Rental hunting - Where to find information protecting tenants

[tk05]

Originally Posted by beb0p

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.
...
...

Thanks, beb0p. I really do appreciate the the info it's exactly what I was looking for.

[rkwalton]

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.

Anybody still unclear about the topic?

There are also basic things you can do to protect yourself. re the place I now call home, I met a woman who said she was the manager of the unit. I wanted to make sure that she wasn't someone pulling a scam of some sort, so I called the tax assessor's office to check to get the name of the person who owns the property. Ends up the manager is the owner and probably introduced herself that way to avoid dealing with potential tenants trying to negotiate the rent down or other b.s.

That info is all public record, BTW. That way I wrote a check knowing that I was writing it to the correct person, the owner of the property, and all was fine.

I think it's more being aware of what the laws are and being aware of what info is open to the public. I'd never give some random person a deposit to "secure the unit" until I verified that person was who they said they were, signed a document, and had the keys.

[aslowdodge]

Originally Posted by tk05

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.


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.

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.


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.

Completely unconstructive personal attack.


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.


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.


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.

Jeez, you really need to go back and read over your own posts.