Lol thank you I love that movie.

You have a typo in the title. It's "Ware does Western Mass begin." I hope this answers your question.

Yes that's almost always the case in evictions.

You can probably sue for these expenses, but it's a separate filing from eviction and almost certainly not worth the trouble.

He will face the consequences of not being allowed to live there. It just takes time to force compliance.

It's best to deliver legal notice to quit through official means. Look up a constable and have them deliver it. I'm not familiar with the legal term "lodger," but again, if you can afford it, working with an attorney will help you stay out of trouble. If you think he may become violent or retaliate, get yourself and your valuables out of the house.

Yes he is your tenant. You have to serve him legal notice to quit with 30 days notice, after which you can begin eviction. It's not that complicated, honestly, but if you can afford it, I suggest hiring an attorney to handle the whole thing.

Point being, landlord legally cannot use it as a screening criteria, which is why OP cannot use it to circumvent LL's screening criteria.

So in practical terms, what is the difference? If OP says, "lease to me and I'll pay up front," but landlord can't enforce a document that says this, because that would be a requirement. they have to sign and accept a standard lease and hope op pays up. Can't pursue eviction until the tenant is late based on the written agreed upon rent schedule.

"Jack up" is relative, but yes. Landlords are looking for tenants who will be long term, stable, and keep up with market rent. Most landlords will raise the rent at least enough to keep up with inflation. By your own admission, you're not likely to be a long term tenant.

Oh my bad I didn't see it.

Your account says "Somerville" on it. I assume by fifteen minutes that's no longer where you live?

Should've said so.

A lot of towns will check those boxes. Wakefield, swampscott, Norwood. I suggest looking at traffic patterns, because a lot of places are twenty minutes away at midnight but two hours away at 5pm.

There are a lot of great suburbs that still have good access to Boston. One question I'd have is whether you will prefer access to Boston by train or by car. A lot of towns have both, but it will help you narrow your search. Also think about how close to Boston you want to be and set up a radius. You say you want a fair amount of land, just plug in a search with filters for lot size and everything else and see what you can get. I find that 93 South of the city commute sucks these days, but there are several train options.

LOL i'm sorry that happened to your number! those fuckers ruin everything.

hey wait you have 88 in your usersname *eyes suspiciously*

TY and apologies for adding an edit you may not agree with as you were complimenting the rest of my post. =)

Yeah and you won't find me cheering for those types of democrats either. More of that party's electeds are trash than not, but there's not a party with a lower trash ratio, so I'm registered Dem. Doesn't mean I think it's a good party, just think the others are worse. I absolutely agree that we all need to scrutinize government spending, but there is a huge difference in approaching problems from a standpoint of, how can we improve the outcomes from government spending versus, how can we end government spending. Edit to add: also there has been a very clear libertarian to fascist pipeline in place for at least the last decade (most well known example is crying nazi Christopher Cantwell, but it's a common trend), so I think there's a case to be made that "social liberalism" isn't as crucial a component of the movement as they paint it as.

Red herring because I think this framing is deliberately misleading. Trying to get good person brownie points without doing anything good. "I don't hate poor people, but I'm also happy to watch them die for a tiny tax break."

My opinion, this "socially liberal" position was only ever a red herring. Like, oh I want all people to thrive, but I also want to withhold resources from those who most need them.

MA needs more money because our transit system sucks.

Your response is a response.