A tenant "at sufferance" is someone who stays in a property after their right to be there has ended. They do not own any part of the property.


These are questions that the above text answers:

1. What is the definition of a tenant "at sufferance"?
2. How would you describe the ownership status of a tenant "at sufferance"?
3. What does it mean when a tenant's right to be in a property has ended?
4. Can a tenant "at sufferance" claim ownership of any part of the property?
5. What is the term used to describe a tenant who stays in a property without any ownership rights?
6. What are the responsibilities of a landlord towards a tenant "at sufferance"?
7. Is a tenant "at sufferance" legally allowed to remain in the property?
8. What is the legal status of a tenant "at sufferance"?
9. How does a tenant become a tenant "at sufferance"?
10. What are the rights of a tenant "at sufferance" in terms of the property they are staying in?

A landlord may not "target" a certain group of people by asking them for a co-signer. As long as all potential tenants are held to the same standards, the landlord may ask for a "high credit score," payment of the "last month's rent," and "positive references."


These are questions that the above text answers:

1. What are some examples of criteria a landlord may ask for when considering potential tenants?
2. Can a landlord ask for a co-signer from specific groups of people?
3. What actions by a landlord would be considered "targeting" a certain group of people?
4. Is it legal for a landlord to require payment of the last month's rent from all potential tenants?
5. Can a landlord ask for positive references from all potential tenants?
6. What are some ways a landlord can ensure they are not unfairly targeting certain groups of people?
7. Are there any restrictions on the criteria a landlord can use to evaluate potential tenants?
8. What are some examples of unfair co-signer requirements that landlords should avoid?

A landlord cannot "require" unmarried tenants to have separate "cosigners." This would be considered unfair and "unlawful," as all tenants should be treated the same. It is appropriate to have requirements related to money, but they must be applied to all tenants in the same way.


These are questions that the above text answers:

1. What is considered an unlawful requirement for unmarried tenants?
2. Can a landlord require unmarried tenants to have separate cosigners?
3. How should tenants be treated in terms of cosigners?
4. What is the appropriate way to apply requirements related to money for tenants?
7. Can a landlord legally discriminate against unmarried tenants in terms of cosigners?
9. What is the role of cosigners for tenants?
10. What are the responsibilities of landlords in relation to cosigners for tenants?