> they’ll be told that the contract is just a standard form that can’t change. One of the biggest problems with rental contracts is that the person who is coun

> they’ll be told that the contract is just a standard form that can’t change. One of the biggest problems with rental contracts is that the person who is counter-signing the contract on behalf of the property owner often doesn't have the authority within the organization to negotiate, only the owner does, but you have no opportunity as a tenant to speak to them. The manager of most apartment complexes is a low-mid paying role that basically exists to say "no" a whole lot and be a scapegoat for the choices/decisions of the owners. This is even /more true/ with corporate-owned apartments. When you combine this with the systems used to effectively illegally price fix via collusion with other landlords (although somehow this is never prosecuted), it becomes an untenable system for renters who have essentially no legal recourse. Ironically, the more expensive the apartment rent, the less likely you are to put up with these things because the owners know that their tenants can afford to sue them and are likely educated and know their rights. It's primarily lower rent locations where abuses occur en masse. In order for a contract to be enforceable it must allow for negotiation and must provide consideration for both parties. But there's a huge difference between a contract being legally enforceable and upheld by a court vs a contract you must follow because you have no means to legally challenge it. Contracts of adhesion are very rarely fully enforceable, because they often do not include consideration and may be unconscionable. As an example, you are not allowed to contractually sign away your civil rights in most jurisdictions, but many rental contracts include clauses that effectively have you do so.