Key facts
- Tenants are facing eviction over add-on utility fees known as "Ratio Utility Billing Systems" (Rubs).
- These fees are charged on top of rent and are typically paid to landlords, not utility companies.
- Many leases allow for eviction due to unpaid utility fees, even if rent is paid in full.
- Advocates report an increasing number of eviction cases linked to these utility charges across several U.S. cities.
- Some cities and states have banned or regulated the use of Rubs, while tenants have organized protests.
- Industry representatives argue Rubs help manage costs and encourage conservation in buildings without individual meters.
Add-on utility fees, known as "Ratio Utility Billing Systems" (Rubs), are increasingly leading to evictions for tenants across the United States, even when rent is paid in full. These fees, often unclear and paid directly to landlords or third-party billing companies rather than utility providers, can significantly increase a tenant's monthly housing costs.
Constance Soule, an 81-year-old disabled tenant with a housing voucher in Larkspur, California, received a 10-day eviction notice from Greystar, the nation's largest apartment manager, solely over accumulated utility charges. Her sister, Margot Jones, expressed frustration, stating that Soule had paid her rent but was being charged additional fees.
Lucie Hollingsworth, policy director at Legal Aid of Marin county, noted that a majority of "nonpayment" evictions her agency handles involve tenants unable to pay utility charges. These Rubs fees, which can add hundreds of dollars to monthly expenses, are rarely detailed in apartment listings or leases. Unlike traditional utility bills, tenants owe Rubs to their landlords, and many leases stipulate that failure to pay these fees can result in eviction.
Tenant advocates and attorneys in cities like Philadelphia, Los Angeles, Oakland, and Columbus, Ohio, report a rise in eviction cases related to utility fees. In response, eight California cities have banned Rubs, and several states have enacted regulations. Last year, California's attorney general reached a nearly $500,000 settlement with a national property management firm accused of using Rubs for "shadow" rent increases that violated state limits.
Tenants in Los Angeles and Seattle have organized "Rubs strikes," refusing to pay these utility charges until landlords agree to reductions. A study in Colorado found utility fees to be the most common charge on top of rent for tenants facing eviction, with one tenant facing monthly charges of up to $2,620 to avoid eviction, despite their lease only listing $1,725 for rent and $35 for pet rent.
Industry representatives, such as Conservice, defend Rubs as a fair system that encourages conservation and helps landlords manage costs in buildings without individual utility meters. Conservice's general counsel, Marc Treitler, stated that Rubs are "much better for the tenants, owners and environment than in-rent utilities." However, marketing materials from third-party utility management companies, like Livable, highlight Rubs' potential to increase landlord revenue.
Jaslyn Cosey, another disabled tenant in a Greystar-managed building in Las Vegas, filed a lawsuit alleging "unreasonably high utilities fees" and a failure to disclose a clear formula for calculating costs. Cosey was surprised by nearly $140 in monthly fees for common area utilities, administration, and individual services, which she did not realize would be treated as rent. When state assistance covered her back rent, Greystar allegedly applied it to her utility fees, leaving her short on rent and leading to her eviction. Greystar denies Cosey's allegations, asserting the fees were disclosed in her lease.