Question: We are renting our home to a nice young couple who are engaged to be married. The rent for the young woman is paid by a bank which is serving as trustee for an estate. The bank has advised us that if the other tenant should move out, their client will only be liable for half of the rent.

While we do not expect this to happen, we want to know whether there are any laws on the books which address such matters. Our form lease does not make any specific reference to this subject.

In the event the bank is correct, is there some legal language that should be included in the lease to insure that the full rent will continue when one of the tenants moves out?

Answer: Yes, there is a simple solution. If you are renting to two or more persons, the lease should specifically state that the tenants, "jointly and severally," are responsible for the full amount of the rent.

To the best of my knowledge, there are no laws dealing with this issue. Legislatures cannot -- and will not -- regulate every aspect of real estate law. When there is a serious consumer protection area which needs to be addressed, such as occurred back in the 1970's when Congress enacted the Real Estate Settlement Act (RESPA), legislatures will respond.

But many aspects of real estate law are left to negotiation between buyer and seller, or landlord and tenant.

The bank is correct. If the arrangement is that the trustee will pay the woman's rent, and the man will pay his own, then should the man leave the property, the bank remains liable only for the payment of its client.

By adding the "joint and several" language, this will change the situation. Under this arrangement, both tenants are put on notice that they are each responsible to pay the entire monthly rental, regarding of what the other tenant does.

If the bank is not willing to accept this language, which is commonly used and accepted in the real estate community, then you may want to consider rejecting their rental application for your home.

Let's play this out. The couple decide to call off their marriage and the young man moves out. If the "joint and several" language is not in your lease, the bank will only pay half of the rent. Technically, the young woman is not in default, since she is not obligated to pay the entire monthly rent. So, you cannot evict her.

This does not mean that you do not have any remedies. Since the man also signed the lease, and has not paid his share of the rent, you certainly have the right to try to collect against him. But good luck! He probably has left the area, and you will have to chase him down. Even if you locate him, you will have to file suit, and that is both time consuming and expensive.

Finally, even if you are able to get a money judgment against him, there is no cash register at the back of the courthouse. Collection is difficult and often impossible.

So, by adding three little words (joint and several) you can solve your problem.

There is another aspect to your question which must be addressed. How do you handle situations where one tenant moves out and the other wants to stay?

Here is my recommendation.

Advise the tenant who will remain in the property that she is responsible for the full rent. Tell her that it is her obligation to locate a replacement tenant, at her expense. Once she finds a potential roommate, you want to meet that person, and check out all references. If you approve of the substitution, the new tenant will be added to the lease, again "jointly and severally."

How do you deal with the security deposit? Under no circumstances should you return a portion of the deposit to the tenant who is leaving. This should be the obligation of the new tenant, who will reimburse the former occupant for his share of that deposit.

You, as landlord, will hold the entire security deposit until all tenants have vacated the premises. A security deposit is to protect the property owner against any damage caused by the tenants, and as landlord you want to make sure that the house is in good condition when all of the tenants have gone.