Offit Kurman Blogs
Landlord Representation
Rent Filings During the Federal Shutdown: What DC, VA & MD Landlords Need to Know
With the federal shutdown underway, landlords in Virginia, Maryland, and the District of Columbia are asking: Should we pause filings for federal workers? The short answer — no, and here’s why. As the federal government shutdown begins, landlords across the region are understandably concerned about the potential impact on tenants who are federal employees or contractors. While certain state laws provide limited relief for furloughed tenants, landlords should not pause nonpayment filings or alter their standard procedures. Virginia Under Va. Code § 44-209, tenants who are federal employees, independent contractors for the federal government, or employees of companies under contract with the federal government may be eligible for a 60-day continuance of an unlawful detainer case for rent due after the shutdown began. To qualify, the tenant must: Appear in court on the initial hearing date, and Provide written proof that they were furloughed or otherwise not receiving wages or payments due to the shutdown. Importantly, this continuance applies only when the case is for nonpayment of rent, not for other lease violations. Landlords should continue to file nonpayment cases as usual; the court will decide whether a tenant meets the statutory criteria for a continuance. Maryland Under Md. Real Property § 8-401(d), courts may stay (temporarily pause) eviction proceedings for tenants who show that: The property is their primary residence They are a federal, state, or local government employee They were involuntarily furloughed without pay because of the shutdown The stay lasts for a period the court deems reasonable, generally not exceeding 30 days after the end of the shutdown, unless a longer delay is justified. Again, this is a court-granted stay, not a reason for landlords to delay filing. Washington, D.C. D.C. previously enacted the Federal Worker Housing Relief Act of 2019, which temporarily allowed furloughed workers to request up to a 90-day stay of eviction proceedings. That law expired in early 2020 and is no longer in effect. Today, landlords should note that under the D.C. Human Rights Act, treating tenants differently based on their source of income, including federal employment, may constitute discrimination. Overall Takeaway Landlords in Virginia, Maryland, and D.C. should continue handling nonpayment matters in the normal course, allowing courts to determine whether tenants qualify for relief. Do not delay filings or make selective accommodations. Do allow the courts to apply the applicable continuance or stay provisions if a tenant demonstrates eligibility. Avoid differential treatment of tenants based on employment type or source of income. In short: issue notices, file as usual — we will handle the rest in court.
October 9, 2025
Landlord Representation
Federal Class Action Targets Common Add-On Charges in Virginia Leases: Pest and Community Fees Under Scrutiny
A federal class action lawsuit[1] is alleging that monthly pest fees and community fees are unlawful attempts to shift landlord obligations to tenants, in violation of the Virginia Residential Landlord and Tenant Act (VRLTA) and the Virginia Consumer Protection Act (VCPA). If the plaintiffs are successful, the case could trigger industry-wide consequences and result in substantial liability for property owners and managers who use similar fee structures. Initial Recommendations Evaluate all recurring fees, such as pest control, trash, amenity, and community fees to determine whether they relate to obligations that are legally the landlord’s responsibility under Virginia law (e.g., habitability and maintenance of common areas). Distinguish between charges for required services and those for optional or additional tenant benefits. Remove or recharacterize unlawful fees. Eliminate any separate fees that relate to non-waivable landlord duties. Where appropriate, incorporate the cost of pest control and common area maintenance into the base rent rather than charging them separately. Clearly define any remaining fees. Avoid using overly broad or ambiguous language such as “programs deemed necessary by ownership,” which may be interpreted as deceptive or misleading under consumer protection laws. Further Details and Legal Background Plaintiffs’ Allegations Plaintiffs allege that landlords cannot charge tenants for costs of pest control, trash disposal, or common area maintenance. Plaintiffs allege these duties are non-waivable landlord obligations under Virginia Code § 55.1-1220, and that the charging of pest control, trash disposal, and other common area maintenance fees are deceptive representations in violation of Virginia Code § 59.1-200(14). Legal Basis Virginia Residential Landlord and Tenant Act (VRLTA) Virginia Code § 55.1-1220(A): Requires landlords to maintain pest-free premises and clean, structurally safe common areas. These duties may not be waived through the lease. Virginia Consumer Protection Act (VCPA) Virginia Code § 59.1-200(14): Prohibits misrepresentation or deception in consumer transactions, including residential leases. The lawsuit claims tenants were misled into believing that payment of the pest and community fees was required to receive services already required under Virginia law. Analysis Importantly, Virginia Code § 55.1-1220 does not explicitly prohibit landlords from charging for pest control and trash disposal fees, if such fees are authorized under the lease agreement. Plaintiffs are, therefore, making allegations based on implication and a broad reading of Virginia Code § 55.1-1220. It is not clear how the court may rule on the plaintiffs’ allegations. Regardless, plaintiffs’ allegations have merit based upon landlords’ obligations as defined under Virginia Code § 55.1-1220. Potential Impact This lawsuit signals an aggressive new approach to enforcing landlord-tenant law under both the VRLTA and VCPA. This case could set precedent for whether bundling landlord obligations into fees is inherently deceptive under the VCPA and unlawful under the VRLTA. Further, a ruling in favor of plaintiffs could lead to a wave of similar class actions across Virginia and other states. Offit Kurman will continue to monitor the case and provide further recommendations once the court issues a ruling. [1] Valencia Rios v. Belvedere NRDE, LLC and Pegasus Residential, LLC (E.D. Va. No. 3:25-cv-474)
August 12, 2025
