4 ms·

> In the United States, the power is almost entirely in the hands of the landlord. Maybe not for things that reach criminal levels of malfeasance but for your a

by User23 2y ago

> In the United States, the power is almost entirely in the hands of the landlord. Maybe not for things that reach criminal levels of malfeasance but for your average renter with a crappy landlord there is zero leverage, it is particularly bad now because housing is so incredibly broken at the moment. In the USA renting is largely a state law matter. Some states are very landlord friendly, but others, such as California, are considerably more tenant friendly. For example late fees are illegal in California and you can basically get a pro se judgment easy peasy if a landlord even attempts to get you to sign a lease with a late fee clause, let alone collect one. You can also withhold rent to pay for services the landlord should have provided, and so on. Anyhow I'm not a lawyer and this isn't legal advice, but if you're in California learn your rights.

favorited 2y ago
> late fees are illegal in California and you can basically get a pro se judgment easy peasy if a landlord even attempts to get you to sign a lease with a late fee clause That's how laws are supposed to work. If a landlord is foolish enough to put an illegal punitive clause in a lease, they should be punished.
- 1oooqooq 2y ago
  thankfully all renters studied law /s
YokoZar 2y ago
> For example late fees are illegal in California and you can basically get a pro se judgment easy peasy if a landlord even attempts to get you to sign a lease with a late fee clause, let alone collect one. Having actually gone through this process in small claims court in California, I will say that your miles may vary. I completely won my case except for recovering the fifty dollar late fee (written into the lease) that I paid because rent was once a day late. The judge said it seemed "reasonable" and didn't listen to me talk about California "liquidated damages" language on the subject, which is the supposed law that makes late fees illegal. Fact is, most places I've rented from have had late fees, and recovering them sounds like a huge crapshoot at best.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
c2p2 2y ago
This is quite unfair. A landlord has dues to pay as well and they get charged by their mortgage company if the mortgage payment is late or insurance payment is late.
- redserk 2y ago
  A landlord's mortgage simply isn't the responsibility of the tenant. The tenant's name is not on the paperwork. I chose to sell instead of renting out due to the risk of relying on someone else to maintain it's mortgage.
- ryan_lane 2y ago
  If a landlord has a mortgage on the property and can't afford to pay it without the tenant's money, they can't afford to be a landlord. Otherwise, they're doing arbitrage and there's no reason this shouldn't come with risk. Why do we treat landlords as a business type that simply isn't allowed to take a loss?
  - c2p2 2y ago
    That doesn't make sense. Renting is a business transaction and not charity. Why should a tenant get to pay late just because the other party is an individual and not a corporation? If you own a home and are late to pay the mortgage, you don't get to say sorry, I will pay when I want.
    - ryan_lane 2y ago
      Because landlords are a business providing a service, and doing business has risk. Part of the risk around having a tenant is that they may have financial issues and may not be able to pay you on time. If you can't handle that risk, because you rely on the tenant to pay your mortgage, then your business isn't viable. Any business that relied on accounts receivable to be timely would almost certainly be out of business in a short time period. Try doing consulting work and see how long it takes businesses to pay out your invoices. Be a B2B company, and see how long it takes businesses to pay out your invoices. Are they going to be willing to pay a late payment fee? Ask your accounting team what their average payout time is for accounts receivable. The difference between these cases is power dynamic. Landlords have extreme levels of power over tenants. If it's legal to charge a fee for a late payment, the tenant either has a choice of paying a fee or having no home. It's an unfair balance, and the government shouldn't allow this to exist.

by User23 2y ago

favorited 2y ago

> late fees are illegal in California and you can basically get a pro se judgment easy peasy if a landlord even attempts to get you to sign a lease with a late fee clause That's how laws are supposed to work. If a landlord is foolish enough to put an illegal punitive clause in a lease, they should be punished.

1oooqooq 2y ago
thankfully all renters studied law /s

YokoZar 2y ago

> For example late fees are illegal in California and you can basically get a pro se judgment easy peasy if a landlord even attempts to get you to sign a lease with a late fee clause, let alone collect one. Having actually gone through this process in small claims court in California, I will say that your miles may vary. I completely won my case except for recovering the fifty dollar late fee (written into the lease) that I paid because rent was once a day late. The judge said it seemed "reasonable" and didn't listen to me talk about California "liquidated damages" language on the subject, which is the supposed law that makes late fees illegal. Fact is, most places I've rented from have had late fees, and recovering them sounds like a huge crapshoot at best.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

c2p2 2y ago

This is quite unfair. A landlord has dues to pay as well and they get charged by their mortgage company if the mortgage payment is late or insurance payment is late.

redserk 2y ago
A landlord's mortgage simply isn't the responsibility of the tenant. The tenant's name is not on the paperwork. I chose to sell instead of renting out due to the risk of relying on someone else to maintain it's mortgage.
ryan_lane 2y ago
If a landlord has a mortgage on the property and can't afford to pay it without the tenant's money, they can't afford to be a landlord. Otherwise, they're doing arbitrage and there's no reason this shouldn't come with risk. Why do we treat landlords as a business type that simply isn't allowed to take a loss?
- c2p2 2y ago
  That doesn't make sense. Renting is a business transaction and not charity. Why should a tenant get to pay late just because the other party is an individual and not a corporation? If you own a home and are late to pay the mortgage, you don't get to say sorry, I will pay when I want.
  - ryan_lane 2y ago
    Because landlords are a business providing a service, and doing business has risk. Part of the risk around having a tenant is that they may have financial issues and may not be able to pay you on time. If you can't handle that risk, because you rely on the tenant to pay your mortgage, then your business isn't viable. Any business that relied on accounts receivable to be timely would almost certainly be out of business in a short time period. Try doing consulting work and see how long it takes businesses to pay out your invoices. Be a B2B company, and see how long it takes businesses to pay out your invoices. Are they going to be willing to pay a late payment fee? Ask your accounting team what their average payout time is for accounts receivable. The difference between these cases is power dynamic. Landlords have extreme levels of power over tenants. If it's legal to charge a fee for a late payment, the tenant either has a choice of paying a fee or having no home. It's an unfair balance, and the government shouldn't allow this to exist.