Should Your Landlord Be Able To Decide If Your Significant Other Can Stay The Night?

Remember the days of Three’s Company, when the only way a man could convince the landlord to let him stay in an apartment with two single women was by pretending to be gay? Even when I first moved to New York in the mid-’90s, more than a few landlords told me I could only have male roommates and that female overnight guests were frowned upon. But times are changing and most people just expect their landlord to butt out, so long as they aren’t knocking down walls or installing hot tubs in the bathroom. But there are still some people out there that don’t want any unwed hanky-panky going on under their roof.

This is the question being posed on Reddit, by someone who says that after his girlfriend spent the night for the first time, his landlord “came down and told both of us separately that I was not allowed to have her stay over.”

His story is complicated by the fact that he’s not living in a completely separate apartment from his landlord’s house, but instead is paying rent for a bedroom, den, and cooking area, with a bathroom that he shares.

“I have my own door leading outside and there’s no reason for her to be down here other than the freezer,” he writes.

Tenant laws vary by location (this person happens to live in Alberta, Canada) so it’s hard to get into legal questions of whether or not this person’s landlord should have a say in the matter.

So instead, we just wanted to ask the Consumerist Hive Mind for its opinion on whether landlords should be able to have some say in who stays the night at your rented apartment.


Edit Your Comment

  1. Salesman! says:

    Heyyyy someone was on Reddit today.

  2. MrMongerty says:

    You get into a sticky situation of setting curfews if someone isn’t allowed to stay overnight.

    If I am allowed to have people over during the day, I don’t see any reasonable cause that I couldn’t have someone stay the night. The only case I can see it becoming an issue is if your significant other is around often enough that you would consider them another tenant that isn’t on the lease.

    • bluline says:

      Correct. What is the definition of staying overnight? If someone comes over at 8:00 p.m. and leaves at 4:00 a.m., is that overnight? What about 6:00 a.m.? What about midnight? Specifying any specific time is the same as setting a curfew.

  3. evilpete says:

    Is the Apartment even legal ?

    • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

      Sounds like it is – if it’s a separate egress, full kitchen, and at least one bedroom with closet and window – then it should be considered a legal apartment.

  4. Quirk Sugarplum says:

    I would appreciate an objective second opinion on the person(s) I bring home after last call.

  5. SkokieGuy says:

    This one is pretty simple. Even if the space is downstairs, it seems that the tenant and landlord are also roommates – sharing the same dwelling.

    In this situation, it is totally appropriate to set ground rules. But the first time this is brought up shouldn’t be after the GF starts spending evenings, it should have been a point of discussion, prior to renting. Overnight guests are no different than rules about smoking, who pays utilities, sharing cleaning chores, etc.

    • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

      “I have my own door leading outside and there’s no reason for her to be down here other than the freezer,” he writes.

      Separate egress typically means that it’s an independent dwelling, and they are not really roommates.

      • SkokieGuy says:

        You must have missed the part about the shared bathroom? Sounds like a finished basement.

        • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

          I did miss that! I wish he’d said the kitchen situation. Shared kitchen I’d probably side with the landlord. Shared bathroom I’m on the fence.

          I definitely don’t think yuu can have someone stay more than a certain number of days, but I don’t know if the landlord can say you can’t have someone sleep over.

    • one swell foop says:

      Negative ghostrider. Ground rules my ass. Unless it is contracted, or determined by statute, that the property owner can set rules and determine who can and cannot come onto the leased property, any rules that are adopted governing this would be purely voluntary on the part of the lessee. While the lessor may have grounds to be more restrictive on what goes on in the shared areas, unless contractually or legally given, the lessor has no right to restrict the lessee’s use of the area to which he has exclusive rights.

  6. PBallRaven says:

    My lease agreements that I give to tenants say they can’t have guests longer than 14 days without my approval. Other than that I’m OK with it.

  7. Cor Aquilonis says:

    I would suggest getting a lawyer to talk to the landlord, and then preparing myself to move out at the end of the lease.

  8. frank64 says:

    Because it is only a room someone is sharing I think the owner has every right to say only one person. There is a difference in having someone stop over during the day than spending the night. If that was brought up as logic, I would just say no one during the day. I actually think if you are just renting out a room, as long as it is disclosed at renting, not allowing any visitors is fair game.

  9. Xboxer says:

    I don’t know about Canada laws but my own personal policy is if I’m paying rent I can have whoever I want over in my own private space. The only exception is letting a girlfriend stay over for more than a few days. I can see why a landlord would have a problem with you basically just moving someone in, but even that’s iffy because don’t they have to prove you have someone living with you? I once had a landlord that was just jealous I was getting more action than he was.

    • racermd says:

      I was once on the landlord’s side of this issue (renting a room out of my home to a friend when they needed a place to stay for a while). We did discuss this issue before it became necessary. My personal rule was that nobody else was allowed into the home while I was out. It was expected that I would meet any new persons face-to-face and “approve” them before they’d be allowed unsupervised access or keys. Remember – they might be trusted by my “tenant” but they’d still be in my home. I don’t let random people into my home unsupervised, period.

      Though I’m no longer housing anyone other than my wife and child (the offer still stands to all my friends and family should they really need it), my stance still hasn’t changed.

      In other words, I’m taking the landlord’s position on this issue. If there’s open access to other private areas of the home, dedicated access or not, the landlord definitely has the right to vet and potentially ban any other parties that may be in the home unsupervised.

      • chancyrendezvous says:

        I agree. If there’s access to the landlord’s portion of the home, then s/he should have the final word on guests. If the dwellings are completely separate, that changes the issue a bit.

  10. Sarek says:

    Doesn’t it depend on the public accommodation laws in the particular location? Not to mention renting a room is different from renting an apartment.

  11. selianth says:

    If there are clear rules in the lease that were agreed to before the tenant moved in, then sure. No overnight guests for more than X days in a row or X times within a 30 day period. I would be a tenant in that situation. I would not sign a lease that specified “no opposite-gender guests” or something more specific. And it is absolutely not right to make up rules after the fact.

  12. alexwade says:

    I look at this like a “my house, my rules” sort of thing. If you don’t like it, leave.

  13. Snapdragon says:

    My answer would be, “It depends on what the rental agreement says.” If it doesn’t say anything about not having the occasional guest over, and her presence isn’t impacting the landlord in a negative way (beside inflaming moral indignation–like she’s hogging the shower, etc.), then the landlord is really overreacting.

    I would second that suggestion to consult a lawyer and start looking for a new place to live.

    • pmormr says:

      Thank god for PA landlord/tenant act…

      “The tenant also shall have right to invite to his apartment or dwelling unit, for a reasonable period of time, such social guest, family or visitors as he wishes so long as his obligations as a tenant under this article are observed. These rights may not be waived by any provisions of a written rental agreement and the landlord and/or owner may not charge any fee, service charge or additional rent to the tenant for exercising his rights under this act.”

      Too bad that this doesn’t apply in Canada. This provision came in handy when my apartment complex tried to charge to “register parties.”

      • jeepguy57 says:

        But that sounds like it applies more to a separate apartment or dwelling. Not a room in a shared house. I think that changes the game.

  14. MrEvil says:

    In this situation, I think it’s more than reasonable to restrict overnight guests. The Landlord and tenant have shared space(s) in their living arrangement. Overnight guests pose a risk to the landlord’s continued use of those space(s), not to mention the risk to personal possessions.

    If the apartment were completely separated with no shared space then the landlord has no reason to fear for his continued use of the bathroom, nor does he have to fear for his personal property.

    I actually drew myself some crude plans for a two story house where the upper floor could be easily cordoned off from the ground floor and rented out like an apartment. If the upstairs wasn’t making anymore money the stairs could be opened and the house be used like a normal 2 story.

  15. wmibizownr says:

    My son and his buddies moved out (and lost their deposit) after the landlord instituted a “no over night guests” 2 days after they moved in. That meant even his sister who commutes to college in the same town couldn’t stay over due to hazardous winter roads or any guest who drank a few too many couldn’t take a couch when he took their keys. Nor could any out of town family come for a weekend visit and stay. This was a 5 bedroom 2800 sq ft house with a couple extra den/sitting areas rented by 4 college grads.

    Our insurance agent wasn’t so happy with this either as the owner wouldn’t be liable in a drinking and driving lawsuit…

    • StarKillerX says:

      Well houses rented to college students like that are normally on a per person basis, that can make a fortune renting them that way, so I would imagine that this was basically a way to keep from renting to 4 people but having 5 people, or more, living their constantly.

  16. Ilovegnomes says:

    “…but instead is paying rent for a bedroom, den, and cooking area, with a bathroom that he shares.” That’s a housemate situation. If you go this route, you have to ask what the house rules are before moving in. As someone who use to rent in this type of capacity, I’ve heard it all… from no eating meat in the house to no sugar products in the kitchen to no one staying over ever.

    It’s only if your are paying for all spaces (nothing shared) that you get to make your own rules. This is the unspoken law of renting.

  17. YouDidWhatNow? says:

    Not exactly on-topic, but it reminded me of a bizarre dialog that occurred between a buddy of mine and his roommate…

    They’d both just moved into a condo together, and agreed to split all the costs 50/50. A couple weeks later, roommate decides that he’s going to invite his girlfriend, and her daughter, to move in with him. Which logistically wasn’t really an issue…there was plenty of room.

    However, when my friend points out to his roommate that since there are now 3 adults living in the house (nevermind the young girl), the rent et al really should be split up 3 ways, with each person responsible for a third of the costs.

    Roommate wrenches his face up and says “well no, she’s just *living with me* so that’s still just 50% of the costs.”

    This goes round-and-round in a mind-bending spiral for quite some time. Eventually all parties agreed to pay a third of the costs and life moved on…but the initial conversation-cum-argument was painful to bear witness to.

    • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

      Not surprising, the person causing the inconvenience is the one that thinks its “totally cool” and shouldn’t change how much they pay.

    • dks64 says:

      I can see both sides of that, but the couple should definitely be paying more in utilities. If the couple and girl are sharing 1 bedroom and don’t overflow into the main living space, I don’t think 1/3 each is completely equal (although the roommate should have asked before moving the girlfriend and girl in). I’m glad they came to an agreement.

      • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

        They should be paying 1/3 the rent, with MAYBE a slight adjustment for them sharing a bedroom instead of taking up an additional bedroom.

        It’s not just the utility usage, it’s the physical space they occupy while there – using the living room, the kitchen, fridge space, arranging having friends over, their messes, the bathroom space, etc.

        And then you add the kid, who is likely going to cause a bigger mess, more inconvenience, and less fridge space than the other two people combined.

        And it’s just the principle of it! It’s completely unfair to the 3rd party to say someone gets to live with you for free.

        • Bsamm09 says:

          I agree 100%. I’d keep it at 1/3 since there is a kid.Kids can be a pain. Also, does the kid sleep in the same room as the other two? If I were the kid, I’d be in the living room a lot more or outside.

      • Charmander says:

        I hope the couple and girl aren’t sharing one bedroom.

    • selianth says:

      Yeah, my now-husband and I shared a 2-bedroom apartment with a friend right out of college. We split the rent 3 ways. Just cause 2 of us were sharing a bedroom doesn’t mean there weren’t 3 people using the common areas. Then again we all rented the place together up front so it was agreed to beforehand. Much easier that way.

  18. Tim says:

    In the U.S. at least, tenant laws rarely apply to landlords who own fewer than about four rental properties (except laws saying you have to have a toilet and heat and such). So legally, the landlord would probably be alright in the U.S. I don’t know about Canada.

    Beyond the legality, the tenant and landlord are basically roommates. So this isn’t just about what’s happening in a building you own, it’s about what’s happening in your home.

  19. CalicoGal says:

    If the guy shares a bathroom and lets his GF stay over, that is impinging on the living space of whomever he shares the bathroom with.
    Also, if she showers, then that is adding to the cost of water for whomever is responsible for that bill.

    Now, if this were a COMPLETELY self-contained separate apartment, that is a whole other situation.

  20. dulcinea47 says:

    How about “only if they put it in the lease”? My lease specifies that I’m not supposed to have guests staying longer than… I think it’s two weeks? B/c after that they pretty much become another tenant.

    If your landlord just wants to make this up on the spot, then no.

    • dulcinea47 says:

      Meant to add- the OP’s situation is different, b/c if you’re sharing a bathroom, that’s more like a roommate in that it directly effects the “landlord”. Who still should have put it in the lease, but has more of a leg to stand on than if they didn’t share living space.

    • dks64 says:


  21. AustinTXProgrammer says:

    Most landlords like to background check the residents. They also want to make sure they don’t have too many people living in a small space. In fact, some areas are zoned so that only a specified maximum number of unrelated adults can can live in the same building.

    There is a fine line between guest and short term resident. I have previously signed leases that set that line at 72 hours and stuck with it.

    I think it should all be spelled out in the lease. If it isn’t I would try to work out an amicable solution and put it in writing.

  22. El_Fez says:

    Every lease I’ve ever seen dictates something like “Guests may not stay longer than X Days. Stays longer than X must be cleared with the landlord.”

    So yes, if you’re not on the lease, they can dictate the terms of who stays and for how long.

  23. dush says:

    Think about the utility bills. The guy is paying for himself to live there. Not two people to be staying over all the time and using water, electricity, creating trash, etc.

  24. Wysguy says:

    it depends on the circumstances. From what I interpret in this case (renting a couple rooms with a shared bathroom), the landlord has every right to reject unregistered visitors. if it was a complete apartment (i.e., complex) and the tenant pays his/her own utilities, then, no, the landlord should butt out.

  25. becina says:

    In general I give the landlord a lot more leeway if the renter is only renting a room in the home. I am fine with the landlord having a lot more say in terms of guests and entertaining, than if the renter had their own apartment. Who knows, maybe the landlord overheard some activity that made them uncomfortable. But these kinds of things should be clearly spelled out between the landord and renter before the tenancy begins.

  26. araustin81 says:

    Depends what is in the lease. My lease (I’m in Texas) limits the number of days someone who is not on the lease can stay in the apartment. This is probably because water bills are decided by occupancy at my complex. Occasional guests are permitted, then, but nightly guests are not allowed. That being said, I don’t think my landlord keeps a list of the nights I have a guest.

  27. Harry Greek says:

    If it is your own apartment – no.

    If you are sharing an apartment/dwelling – yes, provided that is what you agreed on before you moved in with him/her.

    Something like this should have been brought up by either or both sides before moving in.

  28. daemonaquila says:

    This is basically a roommate situation, not just a guy renting an apartment that’s private to him. Under these circumstances, I have no problem with the landlord/roommate limiting who can stay over IF IT’S IN THE CONTRACT. I’ve had roommates bring friends over who started staying the night when they lost their place, then started stealing stuff, and on it went. So, I’m very sympathetic to the landlord’s position. Otherwise, if the tenant’s apartment is totally private, the landlord shouldn’t be able to say squat.

  29. SoCalGNX says:

    Depends on where they live but in most cases, people are are allowed to have company. If someone else moves in or stays a longer period of time, that might be different. It sounds like the landlord here wants to flex his religious viewpoint.

  30. Pre-Existing Condition says:

    I think it really depends on the exact wording of the lease.

    At a certain point, overnight house guests can turn into de facto tenants.

  31. Peggee has pearls and will clutch them when cashiers ask "YOU GOT A WIC CHECK MA'AM?" says:

    As far as “should be able to,” I feel like if the landlord actually lives on site (and especially in this case where there are shared areas), yes, they should be able to limit guests. I’m thinking more of the guy having male guests over, because the landlord shouldn’t have to worry about strange men in her house. But if she doesn’t want even girls over, that’s fair. She doesn’t deserve to worry that she’ll come home and find random people in the shared bathroom or that one of them will come into her living space.

  32. hjc628 says:

    The last place I lived had a clause in the lease that said anyone who stays for 14 consecutive days has to be on the lease and pay rent.

    • who? says:

      I had a clause like that when I owned a place and was renting rooms to roommates. If someone stayed more than 14 days in a month, they had to be added to the lease, and pay a full share of the utilities.

      I don’t have roommates anymore, but I do still own rental property. My leases say that anyone who stays more than 14 days has to fill out an application, pass a credit check, and get on the lease. Over the years, the only evictions I’ve ever done had to do with unapproved people moving in. The first was a group of 8 people living in a small (really small) 2 bedroom apartment. I originally rented to a married couple with 2 kids. I personally thought the place was too small for a family of four, but the kids were still small, so I didn’t judge. But the next thing I knew, the other tenants were telling me that there was a second family of four living in the same apartment, and that all 8 of them were spending all day yelling at each other.

      The second situation was when I rented a two bedroom apartment to two professional drag queens. They were nice guys, but they subleased every nook and cranny of the apartment to various drag queen friends. They even had a guy living in the detached garage. Again, the other tenants complained. This time, the guys were coming home from work at 3 am, and having parties until dawn. Every night. Apparently, it was like living next door to an episode of True Blood.

      • JenK says:

        I feel that a smarter way to deal with this is to put a maximum occupancy on each apartment. It would be less complicated and wouldn’t require changes to the lease each time someone new moves in, but would allow you to still control the number of people in the apartment.This is what my apartment does, it has max occupancy of 2 people.

      • evilpete says:

        I once met ( “picked up on” ) a girl who took me back to her place; when we got there I saw her bed was the middle spot on the pull out couch.

        Needless to say our date was over as I quickly exited, headed
        Home to the three bedroom house I live alone in…..


    • chatterboxwriter says:

      We have that in our lease, too; I wish our landlord would enforce it. We live in a duplex, so what our neighbors do actually does impact us. It’s not bad enough the people who are actually supposed to be living there are inconsiderate and slovenly; they have constant guests for weeks at a time. These guests smoke heavily (which wafts into our house; you open the door and it smells like smokers live here, and we don’t smoke or allow smoking), make noise at all hours of the night, get into screaming arguments with the actual tenants, and cause all kinds of trouble. Landlord knows about it, but he never does anything.

    • grumpygirl says:

      Mine does, too. Fortunately, my apartment manager has been very understanding that I married a Canadian that lives in Canada but comes to visit me for 4-6 weeks stretches. I’d put him on the lease, but I’m out of here as soon as my visa comes through and he doesn’t have any credit in the US for running the check.

    • missminimonster says:

      Mine says that except it’s 7 days.

    • GreatWhiteNorth says:

      As per the post the tenant shares space/facilities with the landlord. That means the tenant is a boarder and has a much smaller set of rights than a tenant of a self contained apartment. As a result the landlord in this case has the right to make any reasonable demands on the boarder. Limiting guests, both overnight and daytime, is reasonable.

  33. IGetsAnOpinion says:

    I was recently looking at house rentals in OBX and stopped at one that said “no unmarried couples”. Really? Would 5 college age guys renting the place be better? I thought…hmmm – do I know any gay married people who might want to rent a house here?

    • Mark S says:

      While in college, my roommates and I found a place that wouldn’t rent to unrelated people. So brothers could rent there, but friends could not.

      • nodaybuttoday says:

        How could they even verify that? Conduct a blood test?

      • kc-guy says:

        A lot of places in Utah are set up in a similar manner. I think it’s something like no more than 3 unrelated people in a per dwelling, (conveniently exempting over-priced student housing of course).

  34. Smiling says:

    This is an annoyance of mine because at our old apartment, they metered the water by the building, then divided it by the number of people in the building. If you had 3 people, you paid 3x that amount, if you had 2, you paid 2x that amount. The other apartments were rented by singles who would have people staying over all of the time. So, we were footing the bill for the people they had staying the night who were not on the lease. They were paying for one person living there even though their significant other would stay over more often than not.

  35. Chuft-Captain says:

    I’m pretty sure that a landlord is not allowed to determine who stays the night. Girlfriend, Boyfriend, or otherwise, as long as it does not involve illegal activity.

  36. Sarah of Get Cooking says:

    If it is clearly laid out in the lease, fine, it’s their place. But I probably wouldn’t sign such a lease.

    I’ve read that there used to be (and maybe still are in some places) laws limiting the number of women who could live in an apartment together in some cities, because of fears of them running a brothel.

  37. balderdashed says:

    It’s a silly question. I don’t believe there’s a right or wrong answer, as if handed down from the heavens, in any tenant-landlord issue. What matters is what the tenant and landlord agreed to in the lease, and applicable city and state laws. That said, in many jurisdictions in the U.S., a landlord could be in legal hot water for objecting to his tenant’s guests based on their gender, or on the landlord’s personal religious views. It is a different matter, though, if we’re talking about a single family home in which the owner/resident rents out a room or two. In such a case, many state laws would grant an exemption that would in effect allow the landlord to “discriminate” based on gender, marital status, etc. That makes sense — a homeowner renting out a room should have a greater say than an absentee property owner, over what happens under his own roof.

  38. Robert Nagel says:

    I know this will not be received well, but in my experience unmarried couples have a tendency to be much less responsible in their handling of my property.

  39. Alex says:

    I predicted this way back in ’01. Heartless people cashing in on a tragedy; The American dream.

  40. haoshufu says:

    Wow, this is so hard. Landlords want more control on their property but tenants want more freedom on the property they are paying rent on.

    State laws and contract laws govern, then it is up to the agreement between the parties.

  41. who? says:

    This is really a roommate situation, with the technicality that one of the roommates happens to own the property. Legally, they’re bound by whatever their lease and the local landlord/tenant laws say. More realistically, however, the landlord should have made his expectations clear before the tenant moved in. When I was in the same situation, I always made sure the tenant knew what my expectations were about sleepovers. Personally, I didn’t care if they had sleepovers, but I didn’t want anyone living in my place that I hadn’t approved, so I did care how often someone slept over.

  42. Cream Of Meat says:

    It’s a shared space rental, so yes the landlord has say. If it’s not covered in the rental agreement then sorry landlord piss off!

  43. Cream Of Meat says:

    How about this one….

    My friends mom moved out of state, leaving him (22) with the house that she still owns and he rents out the extra two rooms.

    She’s very christian and says she doesn’t want unmarried couples or just girls living there. He doesn’t have a problem with them. I overheard a phone conversation “because I don’t want that going on in my home”. Um… lady? Your son is 22 and has a girlfriend. Surely they’ve had sex in ever goddam room in that house, and you’re ok with (or oblivious to) that. So why cant a nice respectful unmarried couple live there?

  44. Mark702 says:

    These type of limitations, assuming it’s your own apartment not a shared one, are egregious and unacceptable. Which is why I ignore my lease, which says anyone staying overnight for more than 3 (!?) times a month is considered a resident and must go through the background check approval process with the rental company.

    I have a girlfriend who stays over 1/2 the time and friends who stay over 2-4 times a month. I don’t plan on submitting them to background checks or any of that garbage. Fuck em, I’ll do what I want.

    • cspschofield says:

      Assuming that the lease you signed is legal in your area (not necessarily a good assumption) then if your landlord finds out and wants to be a jerk, you could be in real trouble.

      I suppose you have the right to go through life signing contracts you do not intend to honor. You also have a right to go through life having people ram said contracts up you fundament, un-lubricated.

      I’m not saying your a bad person. I am suggesting that your tone (or the tone I took from your post, anyway) is a trifle unrealistic. “Nobody seems to check, and I’ve gotten away with it so far.” is reasonable. “F*ck em.” sounds like an invitation to a whole lot of trouble.

  45. duncanblackthorne says:

    If it’s spelled out in the rental agreement, then you’re kind of screwed. If it doesn’t mention it, then I’d say it’s none of their business. Of couse they can just hand you a 30 day notice to leave, and there’s nothing you can do about that, either, unless you really want to try to fight it and try to prove to a judge that it’s a punitive measure; good luck with that, though.

  46. consumerd says:

    The way my landlord did it at the time was the following. She could stay, but any trouble she causes he was allowed to ask her to leave as her name isn’t on the agreement. She lived with me for about a 1/2 year till we found a house. 2 years later she became a wife. It’s been about 12 yrs now.

  47. Chris Long says:

    Your Gay Agenda advocacy is noted..

  48. Bob A Dobalina says:

    What’s on the lease? Does it specify who may stay and for how long?

    If the landlord is specifically targeting female guests, that is a fair housing violation

    • stonelaw says:

      In any instance where a dwelling is shared (including common areas), the landlord is allowed to place limitations on the sex of the tenant under the Fair Housing Act.

      This specific incident was in Canada, the Fair Housing Act does not apply.

  49. bonzombiekitty says:

    Never really had any weird requirements from previous landlords. Mostly “only three of you can live here”… which we violated when my then fiance moved in for 8 months.

    Though when I was in college there was a pretty famous advertisement for an apartment just off campus that set a “no smoking, no alcohol, no intoxication at all in the house (i.e. no going out and coming home drunk) no more than 2 other people in the house at ANY TIME, no over night guests of the opposite sex” policy. Obviously trying to avoid college students, but it was advertised in the school paper as well as online. The restrictions were such that I’m surprised if he ever found a tenant, and that ad was around for months.

  50. bben says:

    First, this is not what I would call an apartment. The guy is renting a couple of rooms in someone elses home and sharing a common bathroom with the family. That makes all the difference. Now we have a case of a stranger with access to the rest of the home. In that case – Yes the landlord absolutely does have the right to forbid her from staying over – and it should have been a part of the lease/rental agreement.

    IF he had a completely separate apartment – with no access into the rest of the home – Then, as long as the GF was not moving in but just spending the night occasionally – No problem. However if she is staying over most of the time then the landlord is entitled to either have her sign a lease, with an increase in rent as 2 people will cause more wear and tear on the place than one – or he should move out and find a more private place to live.

    • july18 says:

      absolutely – i think that is confirmed by the majority of votes thinking the other person should move in and then everyone else has to deal with the problem AFTER they have become a nuisance – been there done that – no thanks; i’m not subsidizing anyone else’s inevitable domestic drama.

  51. nodaybuttoday says:

    You know, I don’t know what area of the country this is, but I don’t know how a landlord can afford to be that picky about who lives in the apartment. I mean, these days people aren’t moving too much and they are losing their jobs. At least two people living in an apartment would mean the rent might still be able to be paid if one lost their job. I have a friend, he has a job, his wife is a stay at home mom and they have a little girl. This one place said they were going to hold out on finding someone with two incomes before they rented to him. I would have said “Go f*** yourself” and found a different place… but that’s just me.

  52. Press1forDialTone says:

    They need to read their lease (imagine that!). If it says nothing about
    the “regulation” of visitors, then NO they can’t say a word. Now if that
    visitor turns to be a nightmare, causes damage or problems, etc, it WILL reflect on
    you as a tenant, regardless of what your lease says.

  53. Libertas1 says:

    Hows about you buy your own house, then you do whatever you want?

    • Press1forDialTone says:

      Today, owning a house is a “lifestyle”, not an investment. It used to be
      an investment but no longer. The enormous amount of money that you
      put into a house on a mortgage would be better off being carefully invested
      by a reputable retirement organization like MetLife, TIAA-CREF or Fidelity.
      The housing market is permanently broken now for a least a couple of
      generations, then it may recover. Many states allow you to deduct a
      substantial amount if not all of your rent from your gross income.

  54. july18 says:

    if you and your girlfriend or boyfriend want to play ‘house’ – do it on your own dime and you won’t have to worry about anyone’s permission but if you want to pretend like you’re still living at home in a bedroom … suck it up

  55. ganon446 says:

    It depends on the city and state laws but depending on where you live you might have common law law rules. Most people think think its discrimination in Chicago that we can’t let a poor single mother movie into a studio with 5 kids and herself when the city itself posts occupancy laws.