7 ms·

I experienced exactly this in the early 1980's. In Berkeley, CA. Apartments were scarce because of rent control. I had a coworker that lived in his apartment

by e40 6y ago

I experienced exactly this in the early 1980's. In Berkeley, CA. Apartments were scarce because of rent control. I had a coworker that lived in his apartment from late 70's until late 90's. He paid less than $300/mo. It was great for him. He saved a ton of money and bought a house in Berkeley in the late 90's. But, as a student I had to live in Oakland and was never able to find an apartment. Every time I went to look at one there were another 99 people there. It was so frustrating.

latchkey 6y ago
Around 1994/5 I wanted to move to Berkeley. I had a very hard time finding a place. I looked at so many attics turned into bedrooms and other crappy places. Eventually, I found an ideal (relatively) place and there was a good 50+ people looking at the same apartment during a showing... I walked up to the landlord (who was a lawyer in his day job) and said... "I know you can't pick favorites, but I have a good salary and I'm not a student." ... he ended up making his top picks write an essay on why we wanted the apartment. I got the place and stayed there for 10 years. Interestingly, during the last few years I was there, rent control ended and the landlord really wanted me out because he knew that he could make 2-3x more. He turned into a slumlord and refused to make any improvements and the ones he made were all half assed. The storage locker in the carport under the building got broken into as well. Eventually, I left for SF and sublet the place to some friends illegally because they needed an inexpensive place. He eventually found out about that and I had to let the place go. I guess my point is that I've seen first hand rent control and no rent control go through both phases. I really don't think there is a good solution. Someone always gets the short end of the stick.
- slavik81 6y ago
  If there was no rent control, why didn't he just raise the price up to market value when your lease came up for renewal? I live in a city without rent control, and your experience is entirely foreign to me. Heck, my current landlord has offered to pay for things that I don't think are even really his responsibility. He's just happy to have good tenants paying market rate. Switching tenants will probably cost a few thousand dollars in lost rent, and it won't earn him any more income, so he treats us well.
  - klodolph 6y ago
    I don’t know CA, but in NYC, rent controlled apartments can only become market rate apartments in a specific, legally prescribed way. Even if you are in a market rate apartment, the landlord is only allowed to raise your rent by a certain percentage each year; this percentage is higher for market rate and lower for rent-controlled, and there is also a third category called “rent stabilized” which is between market rate and rent controlled. (Just as note about rent control in NYC—rent controlled apartments account for something like 1% of total apartments. The number is slowly going down, it was about 3% twenty years ago.)
  - latchkey 6y ago
    "grandfather clause" The removal of rent control only applied to new tenants. He was limited to a city controlled yearly mandated increase, the entire time I was there. He also couldn't kick me out unless he moved into the apartment himself for some period of time. He also had to put my deposit into an interest bearing account and was required to pay me that interest. The rental increase and payment was a ritual I went through yearly with him and he always delayed giving me the interest as long as he could by law. 2-3x+ more rent is enough reason for a landlord to want to push someone out in a competitive market like Berkeley. There is always a stream of new tenants because it is a college town and limited rental housing is available.
    - jtbayly 6y ago
      In other words, it was still rent controlled.
      - filoleg 6y ago
        Yes, but only until the current tenant leaves. Which gave that landlord all the incentives to make the current tenant leave, as evident by the half-assed repairs and other slumlord-like behaviors that the parent comment mentioned.
        CydeWeys 6y ago
- donarb 6y ago
  Interesting that it took an essay contest to break the tie. Seattle now has an ordinance that they must rent to the first applicant who qualifies. This is to prevent discrimination against minorities.
  - latchkey 6y ago
    Yea, I felt like it was kind of weird at the time, but I was also young and cocky and used my privilege to get the place in a highly competitive market. I don't feel good about that later in life. In his defense, I don't think he was discriminating against minorities as much as he was just trying to find a good tenant, in a sea of applications, that wouldn't cause him a lot of headache. One side bit of information is that he had had an accident and had lost part of one arm. He was very apt and that didn't hold him back at all, he was used to challenges.
  - rayiner 6y ago
    > Seattle now has an ordinance that they must rent to the first applicant who qualifies. This is to prevent discrimination against minorities. Isn’t it already illegal to discriminate against minorities in renting housing?
    - smnrchrds 6y ago
      Yes. But it is impossible to prove, so the law never gets enforced.
      - rayiner 6y ago
        So Seattle entirely removed the ability of landlords to pick their tenants? Imagine applying that to anything else—must hire the first qualified job applicant, etc.
        tptacek 6y ago
        I don't know, this kind of makes sense. You've presumably rented apartments before. The process is shady as shit. I've been shaken down by several landlords for prepayments, and intrusively interviewed. It must be much worse for Black renters. And it's how most purchasing works! I go to rent a car, they have to rent me the car if it's available; they can't wait to see if a safer-looking driver is right behind me. Renting an apartment isn't a job interview.
- exporectomy 6y ago
  > I really don't think there is a good solution. There is a good solution - for outsiders like you to go away and not come back. That leaves more housing for long term residents who are the people it's protecting. It sounds nasty but people everywhere can't stand outsiders coming into their place. Xenophobia.
  - readams 6y ago
    Also, nobody should have children.
    - perl4ever 6y ago
      Don't Europeans average less than one per person? I had the impression that was true for a very long time now.
- galfarragem 6y ago
  My urban planning teacher used to say, as a synthesis, that rent control does more damage to a city than bombing.. Why? Buildings will degrade. Fast forward some years and rents will not justify any building maintenance by landlords. History is full of examples that ideology recurrently ignores.
908B64B197 6y ago
> He saved a ton of money and bought a house in Berkeley in the late 90's. That gave him a durable advantage and helped him acquire assets that would further gain in value. Not to mention, as a renter and home owner, he was able to vote against new developments for years, further increasing scarcity and the value of his house. And then bureaucrats complain about inequalities?

by e40 6y ago

latchkey 6y ago

Around 1994/5 I wanted to move to Berkeley. I had a very hard time finding a place. I looked at so many attics turned into bedrooms and other crappy places. Eventually, I found an ideal (relatively) place and there was a good 50+ people looking at the same apartment during a showing... I walked up to the landlord (who was a lawyer in his day job) and said... "I know you can't pick favorites, but I have a good salary and I'm not a student." ... he ended up making his top picks write an essay on why we wanted the apartment. I got the place and stayed there for 10 years. Interestingly, during the last few years I was there, rent control ended and the landlord really wanted me out because he knew that he could make 2-3x more. He turned into a slumlord and refused to make any improvements and the ones he made were all half assed. The storage locker in the carport under the building got broken into as well. Eventually, I left for SF and sublet the place to some friends illegally because they needed an inexpensive place. He eventually found out about that and I had to let the place go. I guess my point is that I've seen first hand rent control and no rent control go through both phases. I really don't think there is a good solution. Someone always gets the short end of the stick.

slavik81 6y ago
If there was no rent control, why didn't he just raise the price up to market value when your lease came up for renewal? I live in a city without rent control, and your experience is entirely foreign to me. Heck, my current landlord has offered to pay for things that I don't think are even really his responsibility. He's just happy to have good tenants paying market rate. Switching tenants will probably cost a few thousand dollars in lost rent, and it won't earn him any more income, so he treats us well.
- klodolph 6y ago
  I don’t know CA, but in NYC, rent controlled apartments can only become market rate apartments in a specific, legally prescribed way. Even if you are in a market rate apartment, the landlord is only allowed to raise your rent by a certain percentage each year; this percentage is higher for market rate and lower for rent-controlled, and there is also a third category called “rent stabilized” which is between market rate and rent controlled. (Just as note about rent control in NYC—rent controlled apartments account for something like 1% of total apartments. The number is slowly going down, it was about 3% twenty years ago.)
- latchkey 6y ago
  "grandfather clause" The removal of rent control only applied to new tenants. He was limited to a city controlled yearly mandated increase, the entire time I was there. He also couldn't kick me out unless he moved into the apartment himself for some period of time. He also had to put my deposit into an interest bearing account and was required to pay me that interest. The rental increase and payment was a ritual I went through yearly with him and he always delayed giving me the interest as long as he could by law. 2-3x+ more rent is enough reason for a landlord to want to push someone out in a competitive market like Berkeley. There is always a stream of new tenants because it is a college town and limited rental housing is available.
  - jtbayly 6y ago
    In other words, it was still rent controlled.
    - filoleg 6y ago
      Yes, but only until the current tenant leaves. Which gave that landlord all the incentives to make the current tenant leave, as evident by the half-assed repairs and other slumlord-like behaviors that the parent comment mentioned.
      - CydeWeys 6y ago
donarb 6y ago
Interesting that it took an essay contest to break the tie. Seattle now has an ordinance that they must rent to the first applicant who qualifies. This is to prevent discrimination against minorities.
- latchkey 6y ago
  Yea, I felt like it was kind of weird at the time, but I was also young and cocky and used my privilege to get the place in a highly competitive market. I don't feel good about that later in life. In his defense, I don't think he was discriminating against minorities as much as he was just trying to find a good tenant, in a sea of applications, that wouldn't cause him a lot of headache. One side bit of information is that he had had an accident and had lost part of one arm. He was very apt and that didn't hold him back at all, he was used to challenges.
- rayiner 6y ago
  > Seattle now has an ordinance that they must rent to the first applicant who qualifies. This is to prevent discrimination against minorities. Isn’t it already illegal to discriminate against minorities in renting housing?
  - smnrchrds 6y ago
    Yes. But it is impossible to prove, so the law never gets enforced.
    - rayiner 6y ago
      So Seattle entirely removed the ability of landlords to pick their tenants? Imagine applying that to anything else—must hire the first qualified job applicant, etc.
      - tptacek 6y ago
        I don't know, this kind of makes sense. You've presumably rented apartments before. The process is shady as shit. I've been shaken down by several landlords for prepayments, and intrusively interviewed. It must be much worse for Black renters. And it's how most purchasing works! I go to rent a car, they have to rent me the car if it's available; they can't wait to see if a safer-looking driver is right behind me. Renting an apartment isn't a job interview.
exporectomy 6y ago
> I really don't think there is a good solution. There is a good solution - for outsiders like you to go away and not come back. That leaves more housing for long term residents who are the people it's protecting. It sounds nasty but people everywhere can't stand outsiders coming into their place. Xenophobia.
- readams 6y ago
  Also, nobody should have children.
  - perl4ever 6y ago
    Don't Europeans average less than one per person? I had the impression that was true for a very long time now.
galfarragem 6y ago
My urban planning teacher used to say, as a synthesis, that rent control does more damage to a city than bombing.. Why? Buildings will degrade. Fast forward some years and rents will not justify any building maintenance by landlords. History is full of examples that ideology recurrently ignores.

908B64B197 6y ago

> He saved a ton of money and bought a house in Berkeley in the late 90's. That gave him a durable advantage and helped him acquire assets that would further gain in value. Not to mention, as a renter and home owner, he was able to vote against new developments for years, further increasing scarcity and the value of his house. And then bureaucrats complain about inequalities?