Housing bill redefines hotel occupant status

Summary#

S-4843, “Establishes distinction between residential tenant and other occupants of hotel or motel for purpose of determining permitted removal actions,” is an introduced bill that would add new provisions to Title 2A of New Jersey law. It would set rules for deciding whether a hotel or motel occupant is a residential tenant or a transient guest, and for removing either kind of occupant. Its stated goal is to distinguish tenants from transient guests when deciding which removal rules apply.

  • Courts would consider listed factors to determine tenant status, including whether the hotel or motel is the occupant’s only home, whether the owner knew of a planned long stay, and whether the occupant pays regularly for exclusive use of the room. If those factors do not settle the question, a stove, oven and refrigerator, along with the occupant’s use of personal linens and housekeeping, are additional factors.
  • An occupant who willfully withholds information needed for unit registration generally would not count as a tenant. Rules must protect people whose homelessness creates barriers to conventional identification and give a reasonable chance to correct registration problems.
  • The bill would bar hotel and motel owners from using self-help lockouts against any occupant, including by changing locks, shutting off utilities or removing belongings without legal process.
  • The courts must establish an expedited removal process for certain serious conduct by occupants protected by the Anti-Eviction Act. The Department of Community Affairs (DCA) must also set rules for an expedited court process to remove transient guests.
  • For a tenant or temporary assisted housing occupant facing removal for a non-threatening violation, the owner must give written notice and at least 72 hours to correct it. For a temporary assisted housing occupant whose subsidy expires, the owner must give at least five days’ notice and a chance to pay to extend the stay.

What it means for you#

  • Hotel and motel occupants: Staying fewer than 90 days creates a presumption that you are a transient guest, but you can prove tenant status by a preponderance of the evidence (meaning it is more likely than not). Length of stay alone does not determine your status. The bill lists factors a court would consider, with discretion to consider other facts.
  • Occupants receiving housing subsidies: You may be a tenant or a transient guest under the same status test. The agency administering your subsidy must provide a case manager, relocation planning and other specified support. If assistance ends, the agency must generally compensate the owner if you are not immediately relocated, subject to limits in the bill.
  • Hotel and motel owners or operators: You must use legal process to remove any occupant; you cannot lock them out yourself. You may have to provide notice and a chance to correct certain violations, and work with the subsidy agency when an assisted placement ends.
  • State agencies and courts: DCA must adopt rules, and the Administrative Director of the Courts must establish court processes. The bill says its test is similar to one established by New Jersey courts, but the current law and court decisions were not supplied, so that comparison could not be independently verified here.
  • General public: The bill does not directly change rent, create a general housing benefit, or guarantee a new housing placement.

Money#

No cost information is in the available material. No publicly available information.

  • The bill requires agency services, including case management, 24-hour availability for inquiries and relocation planning, and may require compensation to hotel or motel owners. It does not estimate staffing needs or costs.
  • The bill sets limits on some reimbursements and requires continued payment at the program rate while certain expedited proceedings are pending.

What is unclear#

  • The bill does not define “non-threatening violation,” which determines when the 72-hour notice-and-cure rule applies.
  • It does not set out detailed steps, deadlines or review rules for deciding tenant status or carrying out the expedited court processes.
  • It leaves DCA to define what counts as a self-help lockout and to establish protections for registration problems.
  • The bill does not explain how its new rules interact with existing hotel, motel or housing-assistance programs. The supplied materials do not include the current law needed to verify that interaction.
  • It is unclear how the bill’s requirement for agency compensation would work in practice, including when an occupant is “not immediately relocated.”

Case for#

  • The bill appears intended to distinguish people using short-term lodging from people who treat a hotel or motel as their home. A list of factors could help courts make that distinction.
  • A ban on self-help lockouts would require owners to use legal process rather than remove occupants by changing locks or shutting off utilities.
  • Notice and a chance to correct some violations could give tenants and subsidy-supported occupants time to address problems or arrange next steps.
  • The expedited processes could provide a quicker court route for serious conduct and for removing transient guests.

Case against#

  • The status test relies on several factors without specifying how much weight each one gets. That could leave occupants and owners uncertain about which rules apply.
  • The bill sets up expedited proceedings but leaves important process details to later rules. The text does not say how quickly cases must be heard.
  • The agency duties and possible payments to owners could require staff and public funds, but the bill gives no cost estimate.
  • The bill’s registration exception could deny tenant protections to an occupant who willfully fails to provide required information; how the safeguards work depends on rules that are not yet written.