Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > San Francisco - Oakland
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-08-2013, 10:41 AM
 
30 posts, read 160,493 times
Reputation: 22

Advertisements

Is there any website or organization with very comprehensive information to protect tenants from landlords or fraud?

In looking for places to rent online I'm coming across a lot of outrageous demands even in the listings that seem like a setup for identity theft or plain old theft of cash. I've seen some ads demanding the prospective tenant bring a printed credit report - that would make identity theft extremely easy.
There's an apartment complex with an application form on its website that is requesting bank account numbers - if that's not illegal it really needs to be, nobody ever has a right to ask for bank account info!
Lots of ads are looking for first months rent (ok), last months rent and a deposit equal to a months rent - This should exceed the amount allowed to request by law for a deposit (last month rent is a deposit, traditionally it's either/or but never both last months rent and a security deposit). Lots of problems with this. First is a security deposit being equal to a months rent. The bay area has the highest rents in the nation and a security deposit is to cover damages. Just because someone is charging $2000/mo for a $400/mo apartment doesn't mean damage is suddenly worth more. Sounds like they intend to make up an excuse to keep the deposit to make maximum profit (Probably won't even keep the deposit in a separate account as required by law).
Another thing that occurs to me is some of these ads are asking for all this (first mo + last mo + security) "to secure the unit". If you do that then they could just skip town with all that money and never give you the keys. How can a tenant protect themselves from robbery?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-08-2013, 10:59 AM
 
Location: San Francisco
8,996 posts, read 10,426,164 times
Reputation: 5751
If you're looking in San Francisco, try the SF Tenants' Union: San Francisco Tenants Union

Landlords are within their rights to charge 2 months' deposit in addition to the first month's rent, but (at least in SF) they may charge no more.

They are required to keep the deposit in a separate account, and to pay any interest accrued. However, the SFTU charges them a yearly fee per unit, which is passed along to the tenants, so the last yearly interest check I got from my landlord was for 93 cents or something like that.

As you may have realized by now, even though SF has strict protections for tenants, it is also a buyer's market. If you don't want to provide a printed credit report, then the prospective landlord will gladly rent the unit instead to someone who will.

It's a pitiless jungle out there for prospective tenants, and if you can't accept that, go find a kinder, gentler jungle.

As for other parts of the Bay Area, you'd best do some research. I think Berkeley has some similar renter protections in place; I don't know about other cities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2013, 12:51 PM
 
30 posts, read 160,493 times
Reputation: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by pch1013 View Post
If you're looking in San Francisco, try the SF Tenants' Union: San Francisco Tenants Union
Actually I'm looking at the peninsula - more specifically: Belmont area. Looking at the market in SF I cannot believe anybody would even attempt to rent there. The rents are beyond the earning capacity of even the lower end of the upper class, middle class of any sort can forget it.

Quote:
Landlords are within their rights to charge 2 months' deposit in addition to the first month's rent, but (at least in SF) they may charge no more.

They are required to keep the deposit in a separate account, and to pay any interest accrued. However, the SFTU charges them a yearly fee per unit, which is passed along to the tenants, so the last yearly interest check I got from my landlord was for 93 cents or something like that.
I've never encountered a landlord that gave the tenant the interest accrued. They usually even put in the lease that all interest belongs to them.

Quote:
As you may have realized by now, even though SF has strict protections for tenants, it is also a buyer's market. If you don't want to provide a printed credit report, then the prospective landlord will gladly rent the unit instead to someone who will.
I see no protections for tenants at all. It's extremely evident that California laws overwhelmingly favor landlords (see even eviction cases are fast tracked while cases against landlords are put on the backlog). The USA may have the weakest data protection laws in the western world but there are still some and requesting access to extremely private info like a credit report just to view a unit definitely violates the law. The prospective tenant would have no way to guard against identity theft.

Quote:
It's a pitiless jungle out there for prospective tenants, and if you can't accept that, go find a kinder, gentler jungle.
This sounds an awful lot like "Nobody put a gun to your head and forced you to move to <area>". You may not realize this but that kind of statement is very offensive and completely false. In my industry 99% of employers are in the Bay Area. I'm moving to the Bay Area for a job. I don't have a choice. If I did I would've picked a cheaper place to live. If I don't move the Bay area then I don't work and if I don't work then I have no food or shelter so effectively there is a gun to my head. The huge demand in the bay area isn't because people think it would be nice to live there. For many people it's because they HAVE to live there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2013, 01:15 PM
 
Location: San Francisco
8,996 posts, read 10,426,164 times
Reputation: 5751
Quote:
Originally Posted by tk05 View Post
I'm moving to the Bay Area for a job. I don't have a choice. If I did I would've picked a cheaper place to live.
In that case, you'll probably find that your future employer is well aware of the cost of living in the Bay Area and that your salary will reflect that, at least to some extent. At least in some fields, namely tech, there is a seller's market for talent that offsets the seller's* market for rental property. Granted, a 30% salary differential compared to a normal city might not seem like much versus a 50% COL differential, but it does help a bit.

Quote:
I see no protections for tenants at all. It's extremely evident that California laws overwhelmingly favor landlords
And yet San Francisco is full of landlords who insist otherwise, some of whom even go to the extreme of choosing to leave their units vacant rather than comply with SF's stringent pro-tenant laws.

*which is what I meant in my earlier post, obviously.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2013, 03:23 PM
 
30 posts, read 160,493 times
Reputation: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by pch1013 View Post
In that case, you'll probably find that your future employer is well aware of the cost of living in the Bay Area and that your salary will reflect that, at least to some extent. At least in some fields, namely tech, there is a seller's market for talent that offsets the seller's* market for rental property. Granted, a 30% salary differential compared to a normal city might not seem like much versus a 50% COL differential, but it does help a bit.
Unfortunately the very specific sector of my industry I'm isn't known for being generous with salaries. I am lucky that my employer does pay considerably higher than their competitors but it's still not as good as other sectors of the industry. I'm trying to do what I love which is why I'm not in the other sectors which are soul destroying. I've been looking at posts on this forum and there does seem to be some mythology around tech salaries. I'm getting the impression everyone thinks "techies" are making 200k at entry level which isn't true. Only higher level managers (people who aren't at all technical) make that kind of money. Even breaking six figures for any individual contributor is the tech industry doesn't generally happen. Certainly not salaries like 120k except for the most experienced even at Google or Apple. (At Google it'd probably be 70k-80k at entry level)

Quote:
And yet San Francisco is full of landlords who insist otherwise, some of whom even go to the extreme of choosing to leave their units vacant rather than comply with SF's stringent pro-tenant laws.

*which is what I meant in my earlier post, obviously.
I've been reading posts here and comments sections on SF area newspapers and I've definitely seen a lot of this whining from landlords. But this is normal and their point of view is not based in reality. Landlords always complain about absolutely any regulation or law to reduce their power no matter what the situation. In a landlord-tenant relationship the landlord holds enormous power over the tenant. It's been like that since beginning of civilization and history has shown over and over again that landlords are prone to abusing this power which is why laws are required to protect the weaker party, the tenant. Landlords aren't looking at things from the tenants' point of view they are blind to it and see only their own. A person who holds power always fights to keep it or expand it. You see exactly the same thing with every other industry in the USA. Wall Street complains that regulations are killing business despite it being the complete lack of any regulation that led to the crash. In Seattle when they were bringing in laws granting workers the right to sick leave there were employers crying bloody murder that it would kill businesses. That was contrary to evidence from other cities and countries that have such laws and they haven't caused harm (actually the opposite) and when the law was passed not a single business suffered.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2013, 06:17 PM
 
13,711 posts, read 9,184,751 times
Reputation: 9840
Quote:
Originally Posted by tk05 View Post

I've never encountered a landlord that gave the tenant the interest accrued. They usually even put in the lease that all interest belongs to them.
This may be a San Francisco thing as the regulation requires that tenants receive interest from their deposit (but some landlords ignore it). Not sure about places like Belmont, maybe it doesn't apply there.


Quote:
Originally Posted by tk05 View Post
I see no protections for tenants at all. It's extremely evident that California laws overwhelmingly favor landlords (see even eviction cases are fast tracked while cases against landlords are put on the backlog). The USA may have the weakest data protection laws in the western world but there are still some and requesting access to extremely private info like a credit report just to view a unit definitely violates the law. The prospective tenant would have no way to guard against identity theft.
Requesting a credit report just to view a unit is a bit extreme and even in San Francisco, such requirement is not typical. However, almost all landlords require a credit report when one applies for the unit. This is normal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tk05 View Post
This sounds an awful lot like "Nobody put a gun to your head and forced you to move to <area>". You may not realize this but that kind of statement is very offensive and completely false. In my industry 99% of employers are in the Bay Area. I'm moving to the Bay Area for a job. I don't have a choice. If I did I would've picked a cheaper place to live. If I don't move the Bay area then I don't work and if I don't work then I have no food or shelter so effectively there is a gun to my head. The huge demand in the bay area isn't because people think it would be nice to live there. For many people it's because they HAVE to live there.
Actually, other than a few greedy landlords that charges application fees, the process here in SF Bay is not much different from say, Sacramento, where I'm from. Credit report, first/last month rent (except where prohibited like SF), and deposit are pretty standard stuff here or in most CA cities. The competition is a lot more fierce here of course, but in terms of requirement and process, that's pretty standard as per my rental experience.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2013, 06:43 PM
 
Location: South Korea
5,242 posts, read 13,039,448 times
Reputation: 2957
You need to provide a credit report to the landlord one way or another in any part of the US. Usually you pay them like $30 and they run it, but the Bay Area rental market is always so competitive that it's best to just print one out, make some copies, and bring them to every viewing. It's easier for the landlord because they don't have to wait for a credit report order to come back, and it's better for you because you don't have to pay $30 at each viewing (and I guarantee you that you'll go to multiple viewings and make multiple applications until you finally get approved for a place that isn't a total dump). Certainly you can take a sharpie and black out your confidential info on the credit report. You just need to show you have a good credit score, you aren't bankrupt, and you don't have like $300,000 in student loans you can't pay.

Is it invasive? Yeah. But not much more so than in any other part of the US. If you really want to live in the Bay Area then you have to put up with its idiosyncratic rental market.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2013, 07:25 PM
 
7,280 posts, read 10,900,322 times
Reputation: 11491
Quote:
Originally Posted by tk05 View Post
Is there any website or organization with very comprehensive information to protect tenants from landlords or fraud?

In looking for places to rent online I'm coming across a lot of outrageous demands even in the listings that seem like a setup for identity theft or plain old theft of cash. I've seen some ads demanding the prospective tenant bring a printed credit report - that would make identity theft extremely easy.
There's an apartment complex with an application form on its website that is requesting bank account numbers - if that's not illegal it really needs to be, nobody ever has a right to ask for bank account info!
Lots of ads are looking for first months rent (ok), last months rent and a deposit equal to a months rent - This should exceed the amount allowed to request by law for a deposit (last month rent is a deposit, traditionally it's either/or but never both last months rent and a security deposit). Lots of problems with this. First is a security deposit being equal to a months rent. The bay area has the highest rents in the nation and a security deposit is to cover damages. Just because someone is charging $2000/mo for a $400/mo apartment doesn't mean damage is suddenly worth more. Sounds like they intend to make up an excuse to keep the deposit to make maximum profit (Probably won't even keep the deposit in a separate account as required by law).
Another thing that occurs to me is some of these ads are asking for all this (first mo + last mo + security) "to secure the unit". If you do that then they could just skip town with all that money and never give you the keys. How can a tenant protect themselves from robbery?
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"?

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.

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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2013, 07:30 PM
 
7,280 posts, read 10,900,322 times
Reputation: 11491
Quote:
Originally Posted by tk05 View Post
Actually I'm looking at the peninsula - more specifically: Belmont area. Looking at the market in SF I cannot believe anybody would even attempt to rent there. The rents are beyond the earning capacity of even the lower end of the upper class, middle class of any sort can forget it.

I've never encountered a landlord that gave the tenant the interest accrued. They usually even put in the lease that all interest belongs to them.

I see no protections for tenants at all. It's extremely evident that California laws overwhelmingly favor landlords (see even eviction cases are fast tracked while cases against landlords are put on the backlog). The USA may have the weakest data protection laws in the western world but there are still some and requesting access to extremely private info like a credit report just to view a unit definitely violates the law. The prospective tenant would have no way to guard against identity theft.

This sounds an awful lot like "Nobody put a gun to your head and forced you to move to <area>". You may not realize this but that kind of statement is very offensive and completely false. In my industry 99% of employers are in the Bay Area. I'm moving to the Bay Area for a job. I don't have a choice. If I did I would've picked a cheaper place to live. If I don't move the Bay area then I don't work and if I don't work then I have no food or shelter so effectively there is a gun to my head. The huge demand in the bay area isn't because people think it would be nice to live there. For many people it's because they HAVE to live there.
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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2013, 07:45 PM
 
11 posts, read 13,602 times
Reputation: 10
"No one HAS to live in a specific location. No one HAS to work in a specific location."

I disagree. Have you worked anywhere else. A lot of momentum in the software and computer engineering industry is in the bay area. And if not the bay area, maybe New York. That means that software products are created in these areas and shipped out everywhere else. A lot of the innovation is in the bay area because that is where venture capitalists put their money. So if you want to be part of the innovation, it really helps to be in that location.

Why is this true? How is this possible? No venture capitalist or bank or whatever is going to invest in software development firms in Boise Idaho. Now, big IT corporate may exist there in Boise Idaho for lower taxes or whatever. But who wants to be that guy all the time, the guy the installs some people's software, maybe adds a maintenance fix or two.

I have worked other areas and we tend to be the users of the software not the innovators. There is work there in the software industry in other parts of the country, but you are the ones reading manuals to implement at some big corporate IT shop. You aren't part of the innovative creative software work. Not all the time but a lot of the time.
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:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 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 > California > San Francisco - Oakland
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top