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.
Someone asked this foolish question on another board and I feel it's no such thing. I think you can get your rent to stay the same but why would a landlord LOWER your rent?? Does this sound crazy to anyone besides me?
If there is a abindance of rents avilable in the arera they should lower teh rent just like housing is lowweri9ng in manyareas. it just the market in action.Same as they raise the rent when rentals are in demand.
We recently had a tenant on a month-to-month agreement. She came across some difficult times, but she did pay (late, and sometimes a very small portion of the rent rolled over to the next month). She was a good tenant, so we put her on a 6 mo. lease and lowered her rent $100.00. In these times, $100 less is better than having a vacant unit for 3 months. It's a wise financial decision.
We recently had a tenant on a month-to-month agreement. She came across some difficult times, but she did pay (late, and sometimes a very small portion of the rent rolled over to the next month). She was a good tenant, so we put her on a 6 mo. lease and lowered her rent $100.00. In these times, $100 less is better than having a vacant unit for 3 months. It's a wise financial decision.
I just thought a landlord would laugh in your face when asked can they lower the rent
At lease renewals for the past 6 or 8 months, almost every one of our tenants has asked for a reduction because they read the paper and know what's happening, too. They know that inventory is way up and compare rents in the current ads to what they are renting that's similar. Almost without fail our owners have agreed. Sometimes we "counter" depending on what they ask for, but always reduce some. We agree that something is better than nothing! However we do require another 6 month Lease in return; no month to month extension if we are accomodating their request.
At lease renewals for the past 6 or 8 months, almost every one of our tenants has asked for a reduction because they read the paper and know what's happening, too. They know that inventory is way up and compare rents in the current ads to what they are renting that's similar. Almost without fail our owners have agreed. Sometimes we "counter" depending on what they ask for, but always reduce some. We agree that something is better than nothing! However we do require another 6 month Lease in return; no month to month extension if we are accomodating their request.
But what is the landlord gaining but lowering rent?
All I can wonder with this thread is "WHY would a landlord consider this?" They are in business to "hopefully" stay one step ahead of foreclosure, especially with this terrible economy... OMG..
But what is the landlord gaining but lowering rent?
The owner is hoping to keep the unit rented without interruption and avoid the cost of a turnover which always costs something... sometimes it costs a lot... plus a management company usually charges a fee upon placing a new tenant.
I lowered my asking price when a couple wanted to rent a 3 bedroom home I had available... Each required a Home Office so they needed a 3 bedroom...
It paid off because the unit was in excellent condition when they transferred out...
Recently, I agreed to forego a $75 monthly increase for year 3 of a 3 year lease at the tenants request... the lease specified incremental increases... I agreed because the renter was really pitching in on small things that came up... like cleaning the grounds and hauling away storm debris... several truck loads.
I just thought a landlord would laugh in your face when asked can they lower the rent
For me it would depend on how good the tenant was. I'd be a lot more likely to consider it with a tenant who was long-term, always paid on time, and didn't damage the property than I would with one who was a problem in any way. Problem tenant would get laughed at and a big fat "No".
For me it would depend on how good the tenant was. I'd be a lot more likely to consider it with a tenant who was long-term, always paid on time, and didn't damage the property than I would with one who was a problem in any way. Problem tenant would get laughed at and a big fat "No".
This!
We actually just did this for one of our tenents. They are absolutely awesome. Rent is always paid on time, and they take better care of the property than most homeowners, its in better shape than when they moved in. They had a rough winter, and we agreed to lower rent by $100/month for a 4 month stretch to help them out. Better by far than a month of vacancy. And better than having to gamble on how the next tenant behaves.
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.
