May 11, 5:52 PM click here to comment > 14
Why we support better rental housing inspections
The Seattle City Council is considering legislation that would allow Seattle to proactively inspect rental units for safety issues. We believe that people who cannot afford to pay much for rent deserve a safe unit, but complaining to the city can lead to landlord retribution. This ordinance, sponsored by Councilmember Sally Clark, levels the playing field.
Seattle’s current system is complaint-based – we cannot do anything unless a tenant complains about bad conditions in rental housing. Some tenants won’t complain if their landlord won’t make repairs, others won’t complain because they fear retaliation or a rent increase; others are unaware complaining to the City is even an option; and some won’t call a government agency for help because of language or cultural barriers. Requiring inspections for all rental units levels the playing field and assures all tenants safe rental housing that, at a minimum, meets housing code standards.
We appreciate Councilmember Clark’s work on this bill. Due to a law passed by the legislature this session, the law must be passed by June 10th or it cannot be passed at all. If you wish to weigh in on this legislation, contact information and a FAQ is below.
The legislation is being heard in the Committee on the Built Environment chaired by Counilmember Sally Clark on May 12 at 9:30 in City Council chambers. Councilmembers Tim Burgess and Sally Bagshaw are also on the committee. Seattle City Council contact information:
• Sally Bagshaw: sally.bagshaw@seattle.gov or 206-684-8801
• Tim Burgess: tim.burgess@seattle.gov or 206-684-8888
• Sally Clark: sally.clark@seattle.gov or 206-684-8802
• Richard Conlin: richard.conlin@seattle.gov or 206-684-8805
• Jean Godden: jean.godden@seattle.gov or 206-684-8807
• Bruce Harrell: bruce.harrell@seattle.gov or 206-684-8888
• Nick Licata: nick.licata@seattle.gov or 206-684-8803
• Mike O’Brien: mike.o’brien@seattle.gov or 206-684-8800
• Tom Rasmussen: tom.rasmussen@seattle.gov or 206-684-8808
Here are some answers to the questions we are getting about the legislation and why it is needed.
Who is affected by unsafe rental housing?
Everyone. In some cases, however, complaining to the city can lead to landlord retribution. Regardless of race, class, or immigration status, everyone deserves safe housing.
Is there a need for rental inspections?
Seattle has found units recently where:
• A married couple was rented a crawl space with a dirt floor as their place to live
• Six men were renting a unit where their toilet was located in the kitchen
• A university student was rented a furnace room as a bedroom
All of these situations would NOT cause the unit to fail an inspection under the standards set by the new state law.
Why does Seattle want landlords to be licensed?
Seattle wants rental housing to be safe and meet housing codes. Many residential tenants, as well as landlords, are unaware of the maintenance and safety standards required for rental housing in Seattle. The licensing program gives the City a means to improve the quality of rental housing because they will have to meet Seattle’s maintenance and safety standards. Under Seattle’s rental standards, any conditions that endanger tenants are not allowed.
Would someone lose their apartment if a violation is found?
Not in most cases. The city’s goal is to encourage landlords to fix a unit while still occupied. Only when there is an immediate risk of potential harm to a tenant would anyone be required to move out. For example, DPD is currently working with a large apartment complex in Ballard to allow the landlord to replace out of compliance baseboard heaters over time to minimize inconvenience to tenants and make the cost manageable for the landlord.
Would inspectors look for other violations or inquire about a renter’s immigration status?
No, in most cases inspectors will be private contractors and are only looking for violations of the building or housing code. City inspectors do not inquire about immigration status and focus on the physical condition of the building and premises, not the lives of renters.
What if a tenant doesn’t want his or her unit inspected?
The landlord has a right to, and should, inspect his or her rental units at regular intervals. With proper notice, the tenant is required to allow entry to the owner and an inspector for this purpose.
Why is rental inspection legislation being proposed?
The 2010 state legislature passed a bill limiting cities’ ability to enact proactive rental housing inspection programs. Such inspections are the method for cities to preemptively check that rental units are safe for all residents. The bill said that cities that want to have such a rental inspection program can only require checking for a limited list of conditions that present a current danger to the health or safety of tenants. Though this law sounds thorough, this precludes any inspections to show that rental housing complies with locally adopted housing codes that address the most basic of safety issues, including conditions not included on the list or those that may not yet endanger health or safety, but that will do so with further deterioration.
This same bill also imposes severe restrictions on any city in Washington that wants to proactively inspect rental housing, unless their program is adopted prior to June 10th , 2010. This short timeline is why this law was introduced following the legislative session.
Do other cities in Washington have a proactive rental inspection program?
Yes, Pasco and Tukwila both have rental inspection programs.
Why are rental housing business licenses required for owners who may own only one rental unit?
Renting out housing units to tenants is a business. All other business activities in the City of Seattle are required to obtain business licenses, even if they have only one business location. This would treat landlords the same as other business operators.
What does a Certificate of Compliance under this program mean?
The inspectors in this program will be inspecting for compliance with all of the items covered by Seattle’s housing code, not just those conditions that might endanger life safety. Therefore a certification of compliance assures the tenant that the unit being rented has been inspected and found to meet community housing standards.
How do I know the person inspecting my units is qualified?
This ordinance requires the inspectors under this program to be certified by one of several independent housing inspector organizations and to pass a test specific to Seattle’s housing code.
How are Seattle’s requirements different from those in the registration program provisions just authorized by the State Legislature?
The State legislation restricts local jurisdictions’ ability to design their own inspection programs. Conditions in rental housing vary based on location, e.g., what you find in in rural eastern Washington can be very different from the rental housing found in a large city such as Seattle. This proposal is tailored to the needs of the urban environment and the standards of the community in which these units are located. Under the state program, Seattle’s options are severely limited:
• Inspectors can inspect only for conditions that endanger health and safety, which mean many serious but non-life-threatening conditions will not be addressed.
• Units in buildings opened within the last four years and where no violation has been reported will NEVER be required to undergo inspection.
• Building owners dictate which units are inspected. This allows unscrupulous owners the opportunity to hide significant problems. By choosing to have only a small number of units in a multiunit building inspected, they can prevent inspectors from discovering significant problems in other units.
What happens if a landlord doesn’t obtain a license?
A landlord who doesn’t obtain a business license would be penalized with fines. In rare cases, the City could also seek a court order requiring a landlord to obtain a license or get out of the business of rental housing.
Posted by: Deputy Mayor Darryl Smith
Comments
Comment from Capitol Hill Renter
Time May 12, 2010 at 11:13 am
Can we also please adjust the rental laws to do away with the “fees” which are more like bribes in this region. Cleaning fees, administrative fees, application fees, etc. Also let’s make pet deposits actually deposits by making it mandatory they are refundable like security deposits. Standardizing credit check fees would be good too. Landlords around here get away with murder when it comes to what they can charge you just to move into a place compared to other cities. I have seen listings for apartments that could cost as much as $500 – $1000, money that is not refundable, just to move in.
In Chicago the only thing a landlord can charge you is a $25 per person credit check and a deposit that cannot exceed one month’s rent in $. Pet deposits can be additional, but must be 100% refundable unless your pet destroys the place…just like with a regular rental deposit. All other “fees” are against the law.
The landlord tenant laws in the region could use a serious updating. I previously wrote to representatives on the city council about this, but was always rebuffed with “market forces” rhetoric. Would be awesome if Mayor McGinn took up this issue.
Comment from Brett Miller
Time May 12, 2010 at 4:39 pm
The proposed changes sound great! As a previous Seattle renter who lived in less than stellar conditions, I can definitely see the upside of the bill. My only concern would be that many apartment buildings being forced to renovate would likely have to pass those costs along to renters, unless I am somehow mistaken on this matter. Thanks
Comment from Matt the Engineer
Time May 18, 2010 at 12:02 pm
Please be careful with these inspections. I’m fine with trying to fix or remove unsafe rentals, but remember that you’re affecting the most fragile population – the poorest of renters – and that this population is often a few dollars away from living on the street.
My questions aren’t on your list above, so I’ll list them here.
1. Who will pay for these inspectors? If you make the landlord pay you’re adding to the cost of renting space – which will add to the cost of rent.
2. What administrative red tape will be involved? I’m afraid that any regulation will reduce the low-income rental market. If I’m renting a tiny room in my basement out for $100/mo, adding paperwork or a visit to a city office might make me skip the hastle and convert the space to storage.
3. What would cause a landlord to be fined? I’m ok with large safety hazards being banned, but am concerned about where to draw the line. The tougher you are on landlords, the fewer low-rent spaces that will be available (and therefore the higher the rent).
Comment from Steven Bolin
Time May 31, 2010 at 6:13 am
I think the manadatory inspections of rental units is a good idea as well as the license requirements. Some people who rent unsafe rental units often not only affect tentants though also can cause problems for neighbors such as rental units that colpase onto neighbors homes and often the problems that cause such collapses are not visible externaly and owners may know about such safety risks but not do anything about them also rodents are often attracted to homes with openings in them and such can attract rodents to neighbors homes I am aware of a rental home with a bad odor under it and evidence of droppings under it and stucture problems that make it likekly to fall.
Comment from jim mcqueen
Time May 31, 2010 at 8:33 am
this law seems to just be looking for a new revenue source to keep more employees on the city’s payroll.
i also don’t understand why you are sinling ou rental units. if it is so important inspect everything- tenant occupied and also owner occupied.
agin i feel your main interest is to raise income and keep city employees.
Comment from Alex
Time June 1, 2010 at 1:45 pm
I and a host of others are against rental housing inspections legislation.
It will create another costly bureaucracy – pushing administration papers, taking people’s time and resources.
It is a way of penalizing nice people from going into rentals who try to provide our community with good housing.
It will not be helpful toward our city.
Problem cases are very small and need to be investigated individually as a tenant notifies the situation.
This is a poor direction the city is looking to and must be stopped.
Comment from L.S.
Time June 1, 2010 at 10:30 pm
Please support renters’ rights! I have a friend who continually asked for repairs in her unit only to have them ignored and then when she moved out, they passed the repairs fees on to her! The large rental companies should be looked into for such abuse.
Comment from Katie
Time June 4, 2010 at 2:34 pm
Will renting a room in your own house be cause for inspection?
Comment from Small Landlord
Time June 7, 2010 at 3:52 pm
I have three units I rent out. My experience is that tenants do not take proper care of their abodes unless a system of deposits is in place. I repair all issues rapidly, but unless pressured, tenants will not repair damage they cause at all. You’re taxing the landlords with this, and I can tell you that the small timers are barely getting by. Market forces will not allow us to pass the costs of these licenses and inspections onto our tenants–a home rents for what a home rents for, and such fees cannot be advertised as “selling points”–so all you are doing is removing the motivation to own rentals at all.
Comment from Aaron Pickus
Time June 9, 2010 at 12:42 pm
That’s a great question. The next step in the process is the formation of a stakeholder committee to consider the parameters of Seattle’s inspection system. Councilmembers Clark and Licata were co-sponsors of the legislation. I encourage you to contact their offices to learn more details on the process.
Comment from David Hopkinson
Time June 24, 2010 at 5:00 pm
In 2008, the Centers for Disease Control did a study of rental housing. They concluded that complaint-driven systems are the national norm, but that such systems do not work.
Renters do not complain, for whatever reason. The absence of complaints means that problems in rentals continue to fester. As problems fester, rentals decay, becoming increasingly dangerous. Decaying buildings take down the entire neighborhood. What remains is a slum. Without inspection, rentals result in slums.
Keep in mind that half of Seattle is rental housing. And that without inspection, rentals result in slums.
Comment from Kip
Time July 28, 2010 at 11:46 am
I was in an area where we purchased a home, but had the tax bill sent to another address because we knew we would not be at the home very often. We had trouble with the municipality constantly wanting to insspect the property because it looked like a rental. Instead of depending on licensing, their system triggered based on physical address vs. the mailing address of the tax bill.
If it had been a rental it would have been a mandatory inspection that we would have had to pay for. After several months of the inspector showing up, we just gave in and had the tax bill sent to the address.
Comment from OcHa Watanabe
Time January 11, 2012 at 10:57 pm
When good owners of the house go bad : stuff you can’t do to force your renters in order to vacate ;… United kingdom property owners ; prime tips for retrieving lost residence procurment cash flow ; the latest posts.Bad Landlord List
Comment from K Quinn
Time May 12, 2010 at 10:35 am
I would wholeheartedly support this. I have been a renter in Seattle for the past 12 years (since I can’t afford to buy anything on a teacher’s salary), and have lived in some highly questionable places, where safety regulations were obviously not followed, and where requests for repair were either ignored or returned with warnings that my rent would go up or I would be evicted. In one place I lived, part of the roof caved in during a rainstorm; my landlady did not return my calls for 3 days, and when she did, it was to scream at me for leaving so many messages on her machine. It took me threatening to call the Tenants Union and a lawyer before she finally scheduled a repair. Even then, she did not contact me with repair times so I knew when to expect workers, and the workers dumped wet wood and insulation on my bed, forcing me to replace my bed and bedding at my own cost. When I moved out, she badmouthed me to the rental agency, which made it more difficult to find a new place.
I have also seen instances in which some of the parents of my students – most often immigrants with poor language skills – are victimized by landlords demanding extra money for repairs or replacements. One of my parents came in one day with a notice from a landlord that she needed help translating – basically it told her that she needed to pay $250 for the landlord to replace the refrigerator that had been broken since the day they moved in. After a phone call to the landlord in which I verified that he was indeed requiring them to pay for the fridge, I put her in touch with the tenants union also, though she was frightened they would be evicted.