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.
Cry me a river. Every business owner knows, or should know, that he or she will encounter problems, non-paying clients, scammers, catastrophes, and assorted acts of God. The smart ones plan for all that. But small landlords are generally unsophisticated business people who cannot, for whatever reasoon, screen their tenants well, keep adequate reserved, and plan for contingencies. In short, they shouldn’t be landlords. There no shame in that. Hell, I’d like to be shortstop for the Yankees, but if I don’t have what it takes, I shouldn’t be. Same with business people in general and landlords in particular. If the can’t do the job right, sell to someone who can.
Disinformation troll (or useful idiot of disinformation trolls!)!
Everything that you posted here is a lie. Every single one.
Small landlords can't screen adequately for tenants because fringe tenant advocates got laws passed PREVENTING them from doing so. It's against the law for landlords to share a blacklist, to ask for more than one month's deposit (which was the perfect screener), to look up a potential tenant's eviction history or even to create or share a blacklist. And thanks to another series of "rent reforms" passed last year, it's against the law to deny a tenant occupancy based on their court records.
Small landlords can't save up for emergencies because the housing courts have given deadbeats and squatters free reign to live rent free for months--and in some cases--a year or more at a time. These squatters and deadbeats eat into their reserves, in the same way shoplifters who are given free reign to steal as much as possible wind up destroying a business.
So, I repeat, everything that you posted is a lie about what small landlords are. Don't post lies, because it puts everything else that you say under the umbrella of suspicion and makes you out to be a disinformation troll. Tell-tale signs of disinformation trolling is stating egregious non-truths in an authoritative manner. Why are you so eager to post something that isn't true? Do you have a personal financial stake in seeing small landlords go under? A lot of people are eager to force small landlords into bankruptcy, so that they can grab prime real estate for pennies on the dollar. Is this where the eagerness is coming from?
Disinformation troll (or useful idiot of disinformation trolls!)!
Everything that you posted here is a lie. Every single one.
Small landlords can't screen adequately for tenants because fringe tenant advocates got laws passed PREVENTING them from doing so. It's against the law for landlords to share a blacklist, to ask for more than one month's deposit (which was the perfect screener), to look up a potential tenant's eviction history or even to create or share a blacklist. And thanks to another series of "rent reforms" passed last year, it's against the law to deny a tenant occupancy based on their court records.
Small landlords can't save up for emergencies because the housing courts have given deadbeats and squatters free reign to live rent free for months--and in some cases--a year or more at a time. These squatters and deadbeats eat into their reserves, in the same way shoplifters who are given free reign to steal as much as possible wind up destroying a business.
So, I repeat, everything that you posted is a lie about what small landlords are. Don't post lies, because it puts everything else that you say under the umbrella of suspicion and makes you out to be a disinformation troll. Tell-tale signs of disinformation trolling is stating egregious non-truths in an authoritative manner. Why are you so eager to post something that isn't true? Do you have a personal financial stake in seeing small landlords go under? A lot of people are eager to force small landlords into bankruptcy, so that they can grab prime real estate for pennies on the dollar. Is this where the eagerness is coming from?
I was going to respond to him/her, but you have stated the facts beautifully. These scumbags hate "small" landlords (and they include even leaseholders like myself) because they hate any kind of success. They wish to turn NYC into a totally corporate controlled tyranny, where no middle class person would ever even have a shot at considering the very notion of individual freedom and success!
The best way moving forward, if at all possible for an individual landlord, will be to rent to tenants on the basis of word of mouth. That is how it is done in many European countries that have similar tyrannical housing laws like NYC. When I lived in Spain, for example, many landlords will not even post their apartments since the housing laws there allow squatting to go on for years. Instead, what they do is either word of mouth for trusted people or, financially, they will ask their bank for something called an "aval bancario" (bank guarantee that if you default, they will pay the difference). That is an excellent way to screen and prevent cockroaches from ruining your life.
canovas, hypothetical, you've just come into power, Trump was all right but too left wing comparatively
You're both president and mayor rolled into one
So you end the Public assistance programs. Rent control ended. Food stamps ended.
No more protection from eviction. Medicaid ended.
Ok now there are thousands of people in living in the streets. They get by by begging and going through the trash for scraps.
Then what do you do? Leave them alone?
Ok
Or to clean up the streets do you build some concentration camps upstate in remote areas?
Or just kill them, a much cheaper solution?
What's the endgame?
Back in the day when we had a truly free country, are you aware that no American would ever even consider begging on the streets? I suggest you do some reading of history, because even the NY Times in the 19th Century used to say that the only beggars in America were foreign alien undesirables. Back in those days, most undesirables were shipped right back to Italy, Greece and many other places if they were deemed unfit for America at Ellis Island. I wish we had a system like that today where foreign parasites are deported and where the only immigrants allowed to remain are those who have either a high net worth or a potential to contribute great things to our country.
Under my system, if an alien did not have a job or any meaningful skill, they would be shipped right back to their country. That would clear a lot of the poverty problems in this country.
Then, I would tackle the national underclass of fat people (and not so fat) on welfare. Is there a job available for you and you refuse to accept it? You're getting cut off.
Are you not contributing to your community in a civic manner? You're getting cut off.
Even the Communists used to say "those who do not work, shall not eat". That's in the Bible, too.
Leave them alone? Nope. I would clear the streets. I would put the mentally ill into mental institutions, deport any illegal alien without a job and force welfare leeches to work. Oh and I would forbid the welfare class from voting if they refuse to accept jobs that MOST CERTAINLY ARE available. Again, normal American people should not have to take out a mortgage to support these leeches. We have a disease in this country and it must be extirpated. It is called the disease of dependency and thinking "the world" (usually White males) owes you a living.
Again, normal American people should not have to take out a mortgage to support these leeches. We have a disease in this country and it must be extirpated. It is called the disease of dependency and thinking "the world" (usually White males) owes you a living.
NYC is notoriously abusive against our constitutional rights as legit American citizens. It is a city where if you are an illegal alien or a deadbeat or thug, you will have all the legal protections paid for by the ever shrinking taxpayer base that is getting the hell out of Dodge.
Right now, I am celebrating the fact that a group has finally stepped in and is challenging really bad ideas, terrible rules that go against private property rights. New York City's Rent Stabilization Law (RSL) is being challenged in court.
The main excuses used for RSL is to "protect" tenants and keep NYC's "racial diversity" (as if racial diversity was a lofty religious pillar and that we could not survive without it. Often, racial diversity is simply code for "you the White and Asian taxpayer will pay for the inner city types who produce nothing of economic value".
One would think that after having these stupid regulations and laws on the books for over 50 years, the problem would have been fixed. Yet, the city still struggles to get it together on any important issue.
The property owners are very worried, for the right reasons. They argue that the rules violate the Constitution's Fifth Amendment since owners cannot exclude others from their own property nor can they rightfully and properly possess, use or dispose of their property. Of course, these laws also violate due process rights.
They make many other arguments, but these are the most relevant ones to me. I am hoping the legal challenge is successful this time. If it is, finally something good will come out of this year. If the lawsuit fails, I hope they take it to the Supreme Court. It will most certainly be successful at that level and then the ENTIRE country could be relieved because local governments could not treat our properties as if it belonged to them.
I also want to see the eviction laws RADICALLY reformed for the better in NYC. We cannot have such an outrageous system that protects so many deadbeats and people who believe housing is a right. I don't ever ever ever want to live in a country where housing is a right guaranteed by government. I DO NOT GIVE A DAMN if that is "how they do it over in Europe" and other places. This isn't Europe. This is America and I want it to remain that way. Not because we should not try new things, but because freedom to private property will always be better to me than the Euro way. European socialism is stifling and breeds a climate of passivity and mediocrity. You never see great innovators from anywhere in the world excited about emigrating to Europe and for good reason. We need to stop this nonsense of "Scandinavian socialism". If you truly know Scandinavia, it is not socialist at all in most things. Denmark, for example, has one of the freest economies in the world. NYC? NYC is less free than even some Euro-socialist countries.
We need to give NYC tenants the RIGHT TO BUY their own homes in the projects. I would like to see a complete elimination of public subsidized housing in NYC, which are centers of crime, STDs and other very serious social ills. No fault eviction is the way to go. This is getting absolutely ridiculous that we have "tenants" in NYC not paying their rent and are basically living for free, getting subsidized everything else including their $600-weekly taxpayer funded vacation and they still cry about not being able to pay rent.
You obviously do t know much about Europe, where each country has a different culture (and each region of each country) and laws greatly differ depending on each of them.
Also, it would be a great lesson for people like you to, by a stroke of bad luck, be at the receiving end of what you preach. Let’s see if you don’t want rent control...
It is called the disease of dependency and thinking "the world" (usually White males) owes you a living.
What does white males have to do with anything? Members of minority communities always place a far heavier burden on their own than they do on white people when it comes to being subsidized, because they've invented this ridiculous idea that because we're all "oppressed", those of us doing a little bit better than they are (even marginally better) owe it to them to live off us. If we don't, we're being "traitors", sellouts, or "holding out."
This mentality was such that I remember as clear as day back in the 1980s middle and upper middle class blacks frequently ranting that they didn't owe the ghettos that they rose up from anything. The reason why they did that is that they were frequently screamed at by both vagrants within their communities and fauxgressives (people pretending to be liberals) about why they weren't practically giving the shirt off their backs to the "less fortunate." And naturally, upwardly mobile blacks resented that idea because no other demographic is expected to do that.
Also, it would be a great lesson for people like you to, by a stroke of bad luck, be at the receiving end of what you preach. Let’s see if you don’t want rent control...
Follow your own advice. Be a "Do Gooder" landlord like me and my parents were for 25 years. Offer cheap rents to the "disenfranchised", go beyond the call of duty to help them out (even to go so far as to pay their utility bills). See how that experiment works out for you, how fast tenants start screaming "slum landlord" or playing that "I can't pay my bills" card while acquiring a new expensive smartphone, cable sub, new car, etc. Go ahead.
Follow your own advice. Be a "Do Gooder" landlord like me and my parents were for 25 years. Offer cheap rents to the "disenfranchised", go beyond the call of duty to help them out (even to go so far as to pay their utility bills). See how that experiment works out for you, how fast tenants start screaming "slum landlord" or playing that "I can't pay my bills" card while acquiring a new expensive smartphone, cable sub, new car, etc. Go ahead.
I’m talking about rent-control, not market rate.
And I’ve been this guy. I’ve rented out a place for far lower than market rate, the guy was not only paying in advance but also fixing things up when needed.
I’ve then rented for market rates to literal animals who ended up ruining my place, while paying late and giving excuses. And like in most cases I didn’t have to go through the eviction procedure, just not renewing the lease and a few “legal threats” along with my own personality was enough to run them out even before the deadline. It’s a lottery. But it was not rent-control and it’s sadly part of the game. I’ve also had a yuppie-transplant, very good profile on paper, who ended up leaving the place messed up and gross and complained that I had to use the security deposit for the repairs. See, the world is full of different people.
I’m not talking about nut cases but working people with a stable job and prior background and credit check. They deserve housing and rent-stabilized if their income is low. And for the one who ruined my place she scammed me along with the realtor who she knew and I was gullible that time.
But As far as rent-control is concerned the landlords have many many advantages in doing so.
Now check 281 Clifton place in Brooklyn, for instance, rent-stabilized building illegally converted into market rate with landlords trying to pay tenants to leave so they can’t rent out to new tenants for triple the price. And that building was clean with nothing but good tenants.
@BX_Fly if you are a rental property owner and somebody is not paying rent how big of a disadvantage is it if you don't live nearby and are living somewhere else very far away where it's too inconvenient to go there physically?
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.
