House Passes Proposal That Could Affect Landlord-Tenant Dynamic
Supporters say the bill would provide an option to help renters get into apartments without having to come up with potentially thousands of dollars in upfront money.
April 21, 2023 at 02:17 PM
3 minute read
In an issue shadowed by soaring rental costs across the state, the House passed a heavily debated bill that could lead to landlords collecting monthly fees instead of security deposits from renters.
The House voted 89-22 to approve the bill (HB 133), which supporters said would provide an option to help renters get into apartments without having to come up with potentially thousands of dollars in upfront money.
But opponents said the fees would not be capped and that renters wouldn't be able to eventually recoup the money, like they might with security deposits.
"This is a poor tax, plain as day," Rep. Angie Nixon, D-Jacksonville, said.
Supporters disputed such characterizations, saying the fees would be optional for landlords and renters. Bill sponsor Jim Mooney, R-Islamorada, also said such fee arrangements are already being used and that the bill would place "guardrails" on the practice.
"This is not a tax on the poor," Rep. Tiffany Esposito, R-Fort Myers, said. "This is an option for them, for everyone to have access to housing."
A similar Senate bill (SB 494) was approved Wednesday by the Rules Committee and is ready to go to the full Senate.
Under the bill, landlords would be able to offer the option of paying monthly fees instead of security deposits, though landlords would not be required to do so. Renters would decide whether to pay the fees or deposits. Also, renters who choose fees could subsequently decide to pay security deposits and end the fees.
Based on other areas where fees are used, Mooney said a renter would pay an average $25 monthly fee on a $1,500-a-month lease. Landlords could use the money to buy a type of insurance that would help pay for damage to units.
But renters would not be able to get the fees back after they move out and could be held responsible for damage, Nixon said. She likened the fees to payday loans and described them as "perpetual junk fees."
"This bill targets low-income, working-class people, period," Nixon said.
But Robin Bartleman, a Weston Democrat who supported the bill, described a childhood experience of her mother struggling to scrape together money for a security deposit.
"This [the proposed fees] is a choice. This is an option for someone," Bartleman said. "The fee's capped when you sign that dotted line."
Mooney pushed back against the "junk free" description, calling it "nonsense."
Before passing the bill, the House approved an amendment that would allow landlords and renters to agree on installment plans to pay security deposits.
Jim Saunders reports for the News Service of Florida.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllBig Law Assembles as Cruise Lines Clinch Partial Victory in $439M Havana Docks Suit
Marriott's $52M Data Breach Settlement Points to Emerging Trend
Employee's Alleged Action Lands Marriott in Court for Defamation, Negligence
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250