Texas Senate Bill SB1783

Texas 2021 - 87th Regular

Caption

Relating to a fee collected by a landlord in lieu of a security deposit.

Impact

The bill modifies existing provisions in the Texas Property Code, specifically adding Section 92.111, which regulates the circumstances under which landlords can require fees instead of security deposits. By doing so, it aims to provide more flexible financial options for tenants while also giving landlords a mechanism to secure their interests through insurance coverage for damages. This change is particularly significant as it focuses on protecting tenant rights and ensuring that they have a clear option when entering rentals, potentially easing the financial burden on individuals seeking housing.

Summary

Senate Bill 1783 introduces a framework that allows landlords to offer tenants a fee in lieu of a traditional security deposit when entering a rental agreement. This fee must be presented as an option alongside the customary choice of paying a security deposit. Landlords must ensure that this choice does not affect the application for occupancy, thereby maintaining fairness in the leasing process. The bill also stipulates that if a tenant opts for this alternative, the arrangement must be documented in writing and explicitly outline the terms and conditions tied to this fee.

Sentiment

Overall, the sentiment surrounding SB 1783 appears to be largely positive among those who advocate for tenant protections and flexible renting arrangements. Proponents argue that by allowing an alternative to security deposits, the bill enhances housing accessibility for tenants who might struggle to pay a large upfront cost. However, there are concerns regarding the implications of recurring fees as they might accumulate over time, leading to financial strain. Critics emphasize the need for transparency to ensure that tenants are fully aware of what they are agreeing to when they opt for fees instead of deposits.

Contention

While there is general support for the intent behind SB 1783, some points of contention arise regarding the language and enforcement of the provisions. Concerns include the clarity of what constitutes reasonable fees and the repercussions if landlords fail to adhere to the outlined requirements, particularly in how they handle claims related to damages. The bill’s reliance on insurance coverage as a way to protect landlords could raise questions about the adequacy of such measures for tenant rights, prompting discussions about the balance of power between landlords and tenants.