4 ms·

> (not that big ones are any better, but having a face to face just makes it hurt worse) In my experience, big landlords really are objectively better. They ar

by creato 2y ago

> (not that big ones are any better, but having a face to face just makes it hurt worse) In my experience, big landlords really are objectively better. They are inflexible and bureaucratic, but generally fair and follow the law. Some small landlords will outright break the law and force you to deal with them legally. But some small landlords are great and a lot more flexible than a corporate landlord can be. If I ever were to rent again, I'd prefer big corporate landlords. Just my experience of course.

bluefirebrand 2y ago
This really depends on if the letter of the law is favorable to tenants or not. And big corporate landlords can easily slide into the same territory any big corporation is in: they break laws because they have enough lawyers and money that individuals basically cannot win a legal battle against them
NewJazz 2y ago
I'd say larger/corporate landlords and/or property management companies are generally more predictable, but not necessarily better.
RHSeeger 2y ago
My anecdata is exactly the opposite. The only objectively bad landlord I've had was corporate. All the small ones (own only a couple properties, or even just one) have been fantastic. Except for one, that was ... useless, but not actively bad. The corporate one was awful, and I couldn't wait to move.
Repulsion9513 2y ago
Definitely the opposite in my experience. Small landlord = much more willing to work with you AND much less likely to screw you over. Lease for a couple years and then 10% raise (while prices in the city go up about 20%). Big landlord = hey the apartment above you is now an Airbnb; we know about it; and we're going to lie to you about it. Oh and pay us 10% more rent every year or 13 months to live below the motel room (while prices in the city go up a few percent).
jjav 2y ago
> In my experience, big landlords really are objectively better. They are inflexible and bureaucratic, but generally fair and follow the law. They (mostly) follow the law, but the flip side is they will follow the law to their maximum advantage. They'll increase rent the maximum permitted each year. They'll do all the maintenance required by local law but not an inch more. And so on. I've always had a more agreeable time with small-time landlords. I'm nice to them and their property, they're nice to me and don't push the law to the limits. They mostly never raise rents on me. I haven't rented residential in a long while but still currently rent office and workshop space, both are on a handshake deal from small single-building owners. My rents are a fraction of what the corporation-managed spaces are in the area.
arp242 2y ago
Probably depends on where you're at; I found it's shockingly common even for larger agencies and landlords to just break the law in the UK. You can tell them "this is the law, you can't do that", and they will just brazenly unashamed say "I know, we're going to try it anyway". Never-ever make the mistake of anthropomorphising any landlord of any size in the UK. I strongly suspect that David Icke was right all along with his lizard people, but just got the wrong demographic. That said, it's certainly true that with individual landlords you risk a lot more variety; you can end up with a normal friendly fella, or an absolutely crazy nutjob, or anything in-between. In general my experiences have been much much better with small-time landlords.
blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
Yes but small landlords don’t have the money to absorb certain issues - they have just one or two properties and some of the expenses and regulations really do threaten their ability to be in this business. Should various sectors like renting only be accessible to big corporate players?
e40 2y ago
My son’s big landlord paid towing companies to scan the private parking lots of their properties to look for expired tags, presumably getting a split of the fees. Zero notice, btw. He noticed his car was gone and called the office and they told him. Luckily it was very soon after it was towed. What if it was a week later? Fees would have been in the thousands. In CA they can run into the hundreds before 24 hours has elapsed. Big landlords can be better and worse. Worse ones can cause a lot of damage.
- mlrtime 2y ago
  So don't have expired tags? It's illegal. Further, the towing company was most likely also scanning for plates that aren't registered as it is a huge problem for renters where parking spots are a limited resource. Car isn't registered as a guest or tenant? Tow it.
  - 93po 2y ago
    It's not illegal to have expired tags on private property, which an apartment parking garage is.
  - e40 2y ago
    The car was registered to him and registered to be in the parking lot. So, nice stretch there about a situation you know nothing about.
  - Repulsion9513 2y ago
    > So don't have expired tags? It's illegal. No, it is not illegal for a car on private property to have expired tags. SMH... The stated purpose of landlord prohibitions against unregistered vehicles is usually to prevent eyesores but of course it's perfectly possible for a legally registered and/or inspected, road-worthy vehicle to be a complete eyesore.

by creato 2y ago

bluefirebrand 2y ago

This really depends on if the letter of the law is favorable to tenants or not. And big corporate landlords can easily slide into the same territory any big corporation is in: they break laws because they have enough lawyers and money that individuals basically cannot win a legal battle against them

NewJazz 2y ago

I'd say larger/corporate landlords and/or property management companies are generally more predictable, but not necessarily better.

RHSeeger 2y ago

My anecdata is exactly the opposite. The only objectively bad landlord I've had was corporate. All the small ones (own only a couple properties, or even just one) have been fantastic. Except for one, that was ... useless, but not actively bad. The corporate one was awful, and I couldn't wait to move.

Repulsion9513 2y ago

Definitely the opposite in my experience. Small landlord = much more willing to work with you AND much less likely to screw you over. Lease for a couple years and then 10% raise (while prices in the city go up about 20%). Big landlord = hey the apartment above you is now an Airbnb; we know about it; and we're going to lie to you about it. Oh and pay us 10% more rent every year or 13 months to live below the motel room (while prices in the city go up a few percent).

jjav 2y ago

> In my experience, big landlords really are objectively better. They are inflexible and bureaucratic, but generally fair and follow the law. They (mostly) follow the law, but the flip side is they will follow the law to their maximum advantage. They'll increase rent the maximum permitted each year. They'll do all the maintenance required by local law but not an inch more. And so on. I've always had a more agreeable time with small-time landlords. I'm nice to them and their property, they're nice to me and don't push the law to the limits. They mostly never raise rents on me. I haven't rented residential in a long while but still currently rent office and workshop space, both are on a handshake deal from small single-building owners. My rents are a fraction of what the corporation-managed spaces are in the area.

arp242 2y ago

Probably depends on where you're at; I found it's shockingly common even for larger agencies and landlords to just break the law in the UK. You can tell them "this is the law, you can't do that", and they will just brazenly unashamed say "I know, we're going to try it anyway". Never-ever make the mistake of anthropomorphising any landlord of any size in the UK. I strongly suspect that David Icke was right all along with his lizard people, but just got the wrong demographic. That said, it's certainly true that with individual landlords you risk a lot more variety; you can end up with a normal friendly fella, or an absolutely crazy nutjob, or anything in-between. In general my experiences have been much much better with small-time landlords.

blackeyeblitzar 2y ago

Yes but small landlords don’t have the money to absorb certain issues - they have just one or two properties and some of the expenses and regulations really do threaten their ability to be in this business. Should various sectors like renting only be accessible to big corporate players?

e40 2y ago

My son’s big landlord paid towing companies to scan the private parking lots of their properties to look for expired tags, presumably getting a split of the fees. Zero notice, btw. He noticed his car was gone and called the office and they told him. Luckily it was very soon after it was towed. What if it was a week later? Fees would have been in the thousands. In CA they can run into the hundreds before 24 hours has elapsed. Big landlords can be better and worse. Worse ones can cause a lot of damage.

mlrtime 2y ago
So don't have expired tags? It's illegal. Further, the towing company was most likely also scanning for plates that aren't registered as it is a huge problem for renters where parking spots are a limited resource. Car isn't registered as a guest or tenant? Tow it.
- 93po 2y ago
  It's not illegal to have expired tags on private property, which an apartment parking garage is.
- e40 2y ago
  The car was registered to him and registered to be in the parking lot. So, nice stretch there about a situation you know nothing about.
- Repulsion9513 2y ago
  > So don't have expired tags? It's illegal. No, it is not illegal for a car on private property to have expired tags. SMH... The stated purpose of landlord prohibitions against unregistered vehicles is usually to prevent eyesores but of course it's perfectly possible for a legally registered and/or inspected, road-worthy vehicle to be a complete eyesore.