An Act to amend and reenact § 55.1-1245, as it is currently effective and as it shall become effective, of the Code of Virginia, relating to Virginia Residential Landlord and Tenant Act; landlord remedies; noncompliance with rental agreement; mandatory waiting period.
HB15 amends Virginia’s Residential Landlord and Tenant Act provision on landlord remedies for tenant noncompliance with a rental agreement. The bill keeps the general rule that a landlord may give written notice for material noncompliance and terminate the lease if the breach is not cured within the required period, but it changes the timing for certain serious violations. For nonremediable breaches, the landlord may still serve notice and terminate after at least 30 days, but the bill adds a mandatory waiting period before a landlord may obtain possession in court for immediate termination cases involving illegal drug activity or other criminal or willful acts that pose a threat to health or safety.
Under the bill, the initial court hearing on an action for immediate possession must be held within 15 calendar days after service, with an earlier hearing if emergency conditions are alleged. If a later hearing or contested trial is needed, it must be scheduled as promptly as practicable and no later than 30 calendar days from service. The bill also preserves the rule that a tenant’s lease cannot be terminated solely because the tenant is a victim of family abuse, so long as the tenant provides the required documentation and promptly notifies the landlord if the barred perpetrator returns. The text shown appears to continue beyond the excerpt, but the core change is the addition of a mandatory court-timing framework for certain landlord possession actions.
The bill’s impact is to modify § 55.1-1245 of the Code of Virginia, affecting how landlords may pursue eviction or possession when a tenant’s conduct is nonremediable and potentially dangerous. It does not eliminate landlords’ ability to terminate tenancies for serious violations, but it imposes procedural deadlines on the court process and reinforces protections for tenants affected by family abuse. Landlords, tenants, courts, and parties involved in drug-related or safety-related lease violations are the primary affected groups.
The general sentiment around the bill appears to be neutral to supportive, based on the fact that it was enacted as Chapter 353 and approved on April 8, 2026, with no recorded committee transcript or vote details in the provided material indicating opposition. The measure seems designed to balance landlord enforcement rights with due process and tenant protections, especially in urgent safety-related cases.
The main point of contention likely centers on the mandatory waiting period and expedited hearing requirements for immediate possession cases. Landlords may view the added timing rules as a constraint on swift removal of dangerous tenants, while tenant advocates may see them as necessary procedural safeguards to ensure fairness and prevent rushed evictions. Another possible area of concern is the evidentiary and notice framework for family-abuse-related lease protections, particularly the documentation and notification deadlines.
HB15 amends § 55.1-1245 of the Code of Virginia within the Virginia Residential Landlord and Tenant Act. It affects landlord termination and possession procedures for tenant noncompliance, especially immediate nonremediable violations involving illegal drug activity or other criminal or willful acts that threaten health or safety. The bill adds mandatory hearing deadlines and preserves protections for tenants who are victims of family abuse, thereby changing both landlord remedies and court procedure in eviction-related cases.
The available record suggests the bill was generally accepted and enacted without documented controversy in the provided materials. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes included, the sentiment can only be inferred from enactment: the bill appears to have had enough support to pass and become law. Its structure suggests an attempt to balance landlord enforcement with tenant due process and safety protections.
The likely points of contention are the new mandatory waiting period and hearing deadlines for immediate possession actions, which may be seen by landlords as slowing removal of tenants involved in dangerous or illegal conduct. Tenant advocates may support those procedural protections, but could still scrutinize whether the deadlines are sufficient or whether the bill gives landlords too much discretion in defining nonremediable criminal or willful acts. The family-abuse exception may also raise questions about documentation requirements and the tenant’s obligation to notify the landlord if the barred perpetrator returns.