4 ms·

"back in the real world, it never costs a penny over the security deposit." Funny you say that. I have had many landlords in the past when I was renting and at

"back in the real world, it never costs a penny over the security deposit." Funny you say that. I have had many landlords in the past when I was renting and at least 2 of them were shady and tried to take a portion out of my deposit with false claims that I did something wrong. One specific case, the landlord claimed that renters are supposed to pay for carpet cleaning when leaving. We had nothing of that in the contract. I pointed it out and her response "thats the state law" and she forwarded me a PDF of the state law for landlord/tenants. Guess what, I actually found a section in that same PDF that clearly said that tenants are not responsible for usual wear and tear cleaning unless agreed in the contract. Overall, I think you are missing the point of why to own vs rent. I would rather deal with an HOA than a scheming landlord.

VLM 13y ago
"Point is: you cannot generalize." Why? You get what you optimize for. Sometimes it doesn't work, but usually it does. Also in the olden days a landlord might have gotten away with bait and switch, but it seems unlikely it'll happen now. Also given crooks, why risk more financial assets than necessary; I don't get the desire to deal with a HOA over a landlord. I don't trust that homeless person with $5, so I'll hand my wallet to that panhandler instead; what could possibly go wrong?
- jack-r-abbit 13y ago
  Somehow you have convinced yourself that everybody has to deal with an HOA (and that all of them are nightmares). I own two houses and neither have an HOA. When I was house shopping a couple years ago, I think maybe 1 in 5 that we looked at had an HOA.
  - VLM 13y ago
    I don't live in a HOA either, intentionally. The ratio of free vs nonfree housing varies greatly by geography and date of construction. In some markets almost all SFRs are nonfree and in others almost all SFRs are free. However, none of the above discussion about local real estate variations and trends conflicts with or relates to the observation that those who complain the most about landlords statistically seem to live as a subject of a HOA or in a condo. Also some zoning and CCR regs are almost as bad as a HOA. And some HOA are not too bad. Most of them, on the other hand...
    - jack-r-abbit 13y ago
      Zoning regulations are going to equally effect everybody so that is kind of a moot point in this context. Unless you live in a historic neighborhood (where often nearly every aspect of your historic house is regulated), an HOA has no authority on what you do in the inside of your house. So when renting, you have almost no freedom to alter any aspect of your dwelling (unless otherwise allowed by your landlord). Owning a home with an HOA, you have complete freedom to alter the interior any way you like and have some (varied) level of restriction on the exterior. Owning a home without an HOA, you have complete freedom in and out. Plus there is the issue of pets being allowed or not in rentals. So, I don't see any conflict with a person with an HOA complaining about landlords. Even with an HOA, you are statistically more free to do stuff than with a landlord.

VLM 13y ago

"Point is: you cannot generalize." Why? You get what you optimize for. Sometimes it doesn't work, but usually it does. Also in the olden days a landlord might have gotten away with bait and switch, but it seems unlikely it'll happen now. Also given crooks, why risk more financial assets than necessary; I don't get the desire to deal with a HOA over a landlord. I don't trust that homeless person with $5, so I'll hand my wallet to that panhandler instead; what could possibly go wrong?

jack-r-abbit 13y ago
Somehow you have convinced yourself that everybody has to deal with an HOA (and that all of them are nightmares). I own two houses and neither have an HOA. When I was house shopping a couple years ago, I think maybe 1 in 5 that we looked at had an HOA.
- VLM 13y ago
  I don't live in a HOA either, intentionally. The ratio of free vs nonfree housing varies greatly by geography and date of construction. In some markets almost all SFRs are nonfree and in others almost all SFRs are free. However, none of the above discussion about local real estate variations and trends conflicts with or relates to the observation that those who complain the most about landlords statistically seem to live as a subject of a HOA or in a condo. Also some zoning and CCR regs are almost as bad as a HOA. And some HOA are not too bad. Most of them, on the other hand...
  - jack-r-abbit 13y ago
    Zoning regulations are going to equally effect everybody so that is kind of a moot point in this context. Unless you live in a historic neighborhood (where often nearly every aspect of your historic house is regulated), an HOA has no authority on what you do in the inside of your house. So when renting, you have almost no freedom to alter any aspect of your dwelling (unless otherwise allowed by your landlord). Owning a home with an HOA, you have complete freedom to alter the interior any way you like and have some (varied) level of restriction on the exterior. Owning a home without an HOA, you have complete freedom in and out. Plus there is the issue of pets being allowed or not in rentals. So, I don't see any conflict with a person with an HOA complaining about landlords. Even with an HOA, you are statistically more free to do stuff than with a landlord.