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.
Yes. Here and the new place. Insurance for theft. I dont like it. But if I am not here during showing hours I insure everything. At this place and the next the agent tell you 24 hours in advance, knocks loudly several times and opens the door a crack and yells in before walking in. Also they check it before allowing the new tenant to just walk in behind them.
I dont like it but whatever...It just makes me think about how glad I will be to move out soon.
I have only had one landlord show an apartment while I was still living in it. He always gave notice a few days in advance of when he was going to show the place. I would always be sure not to be home during the showing.
It's expected that your place will not be tidy due to packing. Most people don't like others in their apartment because of the other kind of mess they usually have around... dirty dishes and clothes lying about and the place is dirty.
People can see past the messy packing. They're there to see the the physical apartment, not your things.
It's expected that your place will not be tidy due to packing. Most people don't like others in their apartment because of the other kind of mess they usually have around... dirty dishes and clothes lying about and the place is dirty.
People can see past the messy packing. They're there to see the the physical apartment, not your things.
Well, I made darn sure that the place was spotless from floor to ceiling. Interesting thing, though, is that Minneapolis is the only place that I lived where land lords did such a thing. Everywhere else they waited until the place was completely vacated, then "prepared" the place for viewing. It seems to me that the land lords who will show a place while it is still being occupied are the ones who want new tenants in the day after you leave. To me that shows their financial situation and land lords like that should be avoided.
It seems to me that the land lords who will show a place while it is still being occupied are the ones who want new tenants in the day after you leave. To me that shows their financial situation and land lords like that should be avoided.
It's just a business decision. A $1500/mo. home incurs a $50/day vacancy loss cost, not including utilities, yard care and other expenses. Vacancy is a landlord's worst enemy, for many reasons. A good landlord works hard to avoid vacancy. You bet we like to have a quick turnover with the fewest number of vacant days. That can't be accomplished if you give up the 30 to 60 days marketing time that precede the departure of the current tenant.
Some day I hope all of you renters own your own home plus some rental property. It's a great way to build wealth, but it's risky, hard work. When you have your own rentals, it will all make more sense.
It's just a business decision. A $1500/mo. home incurs a $50/day vacancy loss cost, not including utilities, yard care and other expenses. Vacancy is a landlord's worst enemy, for many reasons. A good landlord works hard to avoid vacancy. You bet we like to have a quick turnover with the fewest number of vacant days. That can't be accomplished if you give up the 30 to 60 days marketing time that precede the departure of the current tenant.
Some day I hope all of you renters own your own home plus some rental property. It's a great way to build wealth, but it's risky, hard work. When you have your own rentals, it will all make more sense.
Steve
I do understand what you are saying. My comment was in response to the comments made regarding the assumed renters financial situation if they ask to pay the deposit in installments. You see it goes both ways.
I do understand what you are saying. My comment was in response to the comments made regarding the assumed renters financial situation if they ask to pay the deposit in installments. You see it goes both ways.
Well, your personal ability to make good on a payment plan for the deposit doesn't change the fact that it's a risky think for a landlord to do. Also, note that in my market the deposit is typically 70% of a month's rent. Move-in cost is first month's rent plus deposit, and a $35 application fee. If we took first, last, plus a deposit equal to another month, it might change my views. But that's too high of a move-in cost in my opinion.
If someone can't come up with the move-in costs, they can't rent from me. I don't make any exceptions. It's a business decision and I know I might sometimes be letting a great tenant walk away, but one of the most important disciplines of a property manager or landlord is to have a policy and stick with it.
The problem some landlords have is if their home is sitting vacant, and that's become more and more uncomfortable for them, they lower the standards upon which applicants must qualify instead of just dropping the rent. Then they make a bad decisions, doing stupid things like letting them move in without paying all the rent or deposit, or working out some sort of deal to trade work (painting or yard work is what I usually hear about) for the shortage of funds, and it all goes downhill from there.
So, yes, it is in fact a very prudent policy to simply not accept applicants who can't come up with move-in costs, and I agree that someone like you would be the exception to the bad outcome, but you still wouldn't be able to rent from me because my policy is not flexible.
Steve
Last edited by austin-steve; 03-30-2008 at 11:06 AM..
Reason: typos
The only part of the financial arrangement that I don't see as acceptable is when the landlord asks a tenant to pay a damage deposit immediately before moving in and then are allowed to take three weeks to get it back to the tenant upon vacating the apartment when there hasn't been any damage. Why shouldn't the renter be able to demand their damage deposit back at the time of move-out, after the move-out inspection has been completed and signed-off on by management?
It's like stores who will charge customers fees because of errors customers made, but the customer has no recourse with stores when stores are the ones who make errors against the customer. We can't fee the stores for their errors. We're supposed to just accept it.
It's the same thing when it comes to the damage deposit. I gave it in good faith and the landlord inspected the apartment for damage before I moved out, so why can't they be made to refund the damage deposit immediately? (And why should it take three weeks?)
Other than that, I understand the financial end of needing to show the apartment before the current tenant has actually vacated. Everywhere I've lived around the world, this has been the case.
A try to put into practice what Simple Living said by offering to do a pre-move out walk through to identify any potential problems and answer any questions.
My standard practice is to return the deposit by check at the time the keys are returned based on the walk through and any agreed upon damages.
In a few instances, where I knew the family was moving out of State or with Military families... I will present the my Deposit Return Check to the Tenant for endorsement and then exchange the check endorsed to me for cash...
I like to leave on good terms... we might not always agree, but at least I hope they felt I was professional and fair.
Why shouldn't the renter be able to demand their damage deposit back at the time of move-out, after the move-out inspection has been completed and signed-off on by management?
No, because there is almost always cleaning and/or damages to bill back. We have to wait for the invoices to be mailed to us from the vendors, then process the payments before returning a tenant statement and deposit refund.
In Texas we have 30 days to return a deposit. Some states have a shorter timeline, 14 days in CA or CO I think.
You can't always see everything that a tenant may have damaged on a cursory walkthrough. We send our maintenance man in after move-out with a 4 page checklist to go through the entire house and make sure everything is working properly for the next tenant.
Most commonly we find the former tenant has left a dirty air filter, which triggers an A/C service that will be billed to the tenant, and the cleaning is almost never up to par, so we send in a crew to bring it back up to the condition in which the tenant received the property.
Also, the maintenance man opens and closes ever door, drawer, cabinet door, etc. and often finds broken items that a visual walkthrough would not reveal. Burnt out bulbs that were not replaced, broken/missing garage openers, etc.
I can't be that thorough on a 10 minute walkthrough.
Steve
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.
