In Senior Citizens Housing Development Corporation of Stonington v. Heath, April 2023, a court ruled that if a Live-in Aide is not a party to a lease, the person has no right to remain in the unit after the death of the resident.
In this case, the property owner sought the removal of a tenant’s daughter from a unit, arguing that the daughter had no legal right to remain in the unit.
The property is financed through the HUD Section 202 program. The former tenant (the Mother) had lived in the apartment from 2006 until her death in 2022. The tenant’s daughter began living in the unit in 2008 but refused to vacate after her mother’s death. The owner went to court seeking the removal of the daughter, and the daughter asked the Connecticut state court to dismiss the case.
Adult children are not eligible to live in Section 202 sites unless they are categorized as a live-in aide for a disabled person. In this case, the daughter was never given the status of a tenant. The daughter was not formally approved as a live-in aide until 2017 when the mother submitted an application for a live-in aide. A doctor certified that the tenant was disabled under federal law and that the daughter would be living in the unit “for the sole purpose of providing supportive services essential to the member’s care and well-being.”
In May 2021, the daughter signed a Live-in Aide Agreement that stated, “I also understand that should the tenant vacate the apartment, I have no legal right to occupy and must also vacate.” On October 27, 2022, the tenant died, and as of that date, the daughter was no longer providing the services of a live-in aide.
The court denied the daughter’s request to dismiss the owner’s removal case. The court found that the daughter was not a party to the lease signed by her mother and the property manager. Also, the daughter was in an arrangement to provide services for a tenant, with a full understanding that upon the death of the tenant, her need to be a “live-in aide” would end. Therefore, after her mother’s death, the daughter had no legal authority to remain in the apartment.
The judge also cited the HUD Handbook 4350.3, par 3-6(E)(3)(a)(2)(c), which emphasizes a live-in aide’s conditional qualification for occupancy.
Bottom Line: This again emphasizes the importance of not showing a live-in aide anywhere on a lease. The lease is the document that provides occupancy rights, and if a live-in aide appears on a lease – even as an occupant – it could jeopardize an owner’s attempts to remove an aide after the death or move-out of a resident.