7 ms·

I never understood why US universities have so many more rights over their tenants than other landlords. Why do they have the right to terminate what's effectiv

I never understood why US universities have so many more rights over their tenants than other landlords. Why do they have the right to terminate what's effectively a rental agreement with only a week's notice?

chickenpotpie 7y ago
I don't get it either. It was especially irritating at my university because the dorms were several thousand dollars a semester more expensive than larger, better apartments nearby, but they were the worst landlords I ever had. They would kick me out all the time, while still charging me rent. During finals week you had to be gone within 24 hours of taking your last final or be fined. If schools in the US aren't going to be free, they should at least be held to the same laws that other institutions that provide the same services are.
- JMTQp8lwXL 7y ago
  If you stay past your lease date in a regular apartment, you will typically be fined as well.
  - chickenpotpie 7y ago
    They also don't charge me rent after that day passes. The finals at my school were from Saturday till the next Friday. So whether your finals were on Saturday or on the next Friday, it still cost the same. It sounds nitpicky, but our rent was about $1500 a month. A lot of students paid $375 to be homeless.
- saagarjha 7y ago
  Surely they had better things to do than to try to figure out when people had their finals and check door-to-door every day to make sure people left when they should?
  - chickenpotpie 7y ago
    That's exactly what the RAs did
    - saagarjha 7y ago
      How would they know if you're done with finals?
      - chickenpotpie 7y ago
        You had to share your final schedule with them.
        saagarjha 7y ago
        What's stopping you from lying and saying that all your classes have finals on Friday? It seems kind of stupid that they'll deprive you of a dorm you paid for because of how your schedule is laid out…
        leetcrew 7y ago
        most schools have some sort of database with everyone's course registration and often finals follow a regular schedule that can be derived from the student's course enrollment. I don't know why they even bother to make students tell the RA. they could just send each student's exam schedule directly to the RA and require some written notice from the professor to document exceptions. another question is why it even matters. what are they going to do with the fraction of dorms that are empty after the first day of exams that can't wait a few more days?
        saagarjha 7y ago
        That doesn't really work, because professors move their exams all the time…
        7y ago
- Keverw 7y ago
  Be fined? Is that in a contract? Seems odd with private companies being able to fine people.
  - chickenpotpie 7y ago
    Public university
    - Keverw 7y ago
      Oh I guess that gives more power if state ran but someone below this thread mentioned even regular apartments will fine you... and I assumed by regular apartments they mean private then.
  - buckminster 7y ago
    Regular rentals can "fine" you by retaining the deposit. It used to be the case that universities in the UK would withhold your degree until you paid all fines and charges. I think this was only stopped in the last couple of years.
- Waterluvian 7y ago
  This is the same in Canada. More expensive and evicted once your semester is over. It's insane.
dumbfoundded 7y ago
I have a hard time believing this is legal. Like 50% of MIT guys live in fraternities. At least my fraternity was owned by the alumni board so I don't know how they can force people out. Especially for the Boston-side fraternities, I can't imagine them enforcing this.
- evanb 7y ago
  Even the Boston-side fraternities are subject to licensing as dormitories. It’s unlikely FSILG Alumni corporations would kick someone out but it could put the license at risk. If MIT says they’re closing Boston can consider that to be a suspension of the form license. —a former mit fraternity president
  - dumbfoundded 7y ago
    Understandable. Thank you for explaining the mechanics.
smallnamespace 7y ago
Many universities are either municipalities in their own right, or have delegated municipal powers from the city government. Universities are their own small towns - they provide food, housing, have police forces, a large staff, etc. Put it the other way around, does it make more sense for a city official to be calling the shots, when campuses have their own special context?
- dvtrn 7y ago
  Aren’t tenant/landlord laws typically set by the state, though-Using your analogy or do I have it backwards? Aside from local zoning laws I don’t quite see the comparison to how a municipality would be able to “call the shots” on something like eviction rules.
  - gowld 7y ago
    States delegate power to municipalities. They can override municipal law if they choose to
    - dvtrn 7y ago
      Are you referring to Home Rule? I’ve heard of it, had no idea housing laws could be delegated this way; it seems rather problematic for a state to let local municipalities set their own varying and disparate housing laws, that sounds like an administrative nightmare for both entities.
- JMTQp8lwXL 7y ago
  Universities also have their own judicial systems under Title IX as well.
- chrisseaton 7y ago
  > have police forces Literally their own police forces? How does that work? Where do they get the authority to be police from? Who are they sworn to?
  - 7y ago
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
smacktoward 7y ago
In contract law, there's a concept called force majeure (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force_majeure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force_majeure), which comes into play when the normal circumstances under which the contract was signed are changed by a sudden, unpredictable event -- the proverbial "act of God." Most contracts have a force majeure clause, that either releases the parties from their contractual obligations in such an event, or substantially relaxes the penalties for failing to meet those obligations. The idea is, nobody could have seen these circumstances coming, so it's unfair to hold either party to obligations they suddenly find themselves unable to meet. (Example. I contract with 5,000 people to give them admission to a concert, and then the night before the show an asteroid falls out of the sky onto the stadium I had contracted to hold that concert in. Force majeure means I'm not obligated to put on another show at my own expense despite losing all the money I'd already invested in the first one. It would be unfair to hold me to that promise, since it was invalidated by circumstances no reasonable person could have foreseen.) I'm not a lawyer, and I'm not privy to the precise language in the contracts between universities and students for residential housing. But I feel pretty confident that they have a force majeure clause in them. And seeing as how Massachusetts declared a state of emergency over the coronavirus today (https://www.boston25news.com/news/mass-gov-declares-state-emergency-over-covid-19/VNFNNJ477REVPNDZBP7CMZMPOE/ https://www.boston25news.com/news/mass-gov-declares-state-em...), it seems like universities in that commonwealth would have a reasonably strong legal argument for exercising them.
- chickenpotpie 7y ago
  IANAL either, but force majeure refers to being unable to fulfill a contract. The dorms are still standing and legally habitable so that doesn't really seem to apply here.
  - smacktoward 7y ago
    They may be "legally habitable" under the normal building codes, but those codes don't take into account the circumstances of a pandemic disease. MIT has contracted with these students to provide them with housing. Part of their normal obligation under those contracts would be to provide them with housing that offers a reasonably healthy environment. MIT will have by now heard from a lot of Highly Credentialed Experts that, in the circumstances of a widely circulating coronavirus, normal dorm conditions don't provide that reasonably healthy environment anymore -- they instead put students at elevated levels of risk. So if you're MIT, what do you do? You could say "hey, those dorms up to code!" and keep on housing people in them, sure. But if you do, you open yourself up to lawsuits from outraged parents if those students end up getting sick at greater rates than the overall population. And, when it inevitably comes out in the discovery process of those lawsuits that you were directly warned against doing that by the aforementioned Highly Credentialed Experts -- well, at that point you are boned, my friend, contract or no contract. Or, alternately, you can point to the declaration of a state of emergency, declare that the dorms aren't fit for habitation under the current circumstances (which, you will take pains to remind everyone, were beyond your ability to predict), and kick the kids out. Yes, it'll suck for the kids, but not as much as drowning in their own fluids would. And if anyone comes after you with a lawsuit when the dust clears, you'll be on a much sturdier position from which to defend your actions.
LurkersWillLurk 7y ago
Many states in the US have laws that specifically exempt colleges and universities from the majority of tenancy protections that regular landlords must abide by.
- Keverw 7y ago
  I heard something like that before, like I guess there's states (maybe most of them?) where you can't use your dorm room on your driver license for some reason. Which seems annoying if you moved across the country and don't intend to return home. or your renewals conflict with other dates when far away.
  - kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
    Massachusetts considers out of state students as residents eligible for jury duty so maybe they should enjoy some more protections in exchange for the public service.
    - gowld 7y ago
      They do get to register to vote in MA.
    - Keverw 7y ago
      Yeah I heard that, I think they are the only state doing that. If you live there 50% of the year. Sounds kinda a odd thing to do if they aren't domiciled there, but I guess the locals support it. Was reading a random forum thread and sounds like they use more college students than local. I was researching about domicile before Since the full time RV/digital nomad life interests me and looks like people decide on South Dakota, Texas and Florida or use a friends or family address even if they don't really live with them, and probably the only family member who's stable and I'd trust handling my mail isn't that computer savvy to scan them for me and security concerns - so going to a friendly state and paying a provider makes sense if you are going to get rid of all your stuff and be a nomad. Kinda seems like discrimination in a way though. Some couple who retired sold their house and bought a RV and ran into issues with their state's DMV, so they had to hurry up change to a friendly one, but I guess their former state loses out more then they did anyways since they saved a lot of money since the new state has no income tax, and cheaper registration and insurance. Then homeless people or abused people escaping from their partner or family can struggle to get all their documents. I guess some DMVs were telling elderly people their birth certificates were no longer good and they had to buy new ones and wait. Then also seems a form of voter suppression, some county in Florida said people who are homeless, living in a van, rv or boat wasn't allowed to vote. I'm a fan of one person, one vote though but seems like they need a better system for IDs. Also wouldn't surprise me if some workers would give you trouble for printed bank or credit card statements since so many people are paperless... Oh the DMV is such a annoying place, I think maybe could be right below going to the dentist. I know both Texas and Florida have online renewals every other renewal too, so sounds like when moving maybe factor in the DMV along with other things. Then Texas even offers online driving school too where you can take your permit test online even, so they seem maybe one of the more advanced states. Still have that dream of full time travel though but building up passive income online would be needed, right now I think I rather focus on a startup and find a city I'd love like maybe Austin or Miami, warmer, focus on being happier - then travel a few weeks a year which would be way more vacation I have now.

chickenpotpie 7y ago

I don't get it either. It was especially irritating at my university because the dorms were several thousand dollars a semester more expensive than larger, better apartments nearby, but they were the worst landlords I ever had. They would kick me out all the time, while still charging me rent. During finals week you had to be gone within 24 hours of taking your last final or be fined. If schools in the US aren't going to be free, they should at least be held to the same laws that other institutions that provide the same services are.

JMTQp8lwXL 7y ago
If you stay past your lease date in a regular apartment, you will typically be fined as well.
- chickenpotpie 7y ago
  They also don't charge me rent after that day passes. The finals at my school were from Saturday till the next Friday. So whether your finals were on Saturday or on the next Friday, it still cost the same. It sounds nitpicky, but our rent was about $1500 a month. A lot of students paid $375 to be homeless.
saagarjha 7y ago
Surely they had better things to do than to try to figure out when people had their finals and check door-to-door every day to make sure people left when they should?
- chickenpotpie 7y ago
  That's exactly what the RAs did
  - saagarjha 7y ago
    How would they know if you're done with finals?
    - chickenpotpie 7y ago
      You had to share your final schedule with them.
      - saagarjha 7y ago
        What's stopping you from lying and saying that all your classes have finals on Friday? It seems kind of stupid that they'll deprive you of a dorm you paid for because of how your schedule is laid out…
        leetcrew 7y ago
        most schools have some sort of database with everyone's course registration and often finals follow a regular schedule that can be derived from the student's course enrollment. I don't know why they even bother to make students tell the RA. they could just send each student's exam schedule directly to the RA and require some written notice from the professor to document exceptions. another question is why it even matters. what are they going to do with the fraction of dorms that are empty after the first day of exams that can't wait a few more days?
        saagarjha 7y ago
        That doesn't really work, because professors move their exams all the time…
        7y ago
Keverw 7y ago
Be fined? Is that in a contract? Seems odd with private companies being able to fine people.
- chickenpotpie 7y ago
  Public university
  - Keverw 7y ago
    Oh I guess that gives more power if state ran but someone below this thread mentioned even regular apartments will fine you... and I assumed by regular apartments they mean private then.
- buckminster 7y ago
  Regular rentals can "fine" you by retaining the deposit. It used to be the case that universities in the UK would withhold your degree until you paid all fines and charges. I think this was only stopped in the last couple of years.
Waterluvian 7y ago
This is the same in Canada. More expensive and evicted once your semester is over. It's insane.

dumbfoundded 7y ago

I have a hard time believing this is legal. Like 50% of MIT guys live in fraternities. At least my fraternity was owned by the alumni board so I don't know how they can force people out. Especially for the Boston-side fraternities, I can't imagine them enforcing this.

evanb 7y ago
Even the Boston-side fraternities are subject to licensing as dormitories. It’s unlikely FSILG Alumni corporations would kick someone out but it could put the license at risk. If MIT says they’re closing Boston can consider that to be a suspension of the form license. —a former mit fraternity president
- dumbfoundded 7y ago
  Understandable. Thank you for explaining the mechanics.

smallnamespace 7y ago

Many universities are either municipalities in their own right, or have delegated municipal powers from the city government. Universities are their own small towns - they provide food, housing, have police forces, a large staff, etc. Put it the other way around, does it make more sense for a city official to be calling the shots, when campuses have their own special context?

dvtrn 7y ago
Aren’t tenant/landlord laws typically set by the state, though-Using your analogy or do I have it backwards? Aside from local zoning laws I don’t quite see the comparison to how a municipality would be able to “call the shots” on something like eviction rules.
- gowld 7y ago
  States delegate power to municipalities. They can override municipal law if they choose to
  - dvtrn 7y ago
    Are you referring to Home Rule? I’ve heard of it, had no idea housing laws could be delegated this way; it seems rather problematic for a state to let local municipalities set their own varying and disparate housing laws, that sounds like an administrative nightmare for both entities.
JMTQp8lwXL 7y ago
Universities also have their own judicial systems under Title IX as well.
chrisseaton 7y ago
> have police forces Literally their own police forces? How does that work? Where do they get the authority to be police from? Who are they sworn to?
- 7y ago

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

smacktoward 7y ago

In contract law, there's a concept called force majeure (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force_majeure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force_majeure), which comes into play when the normal circumstances under which the contract was signed are changed by a sudden, unpredictable event -- the proverbial "act of God." Most contracts have a force majeure clause, that either releases the parties from their contractual obligations in such an event, or substantially relaxes the penalties for failing to meet those obligations. The idea is, nobody could have seen these circumstances coming, so it's unfair to hold either party to obligations they suddenly find themselves unable to meet. (Example. I contract with 5,000 people to give them admission to a concert, and then the night before the show an asteroid falls out of the sky onto the stadium I had contracted to hold that concert in. Force majeure means I'm not obligated to put on another show at my own expense despite losing all the money I'd already invested in the first one. It would be unfair to hold me to that promise, since it was invalidated by circumstances no reasonable person could have foreseen.) I'm not a lawyer, and I'm not privy to the precise language in the contracts between universities and students for residential housing. But I feel pretty confident that they have a force majeure clause in them. And seeing as how Massachusetts declared a state of emergency over the coronavirus today (https://www.boston25news.com/news/mass-gov-declares-state-emergency-over-covid-19/VNFNNJ477REVPNDZBP7CMZMPOE/ https://www.boston25news.com/news/mass-gov-declares-state-em...), it seems like universities in that commonwealth would have a reasonably strong legal argument for exercising them.

chickenpotpie 7y ago
IANAL either, but force majeure refers to being unable to fulfill a contract. The dorms are still standing and legally habitable so that doesn't really seem to apply here.
- smacktoward 7y ago
  They may be "legally habitable" under the normal building codes, but those codes don't take into account the circumstances of a pandemic disease. MIT has contracted with these students to provide them with housing. Part of their normal obligation under those contracts would be to provide them with housing that offers a reasonably healthy environment. MIT will have by now heard from a lot of Highly Credentialed Experts that, in the circumstances of a widely circulating coronavirus, normal dorm conditions don't provide that reasonably healthy environment anymore -- they instead put students at elevated levels of risk. So if you're MIT, what do you do? You could say "hey, those dorms up to code!" and keep on housing people in them, sure. But if you do, you open yourself up to lawsuits from outraged parents if those students end up getting sick at greater rates than the overall population. And, when it inevitably comes out in the discovery process of those lawsuits that you were directly warned against doing that by the aforementioned Highly Credentialed Experts -- well, at that point you are boned, my friend, contract or no contract. Or, alternately, you can point to the declaration of a state of emergency, declare that the dorms aren't fit for habitation under the current circumstances (which, you will take pains to remind everyone, were beyond your ability to predict), and kick the kids out. Yes, it'll suck for the kids, but not as much as drowning in their own fluids would. And if anyone comes after you with a lawsuit when the dust clears, you'll be on a much sturdier position from which to defend your actions.

LurkersWillLurk 7y ago

Many states in the US have laws that specifically exempt colleges and universities from the majority of tenancy protections that regular landlords must abide by.

Keverw 7y ago
I heard something like that before, like I guess there's states (maybe most of them?) where you can't use your dorm room on your driver license for some reason. Which seems annoying if you moved across the country and don't intend to return home. or your renewals conflict with other dates when far away.
- kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
  Massachusetts considers out of state students as residents eligible for jury duty so maybe they should enjoy some more protections in exchange for the public service.
  - gowld 7y ago
    They do get to register to vote in MA.
  - Keverw 7y ago
    Yeah I heard that, I think they are the only state doing that. If you live there 50% of the year. Sounds kinda a odd thing to do if they aren't domiciled there, but I guess the locals support it. Was reading a random forum thread and sounds like they use more college students than local. I was researching about domicile before Since the full time RV/digital nomad life interests me and looks like people decide on South Dakota, Texas and Florida or use a friends or family address even if they don't really live with them, and probably the only family member who's stable and I'd trust handling my mail isn't that computer savvy to scan them for me and security concerns - so going to a friendly state and paying a provider makes sense if you are going to get rid of all your stuff and be a nomad. Kinda seems like discrimination in a way though. Some couple who retired sold their house and bought a RV and ran into issues with their state's DMV, so they had to hurry up change to a friendly one, but I guess their former state loses out more then they did anyways since they saved a lot of money since the new state has no income tax, and cheaper registration and insurance. Then homeless people or abused people escaping from their partner or family can struggle to get all their documents. I guess some DMVs were telling elderly people their birth certificates were no longer good and they had to buy new ones and wait. Then also seems a form of voter suppression, some county in Florida said people who are homeless, living in a van, rv or boat wasn't allowed to vote. I'm a fan of one person, one vote though but seems like they need a better system for IDs. Also wouldn't surprise me if some workers would give you trouble for printed bank or credit card statements since so many people are paperless... Oh the DMV is such a annoying place, I think maybe could be right below going to the dentist. I know both Texas and Florida have online renewals every other renewal too, so sounds like when moving maybe factor in the DMV along with other things. Then Texas even offers online driving school too where you can take your permit test online even, so they seem maybe one of the more advanced states. Still have that dream of full time travel though but building up passive income online would be needed, right now I think I rather focus on a startup and find a city I'd love like maybe Austin or Miami, warmer, focus on being happier - then travel a few weeks a year which would be way more vacation I have now.