fee when the rent is less than thirty days late, the landlord will not be able to collect it. Such a provision would most likely be deemed to be against public policy and void and unenforceable.

Robert Nislick is a Massachusetts landlord-tenant lawyer who practices in Boston Housing Court, Worcester Housing Court, Northeast Housing Court, Southeast Housing Court, Western Housing Court, and the summary process session of the District Court.

Employee Housing Licenses in Massachusetts

By Robert Nislick

A large residential property, whether a condominium or a rental, may need to provide housing to a building superintendent or custodian. Or sometimes, a business such as a hotel, resort, or a B&B, may need, or be able, to provide on-site housing to staff members and maintenance people.

The ability to house an employee can provide benefits for everyone involved. For the business owner or building owner, it is helpful to have someone who lives on the premises who can be contacted easily to take care of a problem at a moment’s notice. For the employee, he or she may receive good housing in a great location, which may otherwise be impossible to find or afford. For example, housing in the summertime is extremely limited and expensive on Cape Cod, Nantucket and Martha’s Vineyard.

The employer, building owner, condominium trustee, or property manager, will want to structure the manner in which she provides housing to her employee so as to make it as easy as possible to evict the employee, if something unfortunate happens and the employee must be terminated.

Mainly, the employer should not assume the status of a landlord vis-à-vis the employee. The nature of the housing relationship between the employer and the employee should not become one of landlord and tenant. Especially where the employer is providing a benefit to the employee, in the nature of free housing, the employee should not also become a tenant. Instead, the employer can better protect herself if she provides housing as a licensor, and the employee accepts the housing as a licensee. One case has held that generally, occupancy which is subsidiary and necessary to the efficient performance of the employee’s duties does not give rise to a landlord-tenant relation.

About the author: Attorney Robert Nislick is a Massachusetts lawyer with experience in real estate disputes and landlord-tenant matters. Contact him to draft an employee housing license, or for more information.

Motion to Issue Execution

By Robert Nislick

You are a Massachusetts landlord and you are trying to evict your tenants. You have already terminated their tenancy, served them with a summons and complaint, entered the case in the Housing Court or District Court, and appeared on the day of trial.

On the day of trial, you mediated your case with a housing specialist. You entered into a Summary Process Agreement for Judgment. The tenants agreed in writing to catch up on past due rent and to pay the rent on time going forward. The judge approved the agreement and it became an order of the court. You left the courthouse feeling pretty good.

Then the first of the month comes. You haven’t received any money from the tenants. They haven’t paid the rental arrearage either. How can this be? After all, they said they would pay, and you believed them.

The tenants have breached the agreement. Now you are losing even more money. And the tenants are still living in the apartment.

Your agreement for judgment probably includes a provision like this:

“If either party alleges that the other party has failed to comply with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, she/he may mark a hearing for enforcement of the Agreement or for issuance of execution upon three (3) business days, written notice to the other party and filed with the court. The three (3) day period begins when the other side receives notice. Unless otherwise agreed, notice is to be delivered rather than mailed.”

What can you do now? At this point, the landlord will want to file a Motion to Issue Execution. A motion to issue execution asks the Court to give you the document that can be used to physically remove the tenants and their belongings from the premises. In the motion, the landlord explains that the parties entered into an agreement for judgment, states that the tenants have substantially violated the agreement, explains why, and asks the Court to issue the execution.

The landlord then files the motion with the Court, marks it to be heard at an appropriate time and date, and notifies the tenants. On the day of the motion hearing, the Court will likely ask the parties to mediate the case again. This may present a good opportunity to collect some money from the tenants. If the tenants have breached the agreement for judgment and you cannot work out some arrangement with them, or if the tenants have not shown up, then you will appear before the judge and argue your motion. The motion will probably be allowed.

Soon you should receive an Execution On Judgment For Summary Process. This is the document you need to move the tenant out.

Hopefully, at this point, the tenant will have voluntarily vacated the premises.

If not, can you do it yourself? No. You will want to send the Execution to the sheriff or to a constable. He will serve a 48-hour notice on the tenant, and schedule a move out. If that officer removes the defendant’s personal property from the premises, he must store it. The plaintiff must also pay the moving costs, which are in theory, reimbursable from the defendant.

Robert Nislick is a Massachusetts landlord-tenant lawyer who practices in Boston Housing Court, Worcester Housing Court, Northeast Housing Court, Southeast Housing Court, Western Housing Court, and the summary process session of the District Court.

Evictions For Cause and the 7-Day Notice to Quit

By Robert Nislick

You are a Massachusetts landlord and you have a tenant who has violated the lease in some material fashion. It is possible that your tenant has done some or any of the following:

  • made so much noise that it interferes with the quiet enjoyment of other tenants.
  • allowed unauthorized occupants to live in the unit.
  • acted to destroy, deface, damage, impair or remove any part of the premises.
  • obtained the apartment through fraud by providing the landlord with false information on the rental application.
  • kept dogs or other pets without the landlord’s permission.
  • failed to control dogs or other animals on the property.
  • subletted the premises in violation of the lease.
  • chronically paid rent late.

Hopefully, as a landlord, you will not encounter any of these nightmarish scenarios. They do happen, however.

It should be noted that the examples provided above do not include situations where the tenant may be doing things that are even worse, such as using the premises for purposes of prostitution, illegal gaming, illegal sale of alcoholic beverages, illegal keeping, sale, or manufacture of controlled substances, i.e. drugs, or the illegal keeping of a weapon. If the tenant is doing any of these really bad things, then a separate statute, G. L. c. 139, § 19, allows the landlord to void the lease, and seek declaratory and injunctive relief, including the issuance of an execution for possession to be levied upon forthwith.

You decide to evict the tenant for cause. A landlord may terminate a tenancy for cause when the tenant has violated the terms and conditions of the lease or occupancy agreement between the parties. The burden is on the plaintiff to show the alleged lease violations by a preponderance of the evidence. See Hodess v. Bonefont, 401 Mass. 693, 695 (1988).

What kind of notice to quit must the landlord provide to the tenant? If the parties have signed the Greater Boston Real Estate Board Standard Form Apartment Lease, then paragraph 24, “Non-Performance or Breach by Lessee”, allows the landlord to terminate the tenancy by serving a 7-Day Notice to Quit. Seven days notice is sufficient to terminate a tenancy if the lease so provides.

If there is no lease provision that provides for termination for cause on seven-days notice, or if the tenant is a tenant at will, then the landlord will most likely have to provide a thirty-day notice to quit. But if the tenant has also failed to pay rent, then the landlord may decide simply to bring the summary process case after serving a Fourteen Day Notice to Quit for Nonpayment of Rent. There may be reasons why simply bringing the case as a nonpayment case could present problems. Then again, there may be reasons why the landlord should forego terminating the tenancy for cause, and simply evict the tenant for nonpayment of rent. The landlord should seek counsel rather than doing it himself or herself.

Robert Nislick is a Massachusetts landlord-tenant lawyer who practices in Boston Housing Court, Worcester Housing Court, Northeast Housing Court, Southeast Housing Court, Western Housing Court, and the summary process session of the District Court.