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.
Location: Formerly Pleasanton Ca, now in Marietta Ga
10,351 posts, read 8,572,211 times
Reputation: 16698
Advertisements
I have to say the op is looking at this from a somewhat one sided point of view. I agree with MACK KNIFE. It's all about choices.
It's like saying I trained to be a Lobster fisherman and I am forced to work on the coast. Well duh.
As far as 1st, last, and deposit, I have never collected last month rent at the beginning of a lease form a tenant. I have collected up to 2x the rent for a sec deposit though. I have also had tenants destroy enough of the property to burn through that amount and still be short.
The OP is exactly the type of renter I would try to avoid-one that thinks everything is stacked against him and treats others like he is owed something.
Overall I have had pretty good experiences of recent with tenants. The worse was one that did about 20K worth of damage to the unit about 10 years ago. Like the op they thought I was ripping them off when I didn't return any of their $750 sec deposit. Yeah, that's all we landlords do is plot how to get rich over a $750 deposit. About 3 years later I got a call from a that tenant asking me to write them a letter of recomendation for a rental they were trying to get.You only have to have that happen once before you realize one month's deposit is pretty weak.
Since the op thinks the landlords have devised multiple ways to take your money and run off with it, they ought to just buy their own house and never worry about a landlord.
Ca has some of the strongest tenant rights, so if the OP thinks renters are taken advantage of, try another state.
Common sense should protect you for the most part. Your credit history is going to get run, no way of getting around that. You are asking someone who doesn't know you to give you the keys to a place based on what?
Have you tried Google? Something like "renter protection government agency bay area"?
Try actually reading the original post. It's quite clear that I was only talking about asking for a printed copy of the credit report to VIEW a unit. I'm not talking about when they've agreed to rent it (provided the credit check by a third party is fine).
Quote:
You seem to just want to complain about landlords. News for you, they probably have some complaints about renters. Landlords aren't there to do people favors. Renters aren't there to do landlords favors. It is a business. Abuses galore on both sides so welcome to the world.
Once again, try actually reading the post. I was trying to avoid being conned by a *********. People asking for your bank account number could clear your entire bank account in 24 hours. Anyone could post an ad for a property they don't own and ask for a copy of your credit report then deny the unit (that they don't own) and use the info you gave them to steal your identity.
You seem to just want to dismiss any legitimate problems that tenants face. I have to say that claiming abuses are common both sides is utter BS. The landlord wields all the power in the relationship, the landlord is capable of inflicting the most damage.
Quote:
BTW, if you damage a place that goes for $2000 a month and it takes a week or two just to fix the mess you made, think your measly deposit covers the damages plus lost income?
Say you stay in a place for a couple of years. Then you leave. You really think that deposit it making someone rich? Come on. If you move every few months, well good luck with that.
I've never damaged anything and most people that do the damages aren't worth $2000 or even a fraction. My concern is the landlord trying to just keep the money. It's well established that a lot of landlords have no intention of returning the deposit from day one. And $2000 is not small change. It's serious money.
The reason you think you have to move to the Bay Area for a job is because you didn't adequately prepare yourself to be marketable elsewhere.
Life is nothing but the result of choices. All those things you complain about are the result of choices you made in the past.
No one HAS to live in a specific location. No one HAS to work in a specific location.
All those things you said are nothing but choices. You just don't happen to like the choices you have available to you but those limits are there because you put them there. You seem to want to blame everyone for everything. Time to wake up and start making it because everyone else is passing you by.
This is completely wrong and very offensive. Life isn't really about choices. Most people don't have any. Where you start in life is not a choice. The wealthy always seem to believe being poor is a choice - it's not. It's where you start from.
You can't make yourself marketable elsewhere if there's no one elsewhere to which to market yourself. Most people do have to live in a specific location. It could be because that's where their industry is (You can't tell an actor that they can chose to live in Madison, WI). It could be where their family is. Most people in general can't afford to move elsewhere.
You're actually the one who wants to blame everyone for everything. You blame people for problems that they didn't create. It's classic blaming the victim. You tell people who didn't have exactly the same life as you that it's their fault if their situation isn't ideal. You would be the type of person who'd go to a soup kitchen and tell everyone there that it's their fault that they aren't rich.
I just went through the hell of looking for and, thank goodness, finding a new place. I had to give her a credit report and fill out an application. I chose not to give up my full bank account or credit account numbers, but as others have said, it's a buyers market. Had I been hesitant or simply slow about getting that info to her, I wouldn't have gotten approved. I saw it and in less than 24 hours she had my paperwork.
However, even when I signed a lease in the city back in the mid-90s my credit report got ran. This time I just wanted to make it easy because I wanted a place in a specific area, saw a great place, so I needed to do what I needed to do to get it ASAP.
As others have said, landlords can charge up to 2x the rent for security deposit. I got lucky in a sense and only had to pay one month. That's good because one potential roommate flaked and I had to cough up more cash to lock down my current lease.
It depends on your landlord and their past experiences. It seems that I've gotten lucky with a landlord who has yet to be screwed and I plan on being a good tenant (and maybe that weighed in to how much she asked for if she checked my references with my former landlords).
I have to say the op is looking at this from a somewhat one sided point of view. I agree with MACK KNIFE. It's all about choices.
It's like saying I trained to be a Lobster fisherman and I am forced to work on the coast. Well duh.
As far as 1st, last, and deposit, I have never collected last month rent at the beginning of a lease form a tenant. I have collected up to 2x the rent for a sec deposit though. I have also had tenants destroy enough of the property to burn through that amount and still be short.
The OP is exactly the type of renter I would try to avoid-one that thinks everything is stacked against him and treats others like he is owed something.
It'd be your loss as I've never done any damage and have always had an excellent relationship with all of my landlords. I care about the place I'm living in. Why wouldn't I? It's where I live after all. If you've had people who've actually done real damage to the property then maybe you need to question your judgement of tenants.
Quote:
Since the op thinks the landlords have devised multiple ways to take your money and run off with it, they ought to just buy their own house and never worry about a landlord.
I'd actually be more concerned about the corporate complexes than dealing with a human landlord (face-to-face with the person who actually has the deed). It's not hard to find a corporate complex that has multiple ways to "take your money". There's some specific nationwide complexes that I avoid because they do actually do this. From keeping a deposit (after talking to other former tenants) to inventing an assortment of nonsense fees (ex: Administrative fee, (this is not the application fee), move-in fee, move-out fee, and more). This is less common with human landlords though I can still find a lot of people who've been ripped off. By the way, buy a house? How exactly would a person do that in the Bay Area? You do realize that's impossible for a single person to do right?
Quote:
Ca has some of the strongest tenant rights, so if the OP thinks renters are taken advantage of, try another state.
I've tried other countries actually. CA may have a COUPLE more laws than other states but it's still next to nothing. The US has terrible tenants rights laws.
Location: Formerly Pleasanton Ca, now in Marietta Ga
10,351 posts, read 8,572,211 times
Reputation: 16698
Quote:
Originally Posted by tk05
It'd be your loss as I've never done any damage and have always had an excellent relationship with all of my landlords. I care about the place I'm living in. Why wouldn't I? It's where I live after all. If you've had people who've actually done real damage to the property then maybe you need to question your judgement of tenants.
I'd actually be more concerned about the corporate complexes than dealing with a human landlord (face-to-face with the person who actually has the deed). It's not hard to find a corporate complex that has multiple ways to "take your money". There's some specific nationwide complexes that I avoid because they do actually do this. From keeping a deposit (after talking to other former tenants) to inventing an assortment of nonsense fees (ex: Administrative fee, (this is not the application fee), move-in fee, move-out fee, and more). This is less common with human landlords though I can still find a lot of people who've been ripped off. By the way, buy a house? How exactly would a person do that in the Bay Area? You do realize that's impossible for a single person to do right?
I've tried other countries actually. CA may have a COUPLE more laws than other states but it's still next to nothing. The US has terrible tenants rights laws.
Well my judgement of tenants has come from experience. Truth is like everyone says its not a good position for renters. So if I meet with someone that feels like all landlords are out to get them, I wouldn't rent to them. It might well be a loss for me if you didn't rent from me, but as you might have seen, there's about 20 more like you or maybe better qualified in today's market.
I admit I am a person to person landlord so you may well be right since you have has experiences that sound pretty crappy and unfair. Even with all the extra fees, as long as you are aware of them when you sign, it really is your choice in the end.
As far as buying a house, I was being sarcastic. But I will say as a single person I just bought a house 6 months ago myself, so it's not impossible. A few of my friends have bought homes and they are single also.
Just want to clarify as it seems a lot of people posting here didn't read the original post:
I'm looking for information on protection from fraud while LOOKING for a rental. There's a lot of scams on craigslist and if you're going to run a rental scam then the bay area the best place to do it since prospective tenants are more desperate and less likely to question.
-Regarding a credit report, the query was about craigslist ads asking for the credit report to VIEW. I've never encountered this anywhere else. Landlords typically have a company specializing in the task run your credit when they are committed to giving you the unit (presuming the result isn't a red flag). To me the request seems like a scam.
-Regarding apartment complexes websites having applications online asking for bank account numbers. This sets off huge warning bells for me. There's no legitimate reason a landlord could ask for this. I can't see how this isn't an attempt to empty your accounts.
-Regarding deposit vs last month's rent. Traditionally it's one or the other but only in wording. Even when it's last month's rent it's really a security deposit (The tenant would still pay the last month when that month comes). I have seen requesting both before but when that was the case the security deposit was always a fixed amount that isn't related to the rent which makes sense - why would the potential for damage very based on the rent. The practice of charging a full months rent as the security + first and last is more concerning in the bay area because the rents are astronomical. Taking the $2000/mo example that would be $6000 up front. I grew up in a blue collar city, that kind of money is unthinkable to most people I know.
The point of that 'subtopic' however was when you give someone $6000 to "secure the unit" which means they've already agreed to rent it to you. You already have a signed lease but haven't move in yet. There is a very common scam where the person then finds out when they try to move in that the person with whom they signed a lease doesn't own it and just fled with the $6000.
-Regarding a credit report, the query was about craigslist ads asking for the credit report to VIEW. I've never encountered this anywhere else. Landlords typically have a company specializing in the task run your credit when they are committed to giving you the unit (presuming the result isn't a red flag). To me the request seems like a scam.
As I've replied to you, this is unusual. Just don't go to any listings that requires a report to view. Most showings don't have that requirement.
I think what the landlords mean is that you should be prepared to hand them all the necessary documents on the spot as competition is fierce and they don't like to wait. When you are at the showing just tell the landlord/manager that you have all the docs in hand but you want to see the unit first and hand them the docs if you like it and decide to apply. I think all legit rentals would not have a problem with that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tk05
-Regarding apartment complexes websites having applications online asking for bank account numbers. This sets off huge warning bells for me. There's no legitimate reason a landlord could ask for this. I can't see how this isn't an attempt to empty your accounts.
Some cookie cutter free download applications ask for bank accts. Some management isn't even aware that they're asking you that, especially those mom and pop landlords who only have to rent out the unit every few years. Ask the management if it's ok if you skip those questions. A legit landlord would likely say yes. Don't sweat over this minor thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tk05
-Regarding deposit vs last month's rent. Traditionally it's one or the other but only in wording. Even when it's last month's rent it's really a security deposit (The tenant would still pay the last month when that month comes). I have seen requesting both before but when that was the case the security deposit was always a fixed amount that isn't related to the rent which makes sense - why would the potential for damage very based on the rent. The practice of charging a full months rent as the security + first and last is more concerning in the bay area because the rents are astronomical. Taking the $2000/mo example that would be $6000 up front. I grew up in a blue collar city, that kind of money is unthinkable to most people I know.
Buddy, you're not in Kansas anymore. This is how security deposit is determined here (based on the rent); you'll find this is the case all across CA. Yes, your argument has a point, but it doesn't change anything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tk05
The point of that 'subtopic' however was when you give someone $6000 to "secure the unit" which means they've already agreed to rent it to you. You already have a signed lease but haven't move in yet. There is a very common scam where the person then finds out when they try to move in that the person with whom they signed a lease doesn't own it and just fled with the $6000.
A woman tried this scam a few years ago and got arrested almost as soon as the victims realized it's a scam. I think it's not easy to pull it off with checks. Now, if the landlord wants you to pay in cash, run.
Location: Formerly Pleasanton Ca, now in Marietta Ga
10,351 posts, read 8,572,211 times
Reputation: 16698
Quote:
Originally Posted by tk05
-Regarding deposit vs last month's rent. Traditionally it's one or the other but only in wording. Even when it's last month's rent it's really a security deposit (The tenant would still pay the last month when that month comes). I have seen requesting both before but when that was the case the security deposit was always a fixed amount that isn't related to the rent which makes sense - why would the potential for damage very based on the rent. The practice of charging a full months rent as the security + first and last is more concerning in the bay area because the rents are astronomical. Taking the $2000/mo example that would be $6000 up front. I grew up in a blue collar city, that kind of money is unthinkable to most people I know.
I 'm clear now. You need to go back to where you came from if you think whatever you are used to is the way it's supposed to be everywhere else and that is unfair.
Where you grew up and what people paid or are used to paying back there is irrelevant here. You are not a blue collar worker. Are you expecting to be paid more $ as a tech worker but have prices held down for you? You seem to want your cake and eat it too.
You have already made inference to how expensive real estate here is. You even said it was impossible for a single person to buy a house. Maybe for you it is impossible but others have done it, I don't know why they were more capable than you. Why should rents be held to a lower amount for real estate that is easily 5x the amount of many other places. If real estate was as cheap as where you are from, then maybe it would make sense that rents and deposits would also be as cheap. Real estate is more expensive thus so is rent and deposits. You really expect a landlord who owns a house worth 3/4 of a million dollars feels good with a $1,000 sec deposit?
As far as you thinking traditionally that there was not all 3: first, last, and deposit, that is not the case here. I don't do it myself, but I know that many other landlords do it that way and have done so for as long as I have been aware of landlording which has been 30 years.
If it is so unappealing here with all the ripoff landlords, why not go elsewhere? Oh yeah, you signed on with an employer that wants you here that pays you more than others would and this is you dream job. Like someone else said, this was all your choice. You chose your career path knowing it pays less but was your dream job. You willingly accepted a job with an employer who pays higher than avg for that particular job. Did it ever occur that maybe they pay more because they know cost of living here is higher?
Give me a break-you say you have to work here because there are no jobs for you anywhere else so you are forced to come here or starve? Sounds like really poor planning on your part or being naive when you chose your career. No one I know goes to school without some idea of what the job market will be or where it might be.
As far as your comment that all you see is that the majority of posts are from landlords whining I don't believe it. I have been here longer than you and most of the posts from landlords are ones in response to renters posts complaining how unfair it is.
Your comment about Ca having some of the worst tenant protection laws is untrue. When I took real estate courses we learned how much power tenants have. I was in Idaho looking at rental real estate and the realtor originally came from Ca. He told me I would like Idaho because if a tenant didn't pay rent, the sheriff was tossing them out within a week or two. Unlike Ca where it takes 2 months or more to evict someone for non payment. Tenants have so many loopholes they have been know to stretch it out to as long as six months.
BTW- after reading your posts I don't feel turning you away would be my loss. You sound way to angry at all the landlords here.
I 'm clear now. You need to go back to where you came from if you think whatever you are used to is the way it's supposed to be everywhere else and that is unfair.
Where you grew up and what people paid or are used to paying back there is irrelevant here. You are not a blue collar worker. Are you expecting to be paid more $ as a tech worker but have prices held down for you? You seem to want your cake and eat it too.
Actually this is pretty puzzling. Where did you get these strange ideas? Where did I ever say I expected to be paid more? Or that I was a tech worker? The statements I made about my or others' pay were just statements of fact, nothing more. No where did I make any claim that I ought to be paid more just that the assumption that my employer would take into account the cost of living in the area is incorrect. I made no comment about how I feel about it.
Quote:
You have already made inference to how expensive real estate here is. You even said it was impossible for a single person to buy a house. Maybe for you it is impossible but others have done it, I don't know why they were more capable than you. Why should rents be held to a lower amount for real estate that is easily 5x the amount of many other places. If real estate was as cheap as where you are from, then maybe it would make sense that rents and deposits would also be as cheap. Real estate is more expensive thus so is rent and deposits. You really expect a landlord who owns a house worth 3/4 of a million dollars feels good with a $1,000 sec deposit?
I don't see why you'd have a problem with the statement that a single person cannot afford a house in the area. It's true for the vast majority of people within a single income household. Some exceptions may have additional income or exceptional income(like a CEO).
Regarding rents vs house prices, it's actually cheaper to buy than to rent in much of the bay area (if you ignore the downpayment). Also, most properties being rented weren't purchased at today's prices. Regarding the deposit amount: 3/4 of a million is what a person may've paid for a property but it's not what it's worth. The same damage to one property in city A cost the same to repair in city B even if in city B that property would sell for five times more.
Quote:
As far as you thinking traditionally that there was not all 3: first, last, and deposit, that is not the case here. I don't do it myself, but I know that many other landlords do it that way and have done so for as long as I have been aware of landlording which has been 30 years.
If it is so unappealing here with all the ripoff landlords, why not go elsewhere?
You still seemed to be hung up on deposits for some bizarre reason. I didn't make any strong statements about the way that deposits are being charged but that with that particular practice combined with the very high rents of the area very few people could even have that much money up front. I'm not speaking about myself, I'm speaking in general as most people live paycheck to paycheck. The point of that statement was that I don't really see how that practice could survive here because, as I said, very few perspective tenants are capable of raising that kind of money on demand.
Quote:
Oh yeah, you signed on with an employer that wants you here that pays you more than others would and this is you dream job. Like someone else said, this was all your choice. You chose your career path knowing it pays less but was your dream job. You willingly accepted a job with an employer who pays higher than avg for that particular job. Did it ever occur that maybe they pay more because they know cost of living here is higher?
They pay more than their competitors in the bay area and they also pay more for employees doing different jobs in their office elsewhere in the country where the cost of living is very low. It's not really anything to do with the bay area.
Quote:
Give me a break-you say you have to work here because there are no jobs for you anywhere else so you are forced to come here or starve? Sounds like really poor planning on your part or being naive when you chose your career. No one I know goes to school without some idea of what the job market will be or where it might be.
Completely unconstructive personal attack.
Quote:
As far as your comment that all you see is that the majority of posts are from landlords whining I don't believe it. I have been here longer than you and most of the posts from landlords are ones in response to renters posts complaining how unfair it is.
I'm not talking about landlords starting threads, I'm talking about landlords replying to other posts whenever any kind of tenant rights is mentioned and complaining about laws intended to protected tenants. For example, rent control - any mention of this tends to attract landlords whining about it. When tenants are posting about a legitimate problem and landlords immediately respond to antagonize them and instead blame the tenant that looks pretty bad.
Quote:
Your comment about Ca having some of the worst tenant protection laws is untrue. When I took real estate courses we learned how much power tenants have. I was in Idaho looking at rental real estate and the realtor originally came from Ca. He told me I would like Idaho because if a tenant didn't pay rent, the sheriff was tossing them out within a week or two. Unlike Ca where it takes 2 months or more to evict someone for non payment. Tenants have so many loopholes they have been know to stretch it out to as long as six months.
This isn't at all true. I don't know when's the last time you evicted someone but the current CA court fast tracks evictions to only weeks.
Quote:
BTW- after reading your posts I don't feel turning you away would be my loss. You sound way to angry at all the landlords here.
You can't really make that kind of judgement based on what you read on a forum. You don't know anything about me and have no idea what kind of tenant I am. You're imbuing what you read with your own biases as evident by your assumption that I'm angry at landlords. I'm not and I never said I was. The only thing that makes me angry is that canned statement "you chose this or that and nobody made you". That's a statement that I cannot let stand no matter who it's directed towards and it's always false and deeply offensive.
The original topic was constructive and made absolutely no comment about landlords. It's you and a few other posters here that immediately derailed it to try to turn it into an attack choosing to imbue innocuous statements with your own bias.
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.
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.
