6 ms·

This 1000x. I reflexively said (out loud) “god no!” in answer to the title question. The only people who ask this question are people who haven’t been landlord

• bufferoverflow 7y ago
  It really depends on where you are. In many european countries it's traditional for the tenant to fix the problems. Washing machine broke? Get a replacement yourself. Pipes clogged? Call a plumber.
  • ncphillips 7y ago
    Why would you rent then?
    • bufferoverflow 7y ago
      Most people can't afford to buy. Buying a house/apartment generally requires a 20% down payment, inspections, lawyer fees, realtor fees, and a shit ton of paperwork, and that's assuming a bank will even loan you money at a reasonable rate.
      • Frost1x 7y ago
        Plus, home ownership also reduces your mobility. With rent I have a lease I can typically sublet or end. If not, I'm at most liable for the remainder of the lease. If you ever want or need to move, you have the liability of selling your home, managing a mortgage plus rent, etc. on-top of finding a new position, moving, and everything surrounding the act. The obvious downside is you'll never get any ROI beyond having a place to live like you may with property ownership. Homes are great when you have financial stability and freedom but can become a big shackle if you don't.
  • YorkshireSeason 7y ago
    I recommend thinking about this probabilistically: X% of tenants are reasonable and handle the repairs they are contractually required to handle smoothly. (1-X)% of tenants are a massive headache, and call the landlord for every lightbulb that needs changing, threaten to sue you all the time, smash your property to pieces etc etc. Compute the expected value, and compare with other forms of investment. In my experience, renting out a single property is not worth the expected reward, vis-a-vis other forms of investment. This changes if you can reap economies of scale from renting out multiple properties. (Cut-off point depends on ambient legal system, tax, your own background (e.g. if you are a lawyer, you can handle legal disputes yourself) etc.)
    • apathy 7y ago
      Hello fellow statistician (whether by training or habit). For everyone else, note that this approach is not limited to landlording. Excellent exposition!
    • NullPrefix 7y ago
      >(1-X)% of tenants You mean (100-X)% ?
  • spacesuitman2 7y ago
    Which European countries?
    • freshm087 7y ago
      In Eastern Europe it's often the case. Worth mentioning however that plumbing services are much cheaper then in States, and there are usually no legal/insurance nuances which reapairing may bring in the US. So it's simply easier to call a plumber and have trouble solved then include a landlord into equation. Broken washing machine, or expensive furniture in most cases are on landlord, though.
    • MandieD 7y ago
      Germany, for sure - tenants usually own their own washing machines and most of the time, their own kitchens, including all appliances, cabinets and the proverbial kitchen sink. Tenants are essentially paying for the right to occupy the dwelling, and that’s about it. Therefore rental price to purchase price ratios have historically been lower, as well as home ownership rates. Rents in desirable cities are going up faster than they had been, though, and Berlin has quickly gone from being one of the cheapest cities in the country to one of the most expensive.
  • docbrown 7y ago
    I agree with you on this more than the original response. From my time renting — houses and apartments — the former has always been more of an “as-is” type rental. In a house rental, the landlords tend to usually only be responsible for the big ticket items (hot water tank, septic tank, foundation/exterior issues, etc.) while you were left to deal with moderate homeowner fixes. Apartments on the other hand, especially a complex, we’re held responsible for every repair. Pilot light out? Maintenance. Broken window? call the office. Your water pressure suddenly got cut off at 3:30am? Hello, 24/7 maintenance line.
  • mrighele 7y ago
    I would say that it depends. Regular maintenance of course is on the tenant, if the washing machine is not mine and it brakes down I would not repair it without first discussing it with the landlord. If it broke down because of my misuse I'm fine paying, but it is just regular wear why should I ? I'm paying a premium for a furnished house after all. Of course the best is to make it clear at the moment you rent, not when the issue arise.
  • diegolo 7y ago
    Not in Uk
  • cblum 7y ago
    Same thing in South America. Edit: I find it insane that most people in the US don’t see the advantages of renting. When you rent here, your housing cost is fixed for at least a year. Anything breaks, you call the landlord or leasing office and it gets fixed at zero cost to you. I really miss renting. Now that I own a condo, I keep having to deal with unexpected expenses - fridge breaks, something comes off the drywall, microwave breaks, plumbing issues, etc. Plus, I don’t have the option anymore of moving closer to my kid’s school when she transitions to middle and high school (and those are quite far compared to her elementary school). I mean, I do, but selling a place and buying a new one is a monumental hassle compared to switching apartment leases. I would go back to renting if I could.
• cobbzilla 7y ago
  This -1000x. Get a property manager. Mine takes 8% and does everything. I enjoy a monthly direct deposit. Every once in a while something breaks (just got a new oven), I send them a check, they do everything.
  • u801e 7y ago
    It depends on the property manager. The one I had let the tenants stay 3 weeks beyond their lease end date rent free, pre-dated the move-out inspection and didn't even bother itemizing the damage the caused to the unit (which was well beyond their security deposit). They didn't get a forwarding address from them and there's no way to collect additional damages.
    • cobbzilla 7y ago
      Sounds like a terrible property manager. Thankfully it is usually very easy to fire them and get a new one. At least where I am, there are a lot of them and competition is strong, so it's not hard to find a good one.
    • apathy 7y ago
      Yes! This seems to be the turd in the punch bowl. If you can find a good property manager and a good tenant, it’s not bad. Bad either can get ugly quickly (in CA).
  • bob1029 7y ago
    While I agree with this direction, it does make me begin to question why I don't just abstract the entire thing away with a REIT or other similar investment vehicle. 8% off the top depending on your particular scenario could get you pretty close to the same net returns at the end of the day. If you went with a few REITs, management would take maybe a few hours a month even for a massive portfolio. This also has the benefit of being much more diversified than a single investor directly owning various properties could possibly manage. Granted, using REITs is a tradeoff in granularity of asset allocation and potential upside, so there is always that zone of opportunity to exploit. It just takes a delicate evaluation of the value of your time vs the opportunity itself relative to other competing strategies.
• fbonetti 7y ago
  I don't understand this viewpoint at all. I own multiple properties and the only "work" I do is stuff that I like (minor repairs and renovations). I hire someone else to do all the stuff I don't like or don't have the skillset to do myself. I don't chase tenants down for missing checks because I only buy B class properties and I require all tenants to pass a background check, credit check, and to pay their rent via recurring direct deposit. If having to fix a clogged toilet at midnight once a year is the sacrifice I have to make to retire early, so be it.
  • deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  • JamesBarney 7y ago
    I think it's easy to understand that even though you enjoy responding to calls about fixing a leak at 10pm on a Tuesday that not everyone would. And for many it would be a significant drawback to owning property.
    • sizzle 7y ago
      Property management companies can take care of this headache for a small % of rental income.
    • goostavos 7y ago
      How often does that realistically happen though if you've just got 1-2 properties? I've been thinking a lot about buy an investment property, but the mixed workload reviews makes me hesitant
      • rabidrat 7y ago
        Over the course of 20 years, you will have modest years that seem pretty reasonable, and you will have ridiculous years that tip the whole balance negative. My partner had been renting her house out for about 5 years with the usual annoyances, when the newest tenants left a cabinet on a cord that after a few months started an electrical fire that torched the place. No one was injured and it was (mostly) covered by insurance, but it was still 6+ months of dealing with all the claims and repairs and getting it back into shape. And to top it off, the tenants took her to small claims court for the security deposit! (They lost.)
• alistairSH 7y ago
  I'll counter with a family anecdote. My sister and her husband own a rental home in the DC suburbs. It's within easy commute of the Pentagon and another army base. They've been able to rent exclusively to officers or senior enlisted. Price-wise, the army housing allowance is at the top of the market of the size/style of home (mid-sized 3-bed townhome). The tenants are mostly price insensitive - as long as the house is priced within their allowance and meets their needs. Their theory is a career military tenant more likely to be a good tenant than some random person. So far it's held true, but small sample size (10 years of rentals, 4 or 5 tenants). Anyway, point being, this is like any other investment, you have to do the work up front to ensure the risk and payout are balanced. In their case, it was a no-brainer to keep the house when they moved into something larger. Almost zero chance of the home being unoccupied, better than average chance at a good tenant, etc. But, they're also financial well-off and could afford to keep a relatively expensive house in a nice area - obviously not an option for many in the middle-class.