How does Virginia decide whether a long-term hotel guest is using the hotel as their 'primary residence' for tenant-protection purposes?

Plain-English summary

A Virginia House of Delegates member asked the Attorney General what makes a hotel or similar transient lodging a guest's "primary residence" under § 55.1-1201(D) of the Virginia Residential Landlord Tenant Act (VRLTA), the provision that determines what protections, if any, a long-staying hotel guest gets against eviction. The statute sets up escalating protections: a guest whose stay is not their primary residence gets no VRLTA protection at all; a guest whose primary residence is the hotel but who has stayed 90 days or less is entitled to a five-day written notice before a self-help eviction; and a guest who has made the hotel their primary residence for 90 or more consecutive days gets the full protections of a VRLTA tenant.

Because "primary residence" is not defined anywhere in Virginia's landlord-tenant statutes, and no Virginia court has ruled on the term in this specific context, the opinion looked to the closest analogous case, a federal district court decision interpreting "primary residence" in an insurance-policy dispute, State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Ponzi. That case used a fact-intensive test looking at where a person keeps their belongings and important records, where they spend most of their time, whether they have another place that could be considered home, and where they intend their primary residence to be, while recognizing that a person's conduct can contradict their stated intent. The opinion adopted that same case-by-case approach for hotel guests under § 55.1-1201(D), declining to draw a bright-line rule.

What this means for you

Hotel and extended-stay lodging owners

The opinion holds that whether a long-term guest has made your property their "primary residence" for VRLTA purposes is a factual question you cannot resolve with a fixed rule of thumb; it depends on the totality of circumstances, including where the guest keeps their belongings and important documents, where they spend most of their time, and their stated and demonstrated intent about where "home" is.

Guests staying at a hotel for an extended period

The opinion confirms that simply staying somewhere for a long time does not automatically make it your "primary residence" for tenant-protection purposes; the analysis looks at the whole picture of where you actually live your life, not just the calendar.

Law enforcement and attorneys involved in hotel evictions

The opinion notes that because this "primary residence" determination is fact-specific, the Office of the Attorney General has traditionally declined to answer related hypothetical questions (about what protections a shorter-staying guest gets, whether a "transient" guest can delay removal, or whether police may assist a self-help eviction) without the specific facts of a real case in front of it.

Common questions

Q: What counts as a "primary residence" for a hotel guest under Virginia's landlord-tenant law?
A: The opinion says there is no bright-line rule; it depends on the totality of the facts, including where the person's belongings and important documents are kept, where they spend most of their time, and where they intend their primary residence to be.

Q: Does staying at a hotel for 90 days automatically give a guest tenant protections?
A: Not by itself. Under § 55.1-1201(D)(4), a guest gets full VRLTA tenant protections only if the hotel is both their primary residence and they have resided there for 90 or more consecutive days; the 90-day count alone does not establish that it is their primary residence.

Q: Has any Virginia court defined "primary residence" in this hotel-guest context?
A: No, according to the opinion. It relied instead on a federal district court's fact-specific approach to "primary residence" in an unrelated insurance dispute, since Virginia courts have not addressed the term in the § 55.1-1201(D) context.

Q: Will the Attorney General's office resolve whether a specific guest qualifies as having a "primary residence" at a hotel?
A: No. The opinion notes the office traditionally does not render opinions on specific factual matters, and the delegate's related questions about a particular guest's protections were left unanswered because they turn on facts the office does not have.

Background and statutory framework

Section 55.1-1201(D) of the Virginia Residential Landlord Tenant Act creates a tiered set of protections for people staying in hotels and similar transient lodging, keyed to whether the lodging is the person's "primary residence" and, if so, how long they have stayed there. A guest not using the lodging as a primary residence gets no VRLTA protection; one using it as a primary residence for 90 days or less gets a five-day written notice before self-help eviction; and one using it as a primary residence for 90 or more consecutive days gets the full protections of a VRLTA tenant. The term "primary residence" is not defined in the statute. The Virginia Supreme Court has recognized more generally that the word "residence" is "a prolific source of litigation" whose meaning depends on the context in which it is used, and federal courts applying similar Virginia insurance-law concepts (such as who counts as a "resident" of a household) have consistently used fact-specific, multi-factor analyses rather than fixed rules.

Citations and references

Statutes:
- Va. Code § 55.1-1201(D), tiered VRLTA protections for hotel and transient lodging guests based on primary residence and length of stay
- Va. Code § 55.1-1201(D)(1)-(4), the specific tiers of protection

Cases:
- State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Ponzi, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 220074 (E.D. Va. Dec. 20, 2019), fact-specific test for "primary residence" in an insurance-policy dispute
- Allstate Ins. Co. v. Patterson, 231 Va. 358 (1986), a person spending about 10% of their time at a home did not qualify as a "resident" of that household
- State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Smith, 206 Va. 280 (1965), the meaning of "residence" depends on the context in which it is used

Source

• Landing page: https://www.oag.state.va.us/annual-reports-opinions/official-opinions
• Original PDF: https://www.oag.state.va.us/files/Opinions/2026/26-009-Convirs-Fowler-Issued.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain, the linked PDF is authoritative.

COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA

Office of the Attorney General

Jay Jones, Attorney General
202 North Ninth Street
Richmond, Virginia 23219
804-786-2071
Fax 804-786-1991
Virginia Relay Services
800-828-1120
7-1-1

June 3, 2026

The Honorable Kelly K. Convirs-Fowler
Member, Virginia House of Delegates
P.O. Box 6769
Virginia Beach, Virginia 23456

Dear Delegate Convirs-Fowler:

I am responding to your request for an official advisory opinion in accordance with § 2.2-
505 of the Code of Virginia.

Issue Presented

You inquire what constitutes a "primary residence" for applicability of § 55.1-1201(D) of
the Virginia Residential Landlord Tenant Act (VRLTA).1

Response

It is my opinion that the determination of what constitutes a "primary residence," as that
term is used in Virginia Code § 55.1-1201(D), requires a case-specific review which considers the
totality of the factual circumstances. These circumstances may include, but are certainly not
limited to, the location of one's personal belongings and important documents, where one intends
their primary residence to be, and where one spends most of their time.

Applicable Law and Discussion

Virginia Code § 55.1-1201(D) lays out a specific series of escalating protections for
individuals who stay at hotels (and other "similar transient lodging" hereafter collectively referred
to as "hotels"); these individuals must meet certain criteria.2 In all of § 55.1-1201(D), it is a
necessary condition for the individual to be using the hotel as "his primary residence," to receive
any protections under the VRLTA.3

First, § 55.1-1201(D)(1) and (2) provide that an individual staying in the hotel shall not
receive any protections under the VRLTA so long as "such person does not reside in such lodging
as his primary residence."4 Second, § 55.1-1201(D)(3) provides that an individual staying at a
hotel, as their primary residence, for 90 days or less is entitled to a five-day written notice of
nonpayment before a self-help eviction can be executed.5 Third and finally, § 55.1-1201(D)(4)
provides an individual with the full protections of the VRLTA if and only if: (1) the hotel is their
primary residence, and (2) they have resided at the hotel for 90 or more consecutive days.6

The definition of "primary residence," therefore, is critical to determining what protections,
if any, an individual staying in a hotel receives under the VRLTA. However, "primary residence"
has not been explicitly defined in Virginia law.7 The Supreme Court of Virginia recognized the
term "residence" itself is a "prolific source of litigation," and that the definition of residence,
"depends upon the context in which it is used."8 To that end, no court in Virginia has issued an
opinion on the definition of "primary residence" as used in the context of § 55.1-1201(D).
However, a federal district court in Virginia has interpreted similar phrases in different contexts,
and in each of those cases used a fact specific analysis to reach their conclusion.9

The closest example available is the District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia's
opinion in State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Ponzi, which addressed the definition of "primary
residence" in the context of a dispute over an insurance policy.10 The court engaged in an extensive
fact-specific inquiry to determine "primary residence."11 Such facts included: the location of one's
personal belongings and important records; where one spends most of their time; if they have
somewhere else that can be considered their residence; and where they intend to be their primary
residence.12 Notably though, the court recognizes that "conduct can belie intent."13 As
demonstrated in the Ponzi court's holding, and the other cases cited in this opinion, the
determination of one's "primary residence" will always necessitate a case-by-case analysis of all
relevant facts.14

Conclusion

Accordingly, it is my opinion that the determination of what constitutes a "primary
residence," as that term is used in Virginia Code § 55.1-1201(D), requires a case-specific review
which considers the totality of the factual circumstances. These circumstances may include, but
are certainly not limited to, the location of one's personal belongings and important documents,
where one intends their primary residence to be, and where one spends most of their time.

Sincerely,

Jay Jones
Attorney General

Footnotes:
1 You also inquire: (1) what, if any, protections under the VRLTA a hotel guest at the same property for fewer than
90 consecutive days is entitled to, (2) if a "transient" hotel guest may delay removal by invoking protections under
the VRLTA, and (3) may a police officer or sheriff assist a hotel owner with a self-help eviction for a guest who stays
at a hotel for less than 90 days. These inquiries, as established in the analysis of this opinion, rely on a determination
of "primary residence," which requires case-by-case determinations. When such case-by-case determinations are
required, this Office has refrained from rendering an opinion on the general hypothetical questions without specific
facts being set forth. See 2000 Op. Va. Att'y Gen. 177, 181.
2 Va. Code Ann. § 55.1-1201(D)(1)-(4) (2022).
3 Section 55.1-1201(D)(1) to (4). Subsection (D)(4), as discussed later, provides that an individual who has resided
in the hotel, regardless of which room of the hotel they reside in, for more than 90 consecutive days receives the full
protections provided to a tenant under the VRLTA.
4 Section 55.1-1201(D)(1) and (2).
5 Section 55.1-1201(D)(1) - (D)(3). While self-help eviction is available as a remedy under Va. Code Ann. §
55.1-1201(D)(3), the fact that an individual stays beyond the time provided for in the five-day notice is not, in itself,
sufficient to establish an intent to cheat or defraud the hotel.
6 Section 55.1-1201(D)(4). Alternatively, an individual could have a lease with the hotel and the same protections
would apply.
7 State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Ponzi, Civil Action No. 1:18-cv-1486, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 220074, at 7 (E.D.
Va. Dec. 20, 2019).
8 State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Smith, 206 Va. 280, 285 (1965).
9 See Allstate Ins. Co. v. Patterson, 231 Va. 358, 363 (1986) (holding that the defendant did not qualify as a "resident
of the [insured's] household" because he only spent "about 10% of his time" at the insured's home); State Farm Mut.
Auto. Ins. Co. v. Smith, 206 Va. 280, 286 (1965) (ruling that, for the purposes of insurance, two individuals were not
"residents of the same household" because one was a visitor as indicated by the limited period she resided there, and
that she accepted an invitation to live somewhere else as soon as one was made).
10 State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Ponzi, Civil Action No. 1:18-cv-1486, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 220074, at 7-9
(E.D. Va. Dec. 20, 2019).
11 Id. at 2-3, 9-10.
12 Id. at 9-10.
13 Id. at *8 (citing Allstate Ins. Co. v. Patterson, 231 Va. 358, 363 (1986)).
14 The Office of the Attorney General traditionally does not render opinions in factual situations. "Attorneys
General consistently have declined to render official opinions on specific factual matters...." 2009 Op. Va. Att'y
Gen. 80, 81 and n.17.