New Jersey Assembly Bill A1303

New Jersey 2026-2027 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/13/26
• Refer: 1/13/26

Caption

Prohibits landlord from considering certain actions in tenant screening; clarifies that rent receivership action does not require rent deposit and may be based on implied warranty of habitability.

Summary

Assembly Bill 1303 would expand tenant protections in two main ways. First, it limits what a landlord may consider when screening a prospective residential tenant: a housing court record may be used only if it resulted in a final judgment for possession, is not under appeal, and the judgment was entered within the prior three years. The bill also requires landlords who take adverse action on a rental application—such as rejection or approval with unusually burdensome conditions—to give the applicant a written notice explaining the reasons and disclosing the screening information and reports relied upon. Second, the bill amends New Jersey’s rent receivership law to clarify that a tenant does not have to deposit rent with the court to begin a proceeding. It also expressly states that a rent receivership action may be based on a violation of the implied warranty of habitability, in addition to other unsafe or unfit housing conditions such as lack of heat, water, electricity, or sewage disposal, or wrongful diversion of utility service. The bill takes effect immediately.

Impact

The bill would amend and supplement New Jersey landlord-tenant law, particularly the statutes governing rent receivership proceedings under P.L.1971, c.224 (C.2A:42-85 et seq.). It would create new restrictions on tenant screening practices, impose disclosure obligations on landlords making adverse rental decisions, and establish civil penalties and attorney-fee exposure for violations. It would also revise the rent receivership provisions to remove any requirement that rent be deposited to commence the action and to make explicit that habitability claims are a valid basis for relief.

Sentiment

The bill’s stated purpose and the available context suggest generally supportive sentiment toward stronger tenant protections. The sponsor’s statement frames the measure as preventing unfair denial of housing based on prior landlord-tenant litigation and making it easier for tenants to seek court relief when housing is uninhabitable. No committee transcript or vote record is available here, so there is no documented opposition or recorded floor sentiment in the provided materials.

Contention

The main points of potential contention are likely to be the limits placed on landlord discretion in tenant screening and the new disclosure requirements, which could be viewed by landlords as burdensome or as restricting their ability to assess risk. The bill also increases enforcement exposure through statutory penalties and attorney fees. On the tenant side, the rent receivership changes appear intended to remove procedural barriers, and the explicit reliance on the implied warranty of habitability may be seen as clarifying existing tenant remedies rather than creating a new one.