4 ms·

> As a consequence of this, nobody in my family would ever consider renting a property as a long term rental again - there is just too much risk, which means yo

> As a consequence of this, nobody in my family would ever consider renting a property as a long term rental again - there is just too much risk, which means you'll see a lot of small, private landlords get out, only to leave large corporate landlords who will have much stricter rental policies. Personally I think large corporate landlords in combination with sensible nationwide renters rights are preferable. There are tradeoffs of course, but the protection of the private/small rentier class has had many more bad effects than good for housing policy generally IMO -- Prop 13 being a good example. I think the way that you're describing your relationship with your property in terms of ownership and how you feel about the government intervening in that is shared by most small landlords with investment properties, and gets to the core of a lot of the problems inherent in the small landlord paradigm. Too much skin in the game (lack of diversification) and a dependency on turning a steady profit from a speculative investment in what is a basic human need. There are a lot of things that got us here in the U.S. and unfortunately the reality will likely be a continuance of the status quo.

gxs 5y ago
So the answer to people not paying rent is for small landlords to..not own land? And having Amazon rent you an apartment is somehow preferable? How about we do the critical thinking, fix zoning laws where necessary, allow tenants to be kicked out for…being shitty tenants, and make an effort to put laws in place that make it easier for people to make a living wage and pay their rent.
- femiagbabiaka 5y ago
  > So the answer to people not paying rent is for small landlords to..not own land? Yes actually. Well, in part at least. I would put it in the non-reformist reform category. It opens up the possibility of actually doing something about renting in this country, unlike the status quo where people speculating on property demand law change whenever governments choose to keep people in homes instead of protecting their investment income. Of course, folks can own land if they want. But we should absolutely discourage treating what is at its core a shared resource critical to human existence as an investment vehicle. > And having Amazon rent you an apartment is somehow preferable? Yes. Regulating Amazon and regulating Ms. Jones who rents out her second floor are much different propositions for the average voter. > How about we do the critical thinking, fix zoning laws where necessary, allow tenants to be kicked out for…being shitty tenants, and make an effort to put laws in place that make it easier for people to make a living wage and pay their rent. It is interesting that in your formulation, critical thinking can only lead to a conclusion where the makeup of the rentier class and how we regulate housing investment are irrelevant. Are you a landlord?
- bruce511 5y ago
  I think being a landlord is like everything else, there are upsides and downsides, and there are "amateurs" and "professionals". By which I mean that being a landlord is a business, and it takes time and experience to learn the ins and outs of any business, and ultimately experience improves performance. By extension the landlord with one property, gets little overall experience (maybe one lease a year or so) so they encounter all the rental-business-challenges, one at a time over a long period of time. It may take years to get a bad tenant, or years to figure out what is the correct amount to spend on maintainence, or discover what kind of garden works best, and so on. With only one property under management, there is also magnification of the effect of individual events. One property, and one bad tenant, is a big deal. One property and the need for a new kitchen, of bathroom etc is a big deal. A portfolio of multiple properties helps to spread the load. 1 bad tenant is only 10% of income and so on. Plus with 10 properties you can have a regular plumber, electrician, handyman etc, and so you get good rates, and good service, because you become important to them. Your family member has learned an expensive lesson about vetting tenants, that lesson will cause some to exit the market, and others how to "understand the landlord business better." Typically it makes landlords more risk-adverse, and this has knock-on effects for those who are indeed bad tenants. (for starters the only ones who will rent to bad tenants are inexperienced (bad?) landlords. The spill over of this are folks who have flags (previous bankruptcies) who may be perfectly OK now, but are victim then to landlords that aren't prepared to take on that risk. Some larger landlords can take on some percentage of "medium risk" - small landlords will learn (the hard way) to only take on "no risk".
- antihero 5y ago
  It would be preferable that real estate becomes so hazardous and awful to “invest” in for any party it becomes cheap enough for most people to buy and use for its intended purpose.
legalcorrection 5y ago
Frankly, this is an awful idea. Investment in real estate is basically the best way for the middle class to use their savings to build wealth and long-term financial stability. And I don't see how modern property law is geared toward the interest of small landlords. In every major city—i.e. the places with affordability problems—the laws are extremely friendly to tenants and hostile to landlords. Sure, there's the peculiarity of Prop 13 in California, but I don't see how you can generalize that to any other part of the country.
- femiagbabiaka 5y ago
  > Frankly, this is an awful idea. Investment in real estate is basically the best way for the middle class to use their savings to build wealth and long-term financial stability. There are a lot of things that are profitable but not good for society as a whole. Land as an investment vehicle is one of them. > And I don't see how modern property law is geared toward the interest of small landlords. In every major city—i.e. the places with affordability problems—the laws are extremely friendly to tenants and hostile to landlords. Sure, there's the peculiarity of Prop 13 in California, but I don't see how you can generalize that to any other part of the country. These policy wars are happening constantly in most densely populated parts of the US. Here's an article covering one example outside of California: https://crosscut.com/opinion/2021/06/do-renter-protections-reduce-rental-housing-supply https://crosscut.com/opinion/2021/06/do-renter-protections-r.... I disagree with the characterization of status quo renters rights in the average American city as being hostile to landlords and friendly to renters -- what would be an example of a policy that you classify as being in this category?
  - legalcorrection 5y ago
    For one, in many jurisdictions it can take two, three, even four months to evict a non-paying tenant. Many cities will give free attorneys to tenants being evicted. So now the landlord has a bunch of factually dubious and difficult to dispute allegations made against them.
    - femiagbabiaka 5y ago
throwaway48375 5y ago
Have you ever rented a property from a corporation? They are the worst.
- femiagbabiaka 5y ago
  I have many times, it has almost always been much preferable to my experiences with small landlords. The micromanaging of apartments, corner cutting when it comes to maintenance efforts, bizarre unenforceable stipulations in rental agreements, discrimination and more -- I've seen some of each of these problems in my time renting from both large and small landlords, but the small landlords were almost always worse. Less capital and less experience is part of why I'm guessing. For me, I don't care about my landlord knowing my name if my apartment is managed competently and within local legal guidelines.
  - throwaway48375 5y ago
    My experience with corporate landlords is the complete opposite of yours. You call the office and they tell you to call the manager. You call the manager and they tell you to call the office. You call the office back and the call gets disconnected. You drive down to the office and they are "in a meeting". Letters and emails are ignored. The only way to get them to do anything is to sue them. Apparently this tanks your "shadow credit score" though. The individual landlords I have rented from were always much more flexible and accommodating. When I call them they are responsive. They treat you like another person instead of a number on a spreadsheet. They actually cared about their property and would do even preventative maintenance.
    - FDSGSG 5y ago
      > The only way to get them to do anything is to sue them. Apparently this tanks your "shadow credit score" though. Do you have a source for this claim? I can't find that in the article.
      - throwaway48375 5y ago
pydry 5y ago
The small vs. large landlord distinction is mostly immaterial. The behavior of landlords is dictated by their level of relative market power. When it too high relative to tenants they will start to fuck you over. It is guaranteed to happen unless there is a countervailing force to drive bad landlords into bankruptcy and let good landlords take over. The fact its a basic human need is also something of a red herring. So is food but we dont have abusive amateurs running that market. It functions. The problem with this market is that you can own largely untaxed land. Ownership of land inhibits competition in the rental market and drives dysfunction. It lets amateurs play in the same market as professionals and it richly rewards those with extra capital to spare to buy ever more desirable locations rather than rewarding those who simply do a better job at providing housing.

gxs 5y ago

So the answer to people not paying rent is for small landlords to..not own land? And having Amazon rent you an apartment is somehow preferable? How about we do the critical thinking, fix zoning laws where necessary, allow tenants to be kicked out for…being shitty tenants, and make an effort to put laws in place that make it easier for people to make a living wage and pay their rent.

femiagbabiaka 5y ago
> So the answer to people not paying rent is for small landlords to..not own land? Yes actually. Well, in part at least. I would put it in the non-reformist reform category. It opens up the possibility of actually doing something about renting in this country, unlike the status quo where people speculating on property demand law change whenever governments choose to keep people in homes instead of protecting their investment income. Of course, folks can own land if they want. But we should absolutely discourage treating what is at its core a shared resource critical to human existence as an investment vehicle. > And having Amazon rent you an apartment is somehow preferable? Yes. Regulating Amazon and regulating Ms. Jones who rents out her second floor are much different propositions for the average voter. > How about we do the critical thinking, fix zoning laws where necessary, allow tenants to be kicked out for…being shitty tenants, and make an effort to put laws in place that make it easier for people to make a living wage and pay their rent. It is interesting that in your formulation, critical thinking can only lead to a conclusion where the makeup of the rentier class and how we regulate housing investment are irrelevant. Are you a landlord?
bruce511 5y ago
I think being a landlord is like everything else, there are upsides and downsides, and there are "amateurs" and "professionals". By which I mean that being a landlord is a business, and it takes time and experience to learn the ins and outs of any business, and ultimately experience improves performance. By extension the landlord with one property, gets little overall experience (maybe one lease a year or so) so they encounter all the rental-business-challenges, one at a time over a long period of time. It may take years to get a bad tenant, or years to figure out what is the correct amount to spend on maintainence, or discover what kind of garden works best, and so on. With only one property under management, there is also magnification of the effect of individual events. One property, and one bad tenant, is a big deal. One property and the need for a new kitchen, of bathroom etc is a big deal. A portfolio of multiple properties helps to spread the load. 1 bad tenant is only 10% of income and so on. Plus with 10 properties you can have a regular plumber, electrician, handyman etc, and so you get good rates, and good service, because you become important to them. Your family member has learned an expensive lesson about vetting tenants, that lesson will cause some to exit the market, and others how to "understand the landlord business better." Typically it makes landlords more risk-adverse, and this has knock-on effects for those who are indeed bad tenants. (for starters the only ones who will rent to bad tenants are inexperienced (bad?) landlords. The spill over of this are folks who have flags (previous bankruptcies) who may be perfectly OK now, but are victim then to landlords that aren't prepared to take on that risk. Some larger landlords can take on some percentage of "medium risk" - small landlords will learn (the hard way) to only take on "no risk".
antihero 5y ago
It would be preferable that real estate becomes so hazardous and awful to “invest” in for any party it becomes cheap enough for most people to buy and use for its intended purpose.

legalcorrection 5y ago

Frankly, this is an awful idea. Investment in real estate is basically the best way for the middle class to use their savings to build wealth and long-term financial stability. And I don't see how modern property law is geared toward the interest of small landlords. In every major city—i.e. the places with affordability problems—the laws are extremely friendly to tenants and hostile to landlords. Sure, there's the peculiarity of Prop 13 in California, but I don't see how you can generalize that to any other part of the country.

femiagbabiaka 5y ago
> Frankly, this is an awful idea. Investment in real estate is basically the best way for the middle class to use their savings to build wealth and long-term financial stability. There are a lot of things that are profitable but not good for society as a whole. Land as an investment vehicle is one of them. > And I don't see how modern property law is geared toward the interest of small landlords. In every major city—i.e. the places with affordability problems—the laws are extremely friendly to tenants and hostile to landlords. Sure, there's the peculiarity of Prop 13 in California, but I don't see how you can generalize that to any other part of the country. These policy wars are happening constantly in most densely populated parts of the US. Here's an article covering one example outside of California: https://crosscut.com/opinion/2021/06/do-renter-protections-reduce-rental-housing-supply https://crosscut.com/opinion/2021/06/do-renter-protections-r.... I disagree with the characterization of status quo renters rights in the average American city as being hostile to landlords and friendly to renters -- what would be an example of a policy that you classify as being in this category?
- legalcorrection 5y ago
  For one, in many jurisdictions it can take two, three, even four months to evict a non-paying tenant. Many cities will give free attorneys to tenants being evicted. So now the landlord has a bunch of factually dubious and difficult to dispute allegations made against them.
  - femiagbabiaka 5y ago

throwaway48375 5y ago

Have you ever rented a property from a corporation? They are the worst.

femiagbabiaka 5y ago
I have many times, it has almost always been much preferable to my experiences with small landlords. The micromanaging of apartments, corner cutting when it comes to maintenance efforts, bizarre unenforceable stipulations in rental agreements, discrimination and more -- I've seen some of each of these problems in my time renting from both large and small landlords, but the small landlords were almost always worse. Less capital and less experience is part of why I'm guessing. For me, I don't care about my landlord knowing my name if my apartment is managed competently and within local legal guidelines.
- throwaway48375 5y ago
  My experience with corporate landlords is the complete opposite of yours. You call the office and they tell you to call the manager. You call the manager and they tell you to call the office. You call the office back and the call gets disconnected. You drive down to the office and they are "in a meeting". Letters and emails are ignored. The only way to get them to do anything is to sue them. Apparently this tanks your "shadow credit score" though. The individual landlords I have rented from were always much more flexible and accommodating. When I call them they are responsive. They treat you like another person instead of a number on a spreadsheet. They actually cared about their property and would do even preventative maintenance.
  - FDSGSG 5y ago
    > The only way to get them to do anything is to sue them. Apparently this tanks your "shadow credit score" though. Do you have a source for this claim? I can't find that in the article.
    - throwaway48375 5y ago

pydry 5y ago

The small vs. large landlord distinction is mostly immaterial. The behavior of landlords is dictated by their level of relative market power. When it too high relative to tenants they will start to fuck you over. It is guaranteed to happen unless there is a countervailing force to drive bad landlords into bankruptcy and let good landlords take over. The fact its a basic human need is also something of a red herring. So is food but we dont have abusive amateurs running that market. It functions. The problem with this market is that you can own largely untaxed land. Ownership of land inhibits competition in the rental market and drives dysfunction. It lets amateurs play in the same market as professionals and it richly rewards those with extra capital to spare to buy ever more desirable locations rather than rewarding those who simply do a better job at providing housing.