U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas
 [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 11-09-2022, 12:08 PM
 
Location: Houston
1 posts, read 1,773 times
Reputation: 13

Advertisements

This petition will be presented to the legislature in January. It's a part of a team project for a group of us who are learning to be tenant advocates.

Thank you so much for helping us. To Anyone can sign, you do not have to be a tenant.

https://forms.gle/2GPWgtPHFSppKe1P8

Last edited by TenantAdvocate2022; 11-09-2022 at 12:28 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-09-2022, 10:01 PM
 
1,537 posts, read 642,478 times
Reputation: 2253
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenantAdvocate2022 View Post
This petition will be presented to the legislature in January. It's a part of a team project for a group of us who are learning to be tenant advocates.

Thank you so much for helping us. To Anyone can sign, you do not have to be a tenant.

https://forms.gle/2GPWgtPHFSppKe1P8
This is timely. Thank you.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2022, 06:14 AM
 
10,717 posts, read 6,105,736 times
Reputation: 8630
I do think there are areas Texas can be more tenant friendly, especially when it comes to property maintenances when the landlord does not make repairs within a reasonable period of time and the tenant isn’t able to take the costs out of rent without court approval…

…but when it comes to skyrocketing rent values, I have a different viewpoint. the property the tenant resides in is obligated to them through only a fixed contract where their fixed monthly rent is only gaurunteed to them for a fixed period of time thus they are not entitled to have their rents secured within a reason of affordability only because they live there and call it home. The property does not belong to the tenant but is only leased to them with a fixed contract they both agreed upon. When that contract ends, the tenant must either accept the new market value for the property, or surrender the property. The tenant should in no way be in ‘control’ of that market value but rather demand for the unit. The property owner also has fees to account for between maintenances (inflation variable), taxes (typically increasing with property value which is directly contributed to demand and desirability), staffing (mainly apartment’s), and so forth.

How would you like it, if you rented out your home in Texas (where much of the proceeds are eaten by Property Taxes) and the tenant one day decided that only because the rent was difficult for him to afford that he should have more ‘rights’ to your property in terms of setting how much the landlord (who owns the property) should be able to charge and left you on the hook for inflation related expenses?

Last edited by Need4Camaro; 11-10-2022 at 06:33 AM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2022, 08:49 AM
 
1,537 posts, read 642,478 times
Reputation: 2253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Need4Camaro View Post
I do think there are areas Texas can be more tenant friendly, especially when it comes to property maintenances when the landlord does not make repairs within a reasonable period of time and the tenant isn’t able to take the costs out of rent without court approval…

…but when it comes to skyrocketing rent values, I have a different viewpoint. the property the tenant resides in is obligated to them through only a fixed contract where their fixed monthly rent is only gaurunteed to them for a fixed period of time thus they are not entitled to have their rents secured within a reason of affordability only because they live there and call it home. The property does not belong to the tenant but is only leased to them with a fixed contract they both agreed upon. When that contract ends, the tenant must either accept the new market value for the property, or surrender the property. The tenant should in no way be in ‘control’ of that market value but rather demand for the unit. The property owner also has fees to account for between maintenances (inflation variable), taxes (typically increasing with property value which is directly contributed to demand and desirability), staffing (mainly apartment’s), and so forth.

How would you like it, if you rented out your home in Texas (where much of the proceeds are eaten by Property Taxes) and the tenant one day decided that only because the rent was difficult for him to afford that he should have more ‘rights’ to your property in terms of setting how much the landlord (who owns the property) should be able to charge and left you on the hook for inflation related expenses?
I think 99.99% of people would agree with you, and I agree with you, too, but I do not think tenants should literally lose thousands of dollars worth of personal property and totally disrupt their lives because the landlord decides to turn the property into an (illegal) Airbnb and forces tenants out before they can secure another rental property and save their personal property---which is EXACTLY what happened to both my neighbour and myself--both of us seniors on tiny incomes with no where to go.

I am literally losing thousands upon thousands of dollars in personal property not to mention moving costs (over $2K) and storage rent on a small storage unit to try to save a few things for a minimum of a year unitl the new lease on a tiny one room apartment expires---something I probably will not be able to maintain.

This sort of thing is an untenable maximisation of profits which causes tenants to lose thousands of dollars, disrupts their lives, and negatively impacts their physical and mental health. No landlord should have a right to do this just weeks before the tenants's leases expire, and this is the sort of situation where a Tenants Bill of Rights comes in. I am speaking from personal experience. Any "landlord" who does this to innocent, good, long term tenants is nothing short of a greedy b*st*rd. "Business" is not outside the scope of ethics and morals, and I think this is exactly the point tenants are coming from.

Lease contracts have always been adhesion contracts that do not protect tenants AT ALL, but at this point in time, the losses to many, many renters is staggering. Something has to be done to make this bloody system a helluva lot more equitable!!
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2022, 08:54 AM
 
1,057 posts, read 356,004 times
Reputation: 2443
Just look at what happened when biden said it was ok not to pay rent for over a year because of covid? homeowners and lenders lost their properties or had no income what so ever for months.

Rent control will only make rents sky rocket before it becomes effective, landlords will not improve properties, investors would buy run down properties and rent them, have higher income requirements on applications etc.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2022, 09:04 AM
 
1,537 posts, read 642,478 times
Reputation: 2253
Quote:
Originally Posted by done working View Post
Just look at what happened when biden said it was ok not to pay rent for over a year because of covid? homeowners and lenders lost their properties or had no income what so ever for months.

Rent control will only make rents sky rocket before it becomes effective, landlords will not improve properties, investors would buy run down properties and rent them, have higher income requirements on applications etc.
This is the 21st century. Maybe it is bloody well time that societies stop allowing "investment" in rental properties. ALL PEOPLE NEED A DECENT PLACE TO LIVE, and no one should have to pay 50% or more of his/her income just to keep a roof over his/her head, and that is EXACTLY what has happened to millions of people. This is a system that does not work anymore. Most people have come to realise you cannot sell housing the same way you sell a three piece suit or a microwave oven or any other commodity that is more reasonably subject to supply and demand. People can do without those items if necessary, but NO ONE can do without a home in which to live. EVERYONE needs shelter, a place to sleep, a place to prepare meals, and a place to bathe and clean their clothes, etc.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2022, 09:20 AM
 
10,717 posts, read 6,105,736 times
Reputation: 8630
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhinneyWalker View Post
I think 99.99% of people would agree with you, and I agree with you, too, but I do not think tenants should literally lose thousands of dollars worth of personal property and totally disrupt their lives because the landlord decides to turn the property into an (illegal) Airbnb and forces tenants out before they can secure another rental property and save their personal property---which is EXACTLY what happened to both my neighbour and myself--both of us seniors on tiny incomes with no where to go.
If the landlord disrupts the rental agreement to convert the property into a short-term rental prior to the end of the contract then I will agree with your cause for concern, although short-term rental restrictions vary by local jurisdiction.

However, if the land lord simply refuses not to 'renew the lease' after the lease is over, the landlord is acting within his rights, regardless of what local laws say about short-term rentals ... he can still choose not to renew ... he can also choose to sell the property with an investor while it is being rented out to a tenant ... overall my emphasis is that, the landlord owns the property and therefore is responsible for all expenses related to the property and should have more control over the property.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PhinneyWalker View Post
I am literally losing thousands upon thousands of dollars in personal property not to mention moving costs (over $2K) and storage rent on a small storage unit to try to save a few things for a minimum of a year unitl the new lease on a tiny one room apartment expires---something I probably will not be able to maintain.

This sort of thing is an untenable maximisation of profits which causes tenants to lose thousands of dollars, disrupts their lives, and negatively impacts their physical and mental health. No landlord should have a right to do this just weeks before the tenants's leases expire, and this is the sort of situation where a Tenants Bill of Rights comes in. I am speaking from personal experience. Any "landlord" who does this to innocent, good, long term tenants is nothing short of a greedy b*st*rd. "Business" is not outside the scope of ethics and morals, and I think this is exactly the point tenants are coming from.

Lease contracts have always been adhesion contracts that do not protect tenants AT ALL, but at this point in time, the losses to many, many renters is staggering. Something has to be done to make this bloody system a helluva lot more equitable!!
I'm not fully understanding your situation. What is the landlord doing exactly just weeks before? Did your landlord terminate the contract prior to its ending date to convert the property into a short-term rental or did the landlord simply refuse to extend the lease?

If he broke the contract unjustly and evicted you then I agree, that is dirty and they should not be allowed to do that.

If he just refused to extend the lease, it doesn't matter what his intentions are to do with the property thereafter. Its his property, your contract entitles you rights to the property only for a fixed period of time, regardless of what the landlord intends to do before or after with the property. You are trying to securely establish yourself in an environment you are not legally entitled to outside of contractual terms. Any expenses before and after that contract ends is not the landlords problem and is a personal financial accountability issue. Sorry, but thats the reality of it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PhinneyWalker View Post
This is the 21st century. Maybe it is bloody well time that societies stop allowing "investment" in rental properties. ALL PEOPLE NEED A DECENT PLACE TO LIVE, and no one should have to pay 50% or more of his/her income just to keep a roof over his/her head, and that is EXACTLY what has happened to millions of people. This is a system that does not work anymore. Most people have come to realise you cannot sell housing the same way you sell a three piece suit or a microwave oven or any other commodity that is more reasonably subject to supply and demand. People can do without those items if necessary, but NO ONE can do without a home in which to live. EVERYONE needs shelter, a place to sleep, a place to prepare meals, and a place to bathe and clean their clothes, etc.
Why? Keep in mind the investment of rental properties, or properties in general is nothing new and has existed long before the foundation of this country... And if you look up the definition of 'Real Estate' you will find that it actually has nothing to do with 'housing people'. Real Estate has always been about investment in property, because property is bound to land, and as populations increase, land becomes more scarce therefore increases in value. There is no way around that regardless of how much you need a house, land is a resource whether you like it or not. I agree that people need a place to live, but you have more choices than you think you have. I personally make a reasonably high salary but chose a smaller home to keep my property tax debt low so I would not need to worry about housing siphoning most of my income. I also chose to live further away from the city to keep my property value within reason. Both of those equate to me being able to pay my MTG off very quickly and not have to worry about bouncing between properties only because I feel entitled to a place to live.. ..which is a 'need' but not an 'entitlement' btw. I will agree that rents are high and it is difficult to afford them on an average salary, but you have options to adjust your salary as well (either through self progression, multiple income streams, ect.. ..and I have done all of the above.) Why take something that clearly belongs to someone else, their property.. whom I might add also made financial sacrifices and wise planning to obtain.. ..only because you feel entitled to it?

Last edited by Need4Camaro; 11-10-2022 at 09:52 AM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2022, 09:51 AM
 
1,057 posts, read 356,004 times
Reputation: 2443
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhinneyWalker View Post
This is the 21st century. Maybe it is bloody well time that societies stop allowing "investment" in rental properties. ALL PEOPLE NEED A DECENT PLACE TO LIVE, and no one should have to pay 50% or more of his/her income just to keep a roof over his/her head, and that is EXACTLY what has happened to millions of people. This is a system that does not work anymore. Most people have come to realise you cannot sell housing the same way you sell a three piece suit or a microwave oven or any other commodity that is more reasonably subject to supply and demand. People can do without those items if necessary, but NO ONE can do without a home in which to live. EVERYONE needs shelter, a place to sleep, a place to prepare meals, and a place to bathe and clean their clothes, etc.
So you actually think that without investment housing - that would include builders, developers as well as investors that the amount of homes and their prices would come down? Man you are dreaming. Maybe the reason people pay 50% of their income is that they lack the skills to earn more money. But i guess thats the investors fault too right?

Without the ability to make a profit housing starts will come to a screeching halt and capital will go elsewhere. People need housing but they also need to make the right choices in life that allows them to afford housing be it a trailer, duplex, apartment or mansion.

Your heart may be in the right place but your knowledge of and how capitalism works is lacking.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2022, 09:55 AM
 
3,201 posts, read 1,827,742 times
Reputation: 6522
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhinneyWalker View Post
This is the 21st century. Maybe it is bloody well time that societies stop allowing "investment" in rental properties. ALL PEOPLE NEED A DECENT PLACE TO LIVE, and no one should have to pay 50% or more of his/her income just to keep a roof over his/her head, and that is EXACTLY what has happened to millions of people. This is a system that does not work anymore. Most people have come to realise you cannot sell housing the same way you sell a three piece suit or a microwave oven or any other commodity that is more reasonably subject to supply and demand. People can do without those items if necessary, but NO ONE can do without a home in which to live. EVERYONE needs shelter, a place to sleep, a place to prepare meals, and a place to bathe and clean their clothes, etc.
Did you feel this way 40 years ago? Or just recently since it affected you personally?

There are already laws in place to protect both renters and landlords. Making new laws isn't going to make either side behave differently if they choose not to.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-13-2022, 07:14 PM
 
2,114 posts, read 758,930 times
Reputation: 2470
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhinneyWalker View Post
This is the 21st century. Maybe it is bloody well time that societies stop allowing "investment" in rental properties. ALL PEOPLE NEED A DECENT PLACE TO LIVE, and no one should have to pay 50% or more of his/her income just to keep a roof over his/her head, and that is EXACTLY what has happened to millions of people. This is a system that does not work anymore. Most people have come to realise you cannot sell housing the same way you sell a three piece suit or a microwave oven or any other commodity that is more reasonably subject to supply and demand. People can do without those items if necessary, but NO ONE can do without a home in which to live. EVERYONE needs shelter, a place to sleep, a place to prepare meals, and a place to bathe and clean their clothes, etc.
Maybe get a better job look for a cheaper place to live. No one owes you anything.
Rate this post positively 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 > Texas
View detailed profiles of:

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2023, 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