U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Massachusetts > Boston
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-26-2017, 01:31 PM
 
1,086 posts, read 435,894 times
Reputation: 1324

Advertisements

To the point I was trying to make:
Lying to a landlord and then in turn trying to get the upper hand by throwing the book at them is a scum move.
Not all landlords are millionaires trying to screw people. Some are just trying to make a buck like you and I.
Be upfront about your situation. Just as they should to you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-26-2017, 01:47 PM
 
486 posts, read 361,236 times
Reputation: 801
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dm84 View Post
You're being ridiculous but whatever.

How am I being ridiculous? That's exactly what's being advocated here, hiding the fact there will be kids living in the apartment to get the lease signed, then forcing the landlord to delead. That is one of the big reasons rents are so damn high here, MA laws are pro-tenant to the point of being absolutely ridiculous and landlords are pricing in all the potential bull**** they'll have to deal with.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-26-2017, 01:49 PM
 
5,680 posts, read 5,016,201 times
Reputation: 9884
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hollytree View Post
Renters do not understand things from the perspective of a landlord.

Perhaps all those who would force landlords to rent against their own ideas of who they wish to chose as tenants in their properties should become landlords for a year. I predict a quick change of outlook.
Landlords who want to skirt housing laws shouldn't become landlords in the first place.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-26-2017, 01:52 PM
 
2,769 posts, read 2,213,702 times
Reputation: 2174
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cantabridgienne View Post
Landlords who want to skirt housing laws shouldn't become landlords in the first place.
Exactly. All this sympathy for the plight of the poor beleaguered landlord is ridiculous. If you haven't done your homework on your obligations as a landlord, you shouldn't become one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-26-2017, 02:03 PM
 
Location: Boston, MA
7,871 posts, read 6,819,268 times
Reputation: 6600
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dm84 View Post
Exactly. All this sympathy for the plight of the poor beleaguered landlord is ridiculous. If you haven't done your homework on your obligations as a landlord, you shouldn't become one.
Hmm not sure you have really thought much about a city where nobody wants to ever buy or rent out a house. Providing housing is a service at the end of the day. In an actually competitive market, bad landlords would be punished by nobody wanting to rent from them. In this current distorted market (impossibility of building anything due to red tape, high costs and corruption, in general) there is no incentive to be good. Using the law to force them to raise prices is also a bad idea. Or at least it doesn't solve the root cause.

It's not a mystery or unexplainable phenomenon how prices work.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-26-2017, 02:32 PM
 
486 posts, read 361,236 times
Reputation: 801
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dm84 View Post
Exactly. All this sympathy for the plight of the poor beleaguered landlord is ridiculous. If you haven't done your homework on your obligations as a landlord, you shouldn't become one.
Landlords are not obligated to accommodate fraudsters. You do not get go to a dealership, pay for a Corolla and drive off in a Lexus. And similarly, even if you want a Lexus dealer isn't obligated to sell it to you if someone else offered him more or made the sale more profitable in some other way. Same goes for all other goods and services, including housing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-26-2017, 02:48 PM
 
Location: Westwood, MA
3,464 posts, read 4,356,729 times
Reputation: 4471
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigfatdude View Post
Yes, people who try to scam themselves a Mercedes at Yugo price are scumbags. Telling the landlord you have kids and need the apartment deleaded in advance then signing the lease once it has been priced accordingly is perfectly fine, but anyone who lies, signs the lease on an apartment priced according to its current dilapidated state then spring precious little Brayden on the landlord and demands full deleading and hotel accommodations is definitely a scumbag. And that is exactly what some of you clowns have been advocating.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bjimmy24 View Post
Hmm not sure you have really thought much about a city where nobody wants to ever buy or rent out a house. Providing housing is a service at the end of the day. In an actually competitive market, bad landlords would be punished by nobody wanting to rent from them. In this current distorted market (impossibility of building anything due to red tape, high costs and corruption, in general) there is no incentive to be good. Using the law to force them to raise prices is also a bad idea. Or at least it doesn't solve the root cause.

It's not a mystery or unexplainable phenomenon how prices work.
The law doesn't say anything about granite or stainless steel. It says that landlords are responsible for lead abatement for tenants with children under six. Some landlords get around this requirement by illegally refusing to rent to tenants with children under six. As long as they aren't stupid about it, there isn't really any good way to prove discrimination, so they can continue to get away with what is an illegal practice.

Since there is de facto discrimination against people with children, the supply of apartments for parents with children is reduced. This pushes up the price. These landlords are able to charge a premium, even beyond the additional premiums expected from things like granite and stainless steel.

Let's say the AG decided to prioritize prosecution of this type of discrimination. Aggressively enough that landlords no longer risked the sort of back door discrimination you've advocated (i.e. denying tenants with families, but citing other reasons), then the market would change. Landlords could keep renting unabated apartment for until a child moved in and then they'd be forced to abate. There would be no premium abated apartments could charge because all apartments would effectively (either before or after the costly abatement) be safe for children.

Now you like to talk about supply and demand, but then you use arguments based on cost. Cost only comes into where the supply and demand curves meet in that it reduces supply. You've already pointed out that supply is pretty much pegged. It is currently almost completely insensitive to price. This is great for landlords, because as demand has gone up, so have prices. Quite a bit. Forcing landlords to abate when necessary would only have a minimal effect on supply (unless you think they'd rather just keep their apartments empty or sell to an owner/occupier). Hence the prices wouldn't really go up much, at least not for abatement (if there's still increased demand, prices will continue to go up).

As an aside, the advice to discriminate but find other, acceptable reasons to deny someone in a protected class only works if there isn't evidence to suggest that this is what you are doing. If I were a landlord engaged in this sort of behavior, the last thing I'd do is to advocate this strategy on the internet.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-26-2017, 02:50 PM
 
Location: Westwood, MA
3,464 posts, read 4,356,729 times
Reputation: 4471
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigfatdude View Post
Landlords are not obligated to accommodate fraudsters. You do not get go to a dealership, pay for a Corolla and drive off in a Lexus. And similarly, even if you want a Lexus dealer isn't obligated to sell it to you if someone else offered him more or made the sale more profitable in some other way. Same goes for all other goods and services, including housing.
They are obligated to accommodate families with children. You seem to think they aren't and that discrimination is acceptable. Discrimination is just hard to prove. It still isn't legal. There's a big difference.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-26-2017, 03:00 PM
 
486 posts, read 361,236 times
Reputation: 801
So you're saying they're obligated to rent to a family with children even though there's 30 other more profitable and trouble-free renters without children competing for the same apartment? That's very interesting to say the least.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-26-2017, 03:23 PM
 
Location: Massachusetts
7,077 posts, read 10,820,593 times
Reputation: 5608
If you don't want to rent to families with kids you'll have to advertise the apartment by word of mouth not to the general public.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Massachusetts > Boston
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top