Free Utah Roommate Agreement

A roommate agreement is a contract between the roommates. The landlord is not a party to it and it does not change the lease. Utah adds two features that make the written document matter more than usual. The first is that adding a person to the household is a matter of statutory duty rather than lease drafting, and breaching it has a consequence most people never see coming. The second is that Utah’s general obligation law can make the roommates’ own agreed percentage relevant to what the landlord may recover — which is unusual, because almost everywhere else the internal split has no effect on the landlord at all.

Fill in the fields below and the generator produces a clean, dated PDF that every roommate can sign and keep a copy of. Nothing is stored and there is no charge. Fields you leave blank print as a dash so you can complete them by hand.

Watch: Free Utah Roommate Agreement explained

▶ Watch overview

A roommate agreement records what the people sharing a unit have agreed about rooms, rent, the deposit, shared costs, guests and leaving. It binds them to each other; the landlord is not a party. Everyone named on the rental agreement remains liable to the landlord for the whole rent where the agreement imposes joint and several liability, and no Utah landlord-tenant statute creates one — the phrase returns zero across chapters 57-17 and 57-22. What Utah does provide, unusually, is a general rule in title 15 that can give the roommates’ own written percentages effect against the landlord in one specific situation.

• The number of occupants specified in the rental agreement
• Whether the owner’s written permission was obtained for anyone added
• Each roommate’s share of the rent, expressed as a clear percentage
• Each roommate’s share of the deposit
• That a renter who terminates under § 57-22-5.1 does not end anyone else’s agreement
• The address each roommate will give for the deposit notice
• Guests, quiet hours, smoking, pets and cleaning
• The notice a departing roommate gives the others, and who approves a replacement
• That the agreement binds the roommates only and does not bind the landlord

• Letting someone move in on a verbal yes. Section 57-22-5(1)(f) requires the owner’s written permission to increase the number of occupants.
• Not realising what that breach costs. Section 57-22-5.1(4)(a) makes the early-termination right available only to a renter who is in compliance, so an unresolved occupancy breach blocks it.
• Leaving the rent shares vague. Utah Code § 15-4-5(2) can make the amount you agreed a released obligor would pay the measure of the reduction in the landlord’s claim against the rest.
• Citing section 10-9a-505.5 for occupancy. That chapter no longer exists – the municipal land use act is now title 10 chapter 20.
• Serving a notice by first-class mail. It is not among the methods § 78B-6-805 permits.

Not one that gives you a right to have a roommate. Utah’s provision runs the other way. Section 57-22-5(1)(f) of the Fit Premises Act imposes a duty on the renter not to increase the number of occupants above the number specified in the rental agreement without the owner’s written permission.

Two things follow. Because it is statutory rather than contractual, it applies whether or not the lease repeats it. And because § 57-22-7(1) bars local ordinances inconsistent with the chapter, a city cannot loosen it.

Neither “guest” nor “occupant” is defined in the Act — § 57-22-2 has exactly five defined terms and neither is among them. “Renter” is defined as a person entitled under a rental agreement to occupy a residential rental unit “to the exclusion of others”. There is no day count that converts a guest into a tenant.

This is the finding that justifies reading the two chapters together. Section 57-22-5.1 gives a renter who is a victim of domestic violence a right to terminate early: a termination fee of one month’s rent under subsection (1)(h), a duty to vacate within fifteen days under subsection (6), no availability once an eviction notice has been served under subsection (7), and no availability on an ex parte civil protective order, nor on an ex parte civil stalking injunction for which a hearing has been requested.

Subsection (4)(a) then adds a condition that has nothing obvious to do with domestic violence. The right is available only to a renter who is in compliance with all obligations under the rental agreement, including the requirements of § 57-22-5 — the occupancy rule being one route to disqualification rather than the whole of it, and subject to a carve-out in Subsection (5) for non-compliance caused by the domestic violence itself.

The practical scenario writes itself. A roommate’s partner moves in during the year. Nobody asks the owner, or the owner says yes in a text message rather than in writing. Months later one of the renters needs the early-termination right, and an unresolved occupancy breach stands in the way — because § 57-22-5.1(4)(a) asks whether the renter is in compliance at that moment, not whether a breach ever happened.

That is the strongest argument for making the written permission a step the roommates actually take, and for recording in this agreement that it was obtained.

Section 57-22-5.1(9) is explicit: terminating one renter’s future obligations “does not terminate the rental agreement for any other person entitled under the rental agreement to occupy” the unit. Same rent, one fewer payer, and no statutory apportionment to help.

One caution about currency. A second version of § 57-22-5.1 takes effect on 1 January 2027 and was not read for this page, so subsection (9) may change. Anyone relying on it close to that date should check the current text.

Almost everywhere else, a roommate agreement’s rent split is invisible to the landlord: it governs claims between roommates and nothing more. Utah has a general rule that can change that.

Utah Code § 15-4-5, in title 15 chapter 4, Joint Obligations, sets two different measures depending on what the obligee knew. Under subsection (2) — where the obligee releases one obligor without a written reservation of rights against the others and without knowing the amount that obligor was bound to pay — the claim against the remaining obligors is satisfied to the extent of the lesser of two figures: (a) the released obligor’s fractional share of the obligation or the amount that obligor was bound to pay.

So if a landlord releases one roommate — on a replacement, on a negotiated exit — without reserving rights, the reduction may be measured by that roommate’s fractional share. Where is that share recorded? In the roommate agreement, if anywhere. A document that says “Ana 40 per cent, Ben 35 per cent, Chris 25 per cent” supplies a figure. A document that says “we will split it fairly” does not.

That is not a reason to game the numbers; it is a reason to make them accurate and to have everyone sign.

Utah sets no statewide cap on how many people may occupy a rental. What it does is set a floor on how restrictive a city may be. Section 10-20-602 provides that a municipality may not adopt a single-family limit lower than three where the municipality has a state university, or a private university of at least 20,000 students, within its boundary, and not lower than four otherwise. Section 17-79-601 sets the same numbers for counties, but measures the trigger by whether the university lies within the county’s unincorporated area, with a further trigger for a mountainous planning district.

Those numbers bind local government, not tenancies. The operative limit at any particular address is the municipal ordinance, which may be higher. This page does not state a persons-per-bedroom figure, because none was verified from a state source.

One correction is worth making explicitly, because the citation is still widely quoted: title 10 chapter 9a no longer exists. The Municipal Land Use, Development, and Management Act is now title 10 chapter 20, and the county equivalent is title 17 chapter 79. Any reference you see to “§ 10-9a-505.5” for occupancy is pointing at a chapter that has been renumbered away.

Section 57-17-3, effective 7 May 2025, requires the owner to deliver an itemised written notice of deductions and the balance within thirty days of the day the renter vacates and returns possession, to the renter at the renter’s last known address. Apportionment is not addressed anywhere — “apportion” returns zero across all 918,883 characters of title 57 — so whatever the roommates agreed is the only split there is.

The 2025 amendments added a step that catches people out. Section 57-17-5(3) makes the statutory notice a precondition to the remedies in § 57-17-5: the renter must first serve the notice described in § 57-17-3(3), then allow five business days, before the penalty becomes available.

Service method matters too. Section 57-17-3(4) mirrors the four methods in § 78B-6-805: personal delivery, registered or certified mail or an equivalent means, delivery to a person of suitable age at the address, and conspicuous posting. First-class mail is not among them.

This document binds the roommates to each other. The landlord is not a party to it and is not bound by the shares in it in the ordinary case, and nothing here moves anyone on or off the rental agreement. Each renter named on it can still be pursued for the whole rent. The Utah exception is narrow but real: if the landlord releases one of you without reserving rights, the percentage you wrote down may decide how much the rest of you are still liable for.

A roommate agreement is a private contract, so most of what it does is decided by the roommates rather than by statute. The parts that state law does reach are the ones that involve the landlord — and the biggest of those is the deposit. Our guide to Utah security deposit laws sets out what the landlord may hold and when it has to come back, which is the money the roommates are dividing between themselves.

The other place state law bites is non-payment. An internal agreement about shares does not change what the landlord may do if the total rent is short, and Utah eviction notice laws explain the notices and timelines that follow — which reach everyone named on the lease, not only the roommate who fell behind.

For the obligations that run between a landlord and the tenants throughout the tenancy, and the rules that apply to both sides, see Utah landlord tenant laws.

Published by Tenant Screening Background Check

Established 2004 · 20+ Years · All U.S. States & Territories · Statute-Based · Attorney-Reviewed

A Private Eye Reports™ service trusted by landlords, property managers, and attorneys.