No cause notices to vacate, other than selling home, or home will be used by property owner, or family if property owner.

As  a retired member of Teamsters local 631 here in Las Vegas Nv, I want to know how those elected officials came to a decision to allow "no cause" notices to proceed.  With the soaring rental rates, no unemployment benefits in the near future due to shut down, and tradeshows being smaller than normal, why would anybody think "no cause" is something that should be given the ok to proceed here in Nevada.

There is are more than a few in the tradeshow, hospitality, entertainment, restaurant server type industries still affected by Covid.  And not in a favorable way.  

I will be homeless this week, after renting this house for 6 years.

I also have 5 pets, that the property management company received $1600 in non refundable pet deposits.

There is no justification for "no cause notices"

Just cause notices, when owners need house for family or themselves, or if there is a problem selling their home, though in the world we live in, shouldn't be a problem due to the rental business being the up and coming money maker in real estate.

At the same time there should be a stop to month to month agreements unless 100% acceptable by both parties, in cases where the tenant needs the house for a short term.  "Landlords", deciding to change rental terms to month to month, essentially having the right, on their side to do so because they can give you notice if you don't agree to, to me seems wrong, and in my opinion there probably would be legal arguments agreeing with that.

Also, I would suggest including statutes that would apply differently to those rentals owned by "mom and pop" type landlords, with variations applying to out of state property investors.  If somebody investing in real estate, contracting a property management to handle all decisions, allowing property owners to remain unaccessible to tenants, they should also deal with different rules, and regulations in regard to terminating relationship regarding tenancy. I don't feel out of state investors, and their contracted property management should be allowed to contribute to the homeless population, especially during times like those we ate living in now.  Soaring rents, incomes adversely affected by the pandemic, many having no unemployment due to the shut down, results in credit problems, and the inability to qualify for the income requirements needed to rent.  Not to mention due to the moratorium allowing those tenants who blatantly did not pay rent while buying big items like cars, large flat screen tvs, etc., while causing problems for their property owners, resulting in 2 to 3 times the amount of rent for security deposits, stricter requirements for credit, which there are people with less than desirable credit, but do pay their rent.

And, there also is a need to define "pet friendly". Pet friendly does not mean allowing 5 pets, taking 1600 in nonrefundable pet deposits and turning around 6 years later and serving a no cause-especially while the country is recovering from a pandemic, still present, putting those pets at risk, knowing that the chance of finding another home with 5 pets is far from optimal.  Nor is causing a situation where someone would be forced to choose which pets to keep.  For pet owners this is a deviating, heartbreaking situation.  And the numbers of pets being surrendered or dumped is overwhelming, especially to rescues who have already been burdened with "picking up the ball that the Animal Foundation dropped" at the onset of the pandemic.  Pets are at risk-a very high risk of being killed in order to make room for more, and that usually is a dreaded scenario after the 4th if July.  While Animal foundation received 2.5 million in ppp loans, local rescues were doing the job.  Taking stray animals when finders were turned away, dealing with pets, adopted out of the shelter that had not been spayed or neutered resulting in litters now being taken care of by rescues, who were already operating on less funds due to the pandemic.  And AF is still adopting out pets, not spayed or neutered, not holding stray pets for the mandatory 72 hour hold because of a lack in the management skills of a person that makes over $200,000 a year.  And the problems actually started long before the pandemic.  For a person to have to consider surrendering a pet to our local shelter, at this time, makes a heartbreaking decision even worse. 

These no cause notices to vacate have no reason to even be in existence.  We are talking about a basic need that people shouldn't have to face losing, especially now, but also at any other time.

Besides the reality, that many can neither afford, nor qualify for rentals available, there is also the problem of the amount of applicants per house, while having to pay an average of $50 per application.  Also if the credit score isn't there, the person has to go through sites such as facebook marketplace or craigslist, attempting to sift through fraudulent ads, or risk being scammed.

No cause notices need to stop, and we need our elected officials, who have the power to change these statutes to address the situation immediately.  

It's sad that the real estate groups and their advocates were able to essentially by the housing bill earlier this year.

And it's sad that people who were current on their rent when the moratorium lifted were considered the sacrificial lambs, in what appears to be a trade off for those that took advantage of the moratorium.  Those people who will be enjoying the holidays in their homes, while I face a future of living in my truck with 5 pets.