Comment Detail

Comment

I would like to thank FHFA for this effort to introduce common sense tenant protections to those multifamily properties backed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The entire reason that the Government is involved in the nation's multifamily housing market is to help ensure all Americans have access to decent housing they can afford.

It seems extremely reasonable to require landlords who receive federally-backed loans to actually agree to some guarantees that they will use the funds for their intended purpose. The status quo has at times created an absurd result where landlords benefit from federally-backed loans, only to undermine the purpose for which those loans were backed. I believe most landlords want to deal fairly with their tenants, and tenant protections would simply reinforce their good practices. But there are bad actors in this industry as there are in all industries, and it is those bad actors who lead the charge in hiking rents, delaying maintenance, abusing local courts' eviction processes, and often force other landlords into a "race to the bottom" just to compete.

Tenant protections are not just good for tenants. They are good for responsible landlords who until now are forced to compete with the bad actors on an uneven playing field.

A few suggestions I have for basic tenant protections are:

- Tenants should be able to communicate directly with their landlord. Management companies have a valuable role in the industry, but that role is not to prevent tenants from contacting their landlord directly if needed. This is also a benefit to mom-and-pop landlords, as they may never have an opportunity to hear from a tenant if their property is being mismanaged if the tenant cannot contact them.

- Fair, standardized leases. Having rented several homes across several states over the last fourteen years, I have seen a very wide range of lease terms. Some try to limit a tenant's access to a fair trial in any dispute through practices such as jury trial waivers. Some try to cut off access to justice entirely via mandatory binding arbitration clauses. Leases often provide for any "administrative" fee or other junk fee to come out of a rent payment before the rent itself, making it easier to evict for any shortfall, even a minor one. One lease addendum included a provision declaring any damaged vehicle to be "inoperable" and thus subject to towing from the premises. Another addendum provided that any arrest, even for simple drug possession, was a material breach of the lease and cause for eviction. In my experience, larger corporate landlords have the most draconian, anti-tenant provisions in their leases, so I do not think these provisions are the consequence of cash-strapped "mom-and-pop" operation trying to make ends meet.

- There should not be a mandatory fee to pay rent. At my current complex, an "administrative fee" is charged for every available method to pay rent. Checks and cash are not accepted and attempts to pay by those means are refused. If a fee is mandatory to pay rent, it is part of the rent, and should be disclosed as such when housing is advertised.

- Basic maintenance, utilities, and habitability standards. Not all states and cities have comprehensive habitability requirements for multifamily housing. The Government should not be in the business of backing poorly-maintained, uninhabitable housing.

Thank you very much for your time and attention. I look forward to seeing FHFA's progress in this important work.