4 ms·

As a landlord (I don't like that name, it kinda has a negative connotation) I can see first-hand in dealing with new potential properties the lack of care most

by EADGBE 9y ago

As a landlord (I don't like that name, it kinda has a negative connotation) I can see first-hand in dealing with new potential properties the lack of care most landlords have towards their investments. They approach it as an entirely passive income without ponying up the relatively small amount for someone to actually maintain it (Since they're too old or bothered to do it themselves). I think a major windfall could be had with better regulations and rights renters could have protecting them from abusive landlords. The rental regulations in my city are laughable and I have to deal with it almost every time we look at a potential property when I "assess" how much care has been put into its structure, mechanical, appliances, etc. That's even assuming the previous owner permitted the property for such use.

real_estate 9y ago
Personal anecdote: I know of a retired magistrate judge that acquired over 30 residential properties via tax-delinquency sales. These properties, not in the best condition, were used as Section 8 HUD housing, with no improvements made. Tactics included keeping the utilities in the landlord's name to be able to shut-off water, electric, or gas at a moment's notice. Many of the tenants were former defendants with the magistrate court that the judge oversaw. Additionally, barter was used in lieu of security deposits and partial rent payments - the tenant could fix-up the property. However, the tenants lacked any ability to properly repair anything, and the repairs caused further damage to the properties. The wife of the landlord, insisted he divest himself of these properties before his death, so she would not have to continue to deal with this. However, he did die, she inherited the properties, and is too old to have the energy to deal with this. As you said, "too old or bothered to do it themselves". Some of these properties now sit unoccupied, but cannot pass inspection because of the substandard repairs, and further disintegrate. I know of one particular property that was not winterized (unoccupied), and I am certain the pipes have frozen and cracked. At this point, the property should be razed (roof issues, structural issues, mildew, pests), but that costs money too.
- gnarcoregrizz 9y ago
  Some more incoming personal anecdotes from California I briefly rented a small single family home from an 85 yo woman (managed by her son who lived a few towns away). We quickly found out there was black mold everywhere from a bad leak in the garage and a small one in the kitchen, and that she smoked her whole life in the place. She had no interest in keeping it up, she just "wanted to rent it out." Her son had no interest in dealing with it either as he readily admitted to us. I don't think he had seen the place in a long, long time considering the state of the damage. We ended up recouping our costs and moving after a few days. She bought it for $150k 20 years ago, pays $600/year in property taxes so there's no incentive for her to give it up (prop 13). It's valued at $500k and was renting for $2500/mo. Our new place is owned by chinese investors, and also has issues which they aren't interested in fixing. They haven't responded to a single email (I think they are in their early 20s, live in china, and i'm not entirely sure they speak english), we also tried to go thru the property manager who said he won't fix stuff since the landlords are unresponsive. We gave both of them 30 days notice that we need about $500 worth of things fixed. We never heard back, so we did the repairs and just deducted it from the rent, as you're legally allowed to do... come to thing of it, I could propbably not pay rent and squat the place and I'm sure they couldn't give less of a shit.
  - jjav 9y ago
    Property tax in California is at least 1% (typically a bit higher due to various local fees, but let's say 1% for this example). That means if she bought the property 20 years ago for $150K, the property tax in year one was 1% of 150K, or $1500. Under Prop 13 property taxes go up 2% ever year (compounded). So after 20 years that property tax would be up to roughly $2400.
    - emodendroket 9y ago
      That's still pretty insignificant, isn't it?
    - gnarcoregrizz 9y ago
      The assessed value is $61k, the estimated value (according to zillow) is $480k. Property taxes in 2016 were $640. There is a law where 55+ can transfer valuations if they move within counties that participate. https://www.ocgov.com/gov/assessor/programs/55plus#2179 https://www.ocgov.com/gov/assessor/programs/55plus#2179
- Bartweiss 9y ago
  > At this point, the property should be razed (roof issues, structural issues, mildew, pests), but that costs money too. And when this sort of thing gets truly out of control, you end up with Detroit syndrome. A city with a tax base so small it can't even afford to tear down unlivable properties - and consequently can't encourage reconstruction that might expand the tax base. Hell, Detroit got to the point where serial arson was one of the major ways of cleaning up abandoned properties. I think people underestimate the degree to which this sort of disuse is not just a missed opportunity but an active harm.
  - real_estate 9y ago
    The serial arson isn't really a solution, either. So, in the same area I mentioned in my previous post, there have been several arson incidents. All that remains is the shell of the structure, and the property owner cannot be contacted (some other state/country), the municipality cannot pay for the removal and dumping of the debris, and the EPA considers the property an unauthorized dump/landfill. Particularly in areas with basements, the basements collect the debris and all the rain and snow, and become, as you say, an "active harm".
    - Bartweiss 9y ago
      Yeah, this is a good point. The arson seems to have been done to get rid of squatters, drug dealers, and places children might try to go play. So it's lowering the community impact of the building, but doing nothing (or less than nothing) to make actual cleanup or development there possible.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
and0 9y ago
Previous landlord was a nightmare, and renter's rights in VA are non-existant. He was clearly well versed in the law but because he didn't own an absurd amount of active rental units all the normal rights didn't apply. He lived pretty far away and I wasn't legally able to withhold rent or anything (unless doing it through court and paying into an escrow) for the numerous issues that came up. Since then he's tried to withhold the full security deposit, largely for issues that existed when I moved in that he'd (verbally) promised to fix (but refused to commit to over email). I submitted it to small claims around the same time one of my roommates from that house put him down as a (required) reference for a new place, and he called her directly to blackmail her, claiming he would give her a negative reference unless she submitted in writing that she believed all the issues he cited in keeping our deposit were justified. I don't even understand how some people live with themselves. Oh well, court date approaching.
- coding123 9y ago
  I wish more states did what Oregon does for termed leases. Specifically Oregon rent code makes it so that a renter can never be liable for more than 1.5 months of rent due to a lease break (although correct me in the exact amount). That was something that made it much easier to sign a lease in Oregon just in case it turned out the state's largest gun range was behind the house. I love guns but damn I don't want to hear them go off 10 hours a day. The neighbors were crazy and no longer heard them. shutters... I have since moved out of Oregon because too many Californians have moved in (LOL).
- sjg007 9y ago
  You prevent this by taking photos and video before you sign the lease agreement highlighting the condition of the place. You can also annotate a document on condition at move as well. Landlord usually has to countersign lease agreement so attach copies of said things to lease. Also send things registered mail to where your landlord accepts checks.
closeparen 9y ago
Matthew Desmond’s Evicted is quite good on this topic. It points out that slumlords can get around any tenant protection by being lenient to poor tenants who inevitably get behind on the rent. When they invoke tenant protections, evict for non-payment.

by EADGBE 9y ago

real_estate 9y ago

Personal anecdote: I know of a retired magistrate judge that acquired over 30 residential properties via tax-delinquency sales. These properties, not in the best condition, were used as Section 8 HUD housing, with no improvements made. Tactics included keeping the utilities in the landlord's name to be able to shut-off water, electric, or gas at a moment's notice. Many of the tenants were former defendants with the magistrate court that the judge oversaw. Additionally, barter was used in lieu of security deposits and partial rent payments - the tenant could fix-up the property. However, the tenants lacked any ability to properly repair anything, and the repairs caused further damage to the properties. The wife of the landlord, insisted he divest himself of these properties before his death, so she would not have to continue to deal with this. However, he did die, she inherited the properties, and is too old to have the energy to deal with this. As you said, "too old or bothered to do it themselves". Some of these properties now sit unoccupied, but cannot pass inspection because of the substandard repairs, and further disintegrate. I know of one particular property that was not winterized (unoccupied), and I am certain the pipes have frozen and cracked. At this point, the property should be razed (roof issues, structural issues, mildew, pests), but that costs money too.

gnarcoregrizz 9y ago
Some more incoming personal anecdotes from California I briefly rented a small single family home from an 85 yo woman (managed by her son who lived a few towns away). We quickly found out there was black mold everywhere from a bad leak in the garage and a small one in the kitchen, and that she smoked her whole life in the place. She had no interest in keeping it up, she just "wanted to rent it out." Her son had no interest in dealing with it either as he readily admitted to us. I don't think he had seen the place in a long, long time considering the state of the damage. We ended up recouping our costs and moving after a few days. She bought it for $150k 20 years ago, pays $600/year in property taxes so there's no incentive for her to give it up (prop 13). It's valued at $500k and was renting for $2500/mo. Our new place is owned by chinese investors, and also has issues which they aren't interested in fixing. They haven't responded to a single email (I think they are in their early 20s, live in china, and i'm not entirely sure they speak english), we also tried to go thru the property manager who said he won't fix stuff since the landlords are unresponsive. We gave both of them 30 days notice that we need about $500 worth of things fixed. We never heard back, so we did the repairs and just deducted it from the rent, as you're legally allowed to do... come to thing of it, I could propbably not pay rent and squat the place and I'm sure they couldn't give less of a shit.
- jjav 9y ago
  Property tax in California is at least 1% (typically a bit higher due to various local fees, but let's say 1% for this example). That means if she bought the property 20 years ago for $150K, the property tax in year one was 1% of 150K, or $1500. Under Prop 13 property taxes go up 2% ever year (compounded). So after 20 years that property tax would be up to roughly $2400.
  - emodendroket 9y ago
    That's still pretty insignificant, isn't it?
  - gnarcoregrizz 9y ago
    The assessed value is $61k, the estimated value (according to zillow) is $480k. Property taxes in 2016 were $640. There is a law where 55+ can transfer valuations if they move within counties that participate. https://www.ocgov.com/gov/assessor/programs/55plus#2179 https://www.ocgov.com/gov/assessor/programs/55plus#2179
Bartweiss 9y ago
> At this point, the property should be razed (roof issues, structural issues, mildew, pests), but that costs money too. And when this sort of thing gets truly out of control, you end up with Detroit syndrome. A city with a tax base so small it can't even afford to tear down unlivable properties - and consequently can't encourage reconstruction that might expand the tax base. Hell, Detroit got to the point where serial arson was one of the major ways of cleaning up abandoned properties. I think people underestimate the degree to which this sort of disuse is not just a missed opportunity but an active harm.
- real_estate 9y ago
  The serial arson isn't really a solution, either. So, in the same area I mentioned in my previous post, there have been several arson incidents. All that remains is the shell of the structure, and the property owner cannot be contacted (some other state/country), the municipality cannot pay for the removal and dumping of the debris, and the EPA considers the property an unauthorized dump/landfill. Particularly in areas with basements, the basements collect the debris and all the rain and snow, and become, as you say, an "active harm".
  - Bartweiss 9y ago
    Yeah, this is a good point. The arson seems to have been done to get rid of squatters, drug dealers, and places children might try to go play. So it's lowering the community impact of the building, but doing nothing (or less than nothing) to make actual cleanup or development there possible.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

and0 9y ago

Previous landlord was a nightmare, and renter's rights in VA are non-existant. He was clearly well versed in the law but because he didn't own an absurd amount of active rental units all the normal rights didn't apply. He lived pretty far away and I wasn't legally able to withhold rent or anything (unless doing it through court and paying into an escrow) for the numerous issues that came up. Since then he's tried to withhold the full security deposit, largely for issues that existed when I moved in that he'd (verbally) promised to fix (but refused to commit to over email). I submitted it to small claims around the same time one of my roommates from that house put him down as a (required) reference for a new place, and he called her directly to blackmail her, claiming he would give her a negative reference unless she submitted in writing that she believed all the issues he cited in keeping our deposit were justified. I don't even understand how some people live with themselves. Oh well, court date approaching.

coding123 9y ago
I wish more states did what Oregon does for termed leases. Specifically Oregon rent code makes it so that a renter can never be liable for more than 1.5 months of rent due to a lease break (although correct me in the exact amount). That was something that made it much easier to sign a lease in Oregon just in case it turned out the state's largest gun range was behind the house. I love guns but damn I don't want to hear them go off 10 hours a day. The neighbors were crazy and no longer heard them. shutters... I have since moved out of Oregon because too many Californians have moved in (LOL).
sjg007 9y ago
You prevent this by taking photos and video before you sign the lease agreement highlighting the condition of the place. You can also annotate a document on condition at move as well. Landlord usually has to countersign lease agreement so attach copies of said things to lease. Also send things registered mail to where your landlord accepts checks.

closeparen 9y ago

Matthew Desmond’s Evicted is quite good on this topic. It points out that slumlords can get around any tenant protection by being lenient to poor tenants who inevitably get behind on the rent. When they invoke tenant protections, evict for non-payment.