From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Nason v. Mike

Connecticut Superior Court, Judicial District of Hartford
May 19, 2003
2003 Ct. Sup. 6710 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2003)

Opinion

No. HDSP-123262

May 19, 2003 CT Page 6193


MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON MOTION TO DISMISS


The defendant has moved to dismiss this summary process case. The defendant argues that a federally-subsidized Section 8 tenancy requires the notice to quit and complaint to contain both a state reason for termination under C.G.S. § 47a-23 and a federal reason under the Section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937. 42 U.S.C. § 1437.

The plaintiff filed a notice to quit and complaint based upon termination of lease by lapse of time. Oral argument on the motion to dismiss elicited that the initial lease term of one year had expired and that presently an oral month to month lease exists.

Defendant argues that the plaintiff was required to list a federal reason to terminate the lease under 24 C.F.R. § 982.310 in addition to the state reason of " termination of lease by lapse of time." The federal regulation provides that " during the term of the lease " (emphasis added) the tenancy may not be terminated but for one or more of the following grounds: 1) serious violation (including failure to pay rent or other amounts) or repeated violations of the lease; 2) violations of federal, state or local law with respect to tenant obligations; or 3) other good cause. " Other good cause" is defined by the regulation as including failure to accept a new lease; a family history of disturbances of neighbors or destruction of property or poor living or housekeeping habits; the owner's desire to use the premises for personal or family use or to use the unit for other than a residential reason. 24 C.F.R. § 982.310(d) (1). It is clear from the regulations that during the first year of the tenancy the owner may not terminate the tenancy for " other good cause." 24 C.F.R. § 982-310(d) (2).

Defendant argues that Park Terrace Assoc. vs. Taylor 9 Conn. App. 477 (1987) validated the requirement of a state reason (lapse of time) and a federal reason (good cause-desire to rent at a higher rental). However, both parties agree that the United States Housing Act of 1937 ( 42 U.S.C. § 1437) which contains authorization for the Section 8 subsidized housing program was amended by the Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act of 1998. P.L. 105-276 § 549(a) (2). CT Page 6194 42 U.S.C. § 1437f(d) (1) (B). The Act provides in relevant part:

(B)

(i)

the lease between the tenant and the owner shall be for at least one year or the term of such contract, whichever is shorter, and shall contain other terms and conditions specified by the Secretary;

(ii)

during the term of the lease, the owner shall not terminate the tenancy except for serious or repeated violation of the terms and conditions of the lease, for violation of applicable Federal, State, or local law, or for other good cause;

Prior to the change in the act, the phrase " during the term of the lease" was omitted. 42 U.S.C. § 1437f (d) (l) (B) 1994.

42 U.S.C. § 1437f(d) (1).

The Court concludes that since the initial lease term has ended, the cause requirements are not a part of any month to month tenancy, and it was the intent of Congress that the "endless lease" provision be eliminated. This is evidenced by Senate Committee Report 105-021 which indicates in pertinent part:

" The key reforms that encourage greater owner participation include providing flexibility in resident screening and selection, minimizing housing agency involvement in tenant-owner relations, eliminating the `take one, take all' and `endless lease' rules, and conforming section 8 leases to generally accepted leasing practices . . . The Committee recognizes that rules such as . . . 'endless lease" were created to protect assisted households from owner discrimination. The Committee, however, does not anticipate that the repeal of these rules will adversely affect assisted households because protections will be continued under State, and local tenant laws as well as Federal protections under the Fair Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act The intent of the repeals is not to excuse discrimination against section 8 holders but to remove disincentives for owner participation and to expand the number of housing choices available to section 8 families."

. . . The Committee bill also allows owners to terminate the tenancy on the same basis and in the same manner as they would for unassisted tenants in the property Lease terminations would have to comply with applicable State, and local law."

The intent of Congress is also evidenced by a HUD Circular authored by Harold Lucas, Assistant Secretary of Public and Indian Housing. Notice PIH 98-64 (HA) dated December 18, 1998.

(B) Permanent Elimination of the "endless lease" term. Section 549 makes the elimination of the "endless lease" term permanent for the Section 8 tenant-based programs.
. . . .

The permanent enactment of the current lease term policy means that all current and future tenant-based leases may be terminated without cause at the end of the initial term and at the end of any term extension. Except as required by State or local law, an owner participating in the tenant-based programs may terminate tenancy without cause at the end of the initial lease term or at the end of a successive definite term . . . (page 5)

The effect of the federal section 8 changes is that the " endless lease" provisions of the Section 8 housing assistance program have ended, and after the initial lease term, a section 8 lease may be terminated for a state reason such as "lapse of time." " Other good cause" need not be stated in the notice to quit, as the initial one year lease term had ended. The Motion to Dismiss is therefore denied, as there is a proper Connecticut state reason of " lapse of time."

___________________ Angelo L. dos Santos, Superior Court Judge


Summaries of

Nason v. Mike

Connecticut Superior Court, Judicial District of Hartford
May 19, 2003
2003 Ct. Sup. 6710 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2003)
Case details for

Nason v. Mike

Case Details

Full title:SHARON NASON v. LINDA MIKE, ET AL

Court:Connecticut Superior Court, Judicial District of Hartford

Date published: May 19, 2003

Citations

2003 Ct. Sup. 6710 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2003)
2003 Ct. Sup. 6710
34 CLR 629