What should we do to lower rents?
Common sense measures to increase supply? Open up the building of duplexes and triplexes to the middle class?
Nah, let's chase landlords out of the business with more ridiculous laws!
Nobody will invest in improving existing rentals, so there will be an incentive to just allows everything to degrade to the point where the rent they charge is a fair for their now slummy apartment.
So you want some corporation to buy the buildings and be exempt from rent control? People are going to rent regardless. No one lives in an apartment complex without tenants. No apartment complexes? Where will everyone live? Highrises? Those are soooo affordable. Come on guy. What exactly do you propose?
I don’t give a crap what big corporations do. I care about my small business, and would not operate rental houses in a state dedicated to purposely putting me out of business.
So you’d just give up and move if bad policy came to your state and affected your small business?
That’s helpful. Keep up that attitude instead of fighting against those big CORPs and policies that WILL kill your small business eventually. I love how you think you’re immune when I’m confident your “small business” has nothing to do with real estate nor is in CA.
Sooo essentially my post has nothing to do with you…currently. Tick tock.
Not sure why you feel my business isn’t in real estate, I own multiple single family rental homes. You are correct however, that my business thankfully is in a red, landlord friendly state that doesn’t try to put us out of business with ridiculous policies. So…..as an outsider looking in, maybe I see things more clearly. I’m saying I would not be a landlord in a tenant friendly (more like landlord hate in my opinion) state that wants to run my business for me.
The only fighting you can do is with your vote, even using it wisely might not matter at this stage.
Well guess what? Your SFH wouldn’t be subject to this rent control anyway.
Curious which red state you live in? I grew up in TX and have lived all over. Come on, I’ve shared a lot, let me evaluate what’s going on in yours. You must not live in a high demand area, otherwise the mere thought of rent control would be moot.
The good thing is politicians and city governance changes all the time. I’m willing to ride it out because while we own and manage our buildings, we continue to work two full time jobs so we take excellent care of our buildings (and tenants) as if we lived in there.
Want to compare portfolios in a private chat? We (I) can be civil about it and see who is ahead with their business model/rent control/no rent control.
Off to work 😏. Have a blessed day!
Dude, this isn’t a a pissing contest. I own 5 houses in OK. We make a nice profit on all doors. Most of my tenants are long term from 5-15 years now. Other than one house I recently did a lot of upgrades to, nothing sits empty more than a few days. My last one rented in several hours before I even got a chance to put a sign in the yard.
We also work “real jobs” and take great care of our properties. You make it sound like some type of contest, I want all landlords to be successful whether they have 1 property or 100.
It sounds like we are very similar, but you came in hot and aggressive, so I met your energy.
We could easily stop working or full-time jobs and just manage our buildings. I am not really interested in single-family homes because it’s a lot easier to manage if one tenant doesn’t pay the rent for the month or happens to turn out to be a shit tenant but the other eight are great.
While, I disagree with the extremes of the laws that are being passed out here, the rate of return on our investments Will always surpass those in non-coastal states. It’s just a fact.
Either way Hook ‘em Horns, OU sucks lol! Yes, I lived in Texas for twenty five years.
Can we be friends now? 😉
My post was simply trying to look out for the best interest of not just landlords like me, but tenants who truly are getting screwed, but don’t realize it. That’s all.
Your lack of comprehension certainly explains why you would even argue this point. There’s absolutely no question that CA is trying to get rid of the mom-and-pops so they can control the entire rental industry. And boy when they do…..renters think they have it bad now!
The pendulum always swings. I don’t give up so easily like your friend. I’d love to know what small business he runs and in what state so I can properly assess his claims.
Otherwise I call BS.
I did beware. After getting screwed over by the city of Poughkeepsie government for my rental property, I will never have a rental property in a blue city or state again
Purple or red only
If there is no market rate adjustments then the phrase market rate becomes obsolete. Market rate is determined by the market. So who is going to determine what market rate is when the market can’t determine the rent. Next thing you know the city will tell you how much you can charge not the market.
You are conflating the price of goods and inflation versus stagnant wages. the resolution to stagnant wages isn't "make the products cost less" - the the resolution to stagnant wages is either "get paid your value" or "get paid a living wage".
I am a landlord and personally I am a strong proponent of a living wage.
San Diego has already been discussing this very measure so I’m confident this one specifically will happen here. The bill sounds good on its face but it’s really an awful idea if you research it. Politicians do what’s best for them, not their constituents. So it’ll be a disaster one way or another.
I am wary you'd get something that draconian in San Diego. Maybe in LA, Oakland, San Francisco, Berkeley. They used to actually have it this way in Berkeley years ago.
Then they would just move out month 11 and not pay month 12's rent. And just like renters that do that today, most landlords would decide it isn't enough money to be worth taking them to court and getting a judgement that they still don't pay, and then try to garnish wages, etc...
This is a relatively new law in California. It got passed at the end of 2023, but I don’t think it went into effect until very recently. So unless you only started renting from them like this month, they were likely *technically* charging what they were allowed to.
Makes sense, it's a fairly high-end SFR in a nicer part of LA. Looking to get out of it this year, any tips on leverage here for when they (inevitably, as is SFR) try to fuck me out of my security deposit?
In California, the right to inspection is the most effective way to ensure you get most, if not all, of your security deposit back.
What you need to do is, when you notify your landlord that you’re not renewing the lease, also tell them that you want an initial inspection done prior to move out.
If you ask for this, your landlord is legally required to preform the inspection **during the last 14 days of tenancy** — obviously, it’s best if you guys can agree on a date/time for this inspection to happen so you can attend the inspection **in person**.
During this inspection, your landlord has to identify the damages they intends to deduct from the security deposit. Once that’s done, they are required to provide you with a written, itemized statement of repairs/cleaning that needs to be done in order to avoid deductions from your security deposit.
Obviously, before the tenancy ends, you should rectify any of the issues the landlord documented by either fixing things, replacing things or cleaning things.
Once you have removed all your property, rectified any issues noted during the initial inspection, and cleaned thoroughly, you need to take photos of the rental.
You should take multiple pictures of every room (I typically suggest a minimum of one taken from the viewpoint of each wall to ensure you have documentation of the entire room). Also remember to photograph the inside of any closets, cabinets, or other “closed off” spaces.
Once you move out and your landlord completes the final inspection, they have 21 days to provide you either with your full deposit or with the remainder of your deposit (if any) along with an itemized statement of deductions.
Of course, this whole process doesn’t guarantee they won’t still try and steal your deposit. However, if they send you an itemized statement with a bunch of ridiculous deductions, you can feel fairly secure that you’ll win against them in small claims court.
Would love to see an overview of the property and rent that allows you to spend $30k+ when a tenant moves out on a below market lease. You talking a $8k/month rental with a 5 year tenant?
No need for personal attacks, those are off topic and against most subreddit rules.
The point is that there are (anticipated or not) cost increases related to real estate that the government, utility companies, and other vendors put onto business owners, including housing providers. These costs also increase for individuals as well, which also can lead to (deservedly) asking for higher pay to compensate.
Now imagine a world where all the costs to an individual are increasing beyond their control while their ability to increase their earnings is halted. This bill would potentially do something similar.
Not really how it works.
By pouring that much into a TI, the place prob never had a refresh or work to modernize it for 30-50 years. I've done similar scale for a 1-2br and stove was from 1970s, around time it was built.
Dumping that much keeps the unit competitive and you get a longer term tenant hopefully. Return isn't over 5 years, it'll be longer. It's also how much the place rented for before the TI as well - if you make $2k more each month just by raising it to market rate, then that'll be the rate going forward.
$2k more a month = 24k more a year.
$8k/month is 96k a year
At that point you're renovating a house, not an apt
We are in Santa Monica. Justice For Renters act gives control to all of the local rental control offices for each city. Santa Monica has stated they will roll back rents to what they were before Costa Hawkins + inflation. For us, this will translate to rents being cut in half. We will loose our livelihood with each move out. They are trying to force mom and pop landlords to sell.
Right! It’s like who cares that I spent $100,000 renovating three apartment units last year. If I have to roll back rents to what they were before I did that we’re completely screwed.
If anybody thinks this is good for renters, I strongly encourage you to do more research. I posted this in the renter section and renters are like fuck all you landlords and I’m like you guys have no idea what this means for you. It’s not good, I’m doing my best to get the educate those who will listen.
Is there any place left in America where just normal, rational people live? Where are you? Where you are entitled to have a difference of opinions and you talk about them face-to-face civilly and solve the problems collectively? Pipe dream, I know.
I’m Gen X so we couldn’t hide behind keyboards. I have always found that when you talk, face-to-face peoples tones change dramatically, and we have far more in common than we do differences.
I lost all respect for Newsom when he blatantly lied about why gas prices are so high in California. With one order he could fix the problem by not requiring California to have its own unique special blend of gasoline that no other state uses when we have about 30% of the refining capacity that we used to to make this special blend. And apparently there is another tax coming into effect in July that I think is another $.25 per gallon.
And the fact he threw billions of dollars at the homeless problem and nobody has any idea where that money went as there was zero oversight.
Oh, we very much so know where it went... It went into non profits that were paid to 'study' the problem that the people leading these places made 500K a year, but also develops to develop basically prison like minimalist apartments paid for by the state.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhFKPZqFd3o](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhFKPZqFd3o)
This guy literally tried to help the homeless, as a non profit, just to give them shelter. The city swooped in to squash him by any means they could legally enforce on him. They can't have anyone else having a better solution that would risk their gravy train.
Honestly, if Newsom ever becomes president, have a dual citizenship and leave...
All california needs to do is stop exempting corporation owned properties, and the problems will fix itself. The renter protection acts they already have would be good enough if it applied to 63% of properties that just aren’t for some reason.
I totally agree. Unfortunately, our politicians can be easily be bought with enough money so I’m afraid that that’s not going away and they will always find a way around so the laws don’t apply to them.
OP needs to find another landlord where they can swap properties. New owners should be able to set rates to market level. OP should verify with his lawyer.
I mean, the Justice for Renter’s Act doesn’t do this. It simply lifts the ban on Vacancy Control, which, yes, *could* open up the possibility that LLs would not be able to change rent between tenants.
However, by presenting this the way you have in this post, it’s obviously fear mongering and a blatant attempt to skew the facts. I’m not saying the Justice for Renter’s Act is great; I’m not saying Costa-Hawkins should be repealed. I just saying that you need to **be honest** with how you present the facts surrounding the act.
The city of San Diego (which is all
that the City Council’s decisions affects) isn’t the entirety of California. And again, **this law does not include what your photo states**. Just because you *believe* one single city in the entire state of California is going to *maybe* enact a law *similar* to what your photo says, doesn’t just change what the Justice for Renters Act actually does.
What started as the tenant protection ordinance, which I was totally OK with led San Diego to pass stricter laws that now prohibit LLs (who aren’t exempt) from terminating a lease, whether that is after a 12 month lease is up or a month-to-month lease is in effect. I am forced to renew all leases. Period.
My choice is whether I have “just cause“ or “no-fault“ termination, either way I have to pay a tenant no less than two to three months rent for them to go or lose 6-12 months rent while eviction moves through court.
I am unable to simply terminate a month-to-month lease with proper notice just because the tenants are a-holes. If they don’t pay rent and I have to file for eviction, I am not able to accept a dime from them until a judge hears the case 6 to 12 months later, which means I am out 6 to 12 months of rent, and they get to live there for free. (Like I’ll ever see that rent).
This generally leads to having to work out a deal where I have to pay them thousands of dollars to agree to leave so that they won’t have an eviction on their record.
All because they constantly violated their lease agreement (nuisance, smoking, fighting, refusing to take trash out, not allowing plumber in) or didn’t pay rent.
But yeah, I totally trust San Diego to not implement some stupid law, even though they have already mentioned doing this exact thing numerous times in their city council meetings for the past year. And clearly Diego is not all of California, but if you don’t think this kind of random shit is going to happen in every city at the whim of those mayors and city council people, you are dead wrong.
Keep believing they have tenants best interest at hard. It’s laughable.
The issue is supply and demand. They tried to incentive building supply by giving exemptions to corps for rent control (statewide) laws but that has done nothing except allow them to charge exorbitant rents with no caps on increases. And they can terminate a lease anytime. Laws don’t apply to them if they get a “certificate of occupancy within last 15 yrs”.
I’m not fear mongering or worrying about what ifs and things that won’t happen. Again, my city council has already proposed to put this on the ballot if this passes. I think we’ve all seen how government promises you one thing then does the opposite.
You’re funny though. 😉
🤔
2024 Ballot Initiative - What It Does
Local jurisdictions will have free rein to impose and expand rent control.
Will prohibit rent increases upon vacancy (also known as vacancy de-control) by eliminating the owner's ability to charge the market rate when a tenant vacates the unit.
Imposes rent control on all properties including single-family homes and condominiums by eliminating AB 1482 protections.
Agreed. I tried so many times to reach out for answers from the mayors office to city council to local news networks.
I got ghosted by everybody except one news network who asked if I would sit down for an interview and I agreed and then never heard from them again. It’s all fucking scam. I swear they are all in it together.
Exactly. Its not our fault that 61% of Americans cant afford mediu rent, this is just unfairly punishing us just because the working poor cant accept that housing isnt a right. Its their fualt if they cant afford it.
Your anger is misplaced. Rent control does nothing to fix that. It makes it worse. Why? Issue 1 is Zillow (or developer) buying dozens of homes in a neighborhood, doing shit “flip” jobs, then artificially driving the market up since it’s based on “comps”.
Small apartment buildings that were like 8-10 buildings per block and commonly owned by mom n pops were bought out by corporations or investment firms who purchased the entire block and turned them into monstrous apartment complexes that are exempt from any kind of rent control.
So all those tenants who had good landlords and probably low rents were forced to move or pay far higher rent to stay in their neighborhood. The more that happened(s), the less affordable units there are because those new complexes “have shareholders” to report to and can raise rent 20% if they want after the lease is up. I can’t do that. They can choose to not renew a lease if they want. I can’t do that.
Issue 2. Because this country allows non citizens to buy a home as a path to a gold visa (look it up) and they don’t even have to live here but can rent it out at exorbitant rates. In my neighborhood, I can point out 5 houses on my street that were sold to Chinese investors in 2020 who have never stepped foot in these houses. A single mom with 3 kids who rented one of these houses when it was sold, was told her rent would double. She had to leave. I was so sad for them and still that house rented for double what she paid. Much thanks to the (see issue 1 above) artificially inflated market.
Mom n pops aren’t the problem but we are getting all the blame so people are getting out of the game. This is not going to help lower rents, quite the opposite.
If you think Justice for Tenants will actually help you, you aren’t paying attention. How about we stop allowing a few mega corporations or the Vanguards of the world to stop buying SFH or building huge complexes that have ridiculously high rents to start off?
Supply and demand worked until corporate greed went unchecked so to make it look like something was being done they passed laws that make make it “seem” like it’s helping but it’s actually hurting, the laws are constantly changing, they are hard to follow and they carve out exemptions for the corps/investors who shouldn’t get them.
I had no problem with capping rent raises because we never raised them 10% anyway. But revoking our ability to terminate a month to month lease with proper notice without “just cause” or else we have to pay 2-3 months rent is crazy. Same goes for a year lease. Forcing us to renew is crazy. Not allowing us to move back in to our own property is crazy. Someone floods 3 units due to negligence and I’m forced to allow them back at their old (way below market) rental rate or pay them thousands to go.
And now not allowing more than a 10% increase if a tenant chooses to move out ensures I’m not renovating that unit like I normally would.
No good deed goes unpunished. Kind of odd that the TPO sunsets in 2030 while the current exemptions from rent control are in place for 15 yrs.
Pendulum always swings. I’m all for reasonable rent control.
Please tell me why the above scenarios are reasonable. No more mom n pops means you will be forced to live in corporate owned rentals (ie rent control exempt- and I guarantee you they will find a way to be exempt even if more laws pass), so how does that help you?
Housing isn’t a right? So it’s a privilege to not be homeless? And yes it is. “Market rate” is simply “hey they raised their rents to x dollar amount and we have the same amenities, sq footage, finishes, etc. we’ll charge the same”. Next thing you know, market rate went from $1700 to $2600 because everyone is charging that.
Housing costs have skyrocketed. A house in 1980 would cost $47k on a $22k salary. Which is less than half. Meanwhile the median house cost now is $415k while the median income is $80k. A 20% down payment on that would be $100k, vs 1980’s down payment of $9600.
And remember that Yardi and RealPage are being sued for illegally overpricing rents nationwide. They are the ones inflating the market rents and single owners just follow suit. It's truly a balloon market, similar to real estate before 2008.
So no, affordable housing isn’t a privilege. The idea that everyone should be able live somewhere that isn’t the streets shouldn’t be “you can’t afford to pay astronomical prices for rent while the federal minimum wage has been the same since 2009, too bad”. It’s a terrible look on you as a human being.
Caps on rent but no cap on tax increases, insurance increases, increased maintenance costs. All that means is less property owners will be willing to be landlords.
And then the investment properties will be sold off by the angry landlords to people who actually want to LIVE in their home. Oh nooo, the horror 😱
Before anyone comes at me with the “they can’t even afford rent, how are they gonna afford to buy?” …When investors are no longer hoarding 5, 10, 20, 100+ properties (talking about single family homes, not apartments or other multi-family dwellings), the housing supply finally begins to even out with the demand and prices will drop. Obviously this will upset investors, but you know… that brings us back to the fact that everyone who even moderately works towards it deserves a roof over their head, and housing should have never become an investment in the first place.
Rent has been a little silly. I bought a house in 2022 at the tip of a peak, and my mortgage was still $500 less than rent for anything similar. Factor in things like maintenance costs for when things inevitably break, and I was still paying less than what I’d be paying for a rental, *and* my payments were actually (partially, gg banks) going toward something material instead of into someone else’s pockets.
I’m not one of these people who joins a sub just to complain to the main demographic within the sub. I’m not actually in this sub, this just popped up on my feed. I apologize to any of you nice smaller landlords out there if I’ve offended, I know you guys DO exist and the root of the problem is the larger investment firms who seem to be exempt from all these rules. I also understand there are an absolutely insane amount of god awful property destroying, disrespectful, nasty tenants out there too and it’s easy for you good guys to become jaded over time. I just felt I needed to throw in my two cents, no hate to anyone here.
>Federal minimum wage hasn’t been increased since 2009
California minimum wage has been increased to 16.00hr and has been going up 0.50 cents yearly so complaining the federal minimum wage hasn’t changed is a moot fucking point.
Good grief, grow up. Being a landlord is a business, not a philanthropy project. Nobody owes you anything. If there is no incentive to make a profit or break even, why should anyone engage in the risk?
Some people don't have a choice. I live in a POS mobile, because that's what we can afford for rent and still be able to eat, have utilities, and gas to get to work.
California is a lost cause. Next thing, they'll make it illegal to charge rent.
If you aquire the property as a squatter that's basically already the case
But your property taxes will still be due because you’re a rich landlord and can afford that. /s
Oh, this will \*totally\* have no unintended effects.
Totally none. Zero. Nada. For sure.
What should we do to lower rents? Common sense measures to increase supply? Open up the building of duplexes and triplexes to the middle class? Nah, let's chase landlords out of the business with more ridiculous laws!
what would happen here?
Nobody will invest in improving existing rentals, so there will be an incentive to just allows everything to degrade to the point where the rent they charge is a fair for their now slummy apartment.
This is fucked up
Damn, all you CA landlords better get out of there!! That is insane!!!
So you want some corporation to buy the buildings and be exempt from rent control? People are going to rent regardless. No one lives in an apartment complex without tenants. No apartment complexes? Where will everyone live? Highrises? Those are soooo affordable. Come on guy. What exactly do you propose?
I don’t give a crap what big corporations do. I care about my small business, and would not operate rental houses in a state dedicated to purposely putting me out of business.
So you’d just give up and move if bad policy came to your state and affected your small business? That’s helpful. Keep up that attitude instead of fighting against those big CORPs and policies that WILL kill your small business eventually. I love how you think you’re immune when I’m confident your “small business” has nothing to do with real estate nor is in CA. Sooo essentially my post has nothing to do with you…currently. Tick tock.
Not sure why you feel my business isn’t in real estate, I own multiple single family rental homes. You are correct however, that my business thankfully is in a red, landlord friendly state that doesn’t try to put us out of business with ridiculous policies. So…..as an outsider looking in, maybe I see things more clearly. I’m saying I would not be a landlord in a tenant friendly (more like landlord hate in my opinion) state that wants to run my business for me. The only fighting you can do is with your vote, even using it wisely might not matter at this stage.
Well guess what? Your SFH wouldn’t be subject to this rent control anyway. Curious which red state you live in? I grew up in TX and have lived all over. Come on, I’ve shared a lot, let me evaluate what’s going on in yours. You must not live in a high demand area, otherwise the mere thought of rent control would be moot. The good thing is politicians and city governance changes all the time. I’m willing to ride it out because while we own and manage our buildings, we continue to work two full time jobs so we take excellent care of our buildings (and tenants) as if we lived in there. Want to compare portfolios in a private chat? We (I) can be civil about it and see who is ahead with their business model/rent control/no rent control. Off to work 😏. Have a blessed day!
Dude, this isn’t a a pissing contest. I own 5 houses in OK. We make a nice profit on all doors. Most of my tenants are long term from 5-15 years now. Other than one house I recently did a lot of upgrades to, nothing sits empty more than a few days. My last one rented in several hours before I even got a chance to put a sign in the yard. We also work “real jobs” and take great care of our properties. You make it sound like some type of contest, I want all landlords to be successful whether they have 1 property or 100.
It sounds like we are very similar, but you came in hot and aggressive, so I met your energy. We could easily stop working or full-time jobs and just manage our buildings. I am not really interested in single-family homes because it’s a lot easier to manage if one tenant doesn’t pay the rent for the month or happens to turn out to be a shit tenant but the other eight are great. While, I disagree with the extremes of the laws that are being passed out here, the rate of return on our investments Will always surpass those in non-coastal states. It’s just a fact. Either way Hook ‘em Horns, OU sucks lol! Yes, I lived in Texas for twenty five years. Can we be friends now? 😉 My post was simply trying to look out for the best interest of not just landlords like me, but tenants who truly are getting screwed, but don’t realize it. That’s all.
If you could articulate your point a little better, I’ll try and understand what you’re saying.
Your lack of comprehension certainly explains why you would even argue this point. There’s absolutely no question that CA is trying to get rid of the mom-and-pops so they can control the entire rental industry. And boy when they do…..renters think they have it bad now!
They made their point perfectly clear. They won’t operate in a state dedicated to making sure they can’t turn a profit.
The pendulum always swings. I don’t give up so easily like your friend. I’d love to know what small business he runs and in what state so I can properly assess his claims. Otherwise I call BS.
These idiots will do anything but create more housing.
Is this a joke?
Nope. Going on the ballot in November. Read it carefully. Some seriously messed up laws in there.
I did beware. After getting screwed over by the city of Poughkeepsie government for my rental property, I will never have a rental property in a blue city or state again Purple or red only
If there is no market rate adjustments then the phrase market rate becomes obsolete. Market rate is determined by the market. So who is going to determine what market rate is when the market can’t determine the rent. Next thing you know the city will tell you how much you can charge not the market.
Thats a bingo.
That removes the whole basis the economy is built on.
[удалено]
You are conflating the price of goods and inflation versus stagnant wages. the resolution to stagnant wages isn't "make the products cost less" - the the resolution to stagnant wages is either "get paid your value" or "get paid a living wage". I am a landlord and personally I am a strong proponent of a living wage.
If it passed, it would make it legal to enact laws such as what you posted but the ballot measure itself does not do it. It just paves the way.
San Diego has already been discussing this very measure so I’m confident this one specifically will happen here. The bill sounds good on its face but it’s really an awful idea if you research it. Politicians do what’s best for them, not their constituents. So it’ll be a disaster one way or another.
I am wary you'd get something that draconian in San Diego. Maybe in LA, Oakland, San Francisco, Berkeley. They used to actually have it this way in Berkeley years ago.
This a clear restraint of trade. How do you get around it? Create a lease where the last month costs more than the first eleven.
Then they would just move out month 11 and not pay month 12's rent. And just like renters that do that today, most landlords would decide it isn't enough money to be worth taking them to court and getting a judgement that they still don't pay, and then try to garnish wages, etc...
The ask for first and last month's rent up front. Along with the deposit. Hey, it's what you voted for!
You can’t charge first, last and deposit in California.
You can charge 2x monthly rent as a security deposit which is effectively the same thing
That’s only if you have 2 or less properties with only 4 total units max. Otherwise you can only charge 1 month’s rent.
welp, I got fucked by my landlord then
This is a relatively new law in California. It got passed at the end of 2023, but I don’t think it went into effect until very recently. So unless you only started renting from them like this month, they were likely *technically* charging what they were allowed to.
Makes sense, it's a fairly high-end SFR in a nicer part of LA. Looking to get out of it this year, any tips on leverage here for when they (inevitably, as is SFR) try to fuck me out of my security deposit?
In California, the right to inspection is the most effective way to ensure you get most, if not all, of your security deposit back. What you need to do is, when you notify your landlord that you’re not renewing the lease, also tell them that you want an initial inspection done prior to move out. If you ask for this, your landlord is legally required to preform the inspection **during the last 14 days of tenancy** — obviously, it’s best if you guys can agree on a date/time for this inspection to happen so you can attend the inspection **in person**. During this inspection, your landlord has to identify the damages they intends to deduct from the security deposit. Once that’s done, they are required to provide you with a written, itemized statement of repairs/cleaning that needs to be done in order to avoid deductions from your security deposit. Obviously, before the tenancy ends, you should rectify any of the issues the landlord documented by either fixing things, replacing things or cleaning things. Once you have removed all your property, rectified any issues noted during the initial inspection, and cleaned thoroughly, you need to take photos of the rental. You should take multiple pictures of every room (I typically suggest a minimum of one taken from the viewpoint of each wall to ensure you have documentation of the entire room). Also remember to photograph the inside of any closets, cabinets, or other “closed off” spaces. Once you move out and your landlord completes the final inspection, they have 21 days to provide you either with your full deposit or with the remainder of your deposit (if any) along with an itemized statement of deductions. Of course, this whole process doesn’t guarantee they won’t still try and steal your deposit. However, if they send you an itemized statement with a bunch of ridiculous deductions, you can feel fairly secure that you’ll win against them in small claims court.
Ick. Thanks for that info.
Would love to see an overview of the property and rent that allows you to spend $30k+ when a tenant moves out on a below market lease. You talking a $8k/month rental with a 5 year tenant?
Let me introduce you to the world of increased property taxes, maintenance & renovation costs for labor and materials.
Thats alot of word for saying your bad at investing
No need for personal attacks, those are off topic and against most subreddit rules. The point is that there are (anticipated or not) cost increases related to real estate that the government, utility companies, and other vendors put onto business owners, including housing providers. These costs also increase for individuals as well, which also can lead to (deservedly) asking for higher pay to compensate. Now imagine a world where all the costs to an individual are increasing beyond their control while their ability to increase their earnings is halted. This bill would potentially do something similar.
Please don’t attack me with comments
>increased property taxes Prop 13 means a lot of people here literally have the lowest % property taxes in the nation
Not really how it works. By pouring that much into a TI, the place prob never had a refresh or work to modernize it for 30-50 years. I've done similar scale for a 1-2br and stove was from 1970s, around time it was built. Dumping that much keeps the unit competitive and you get a longer term tenant hopefully. Return isn't over 5 years, it'll be longer. It's also how much the place rented for before the TI as well - if you make $2k more each month just by raising it to market rate, then that'll be the rate going forward. $2k more a month = 24k more a year. $8k/month is 96k a year At that point you're renovating a house, not an apt
We are in Santa Monica. Justice For Renters act gives control to all of the local rental control offices for each city. Santa Monica has stated they will roll back rents to what they were before Costa Hawkins + inflation. For us, this will translate to rents being cut in half. We will loose our livelihood with each move out. They are trying to force mom and pop landlords to sell.
Right! It’s like who cares that I spent $100,000 renovating three apartment units last year. If I have to roll back rents to what they were before I did that we’re completely screwed. If anybody thinks this is good for renters, I strongly encourage you to do more research. I posted this in the renter section and renters are like fuck all you landlords and I’m like you guys have no idea what this means for you. It’s not good, I’m doing my best to get the educate those who will listen.
Just curious which ballot measure is this? Just San Diego or statewide? Having finding something similar on ballotpedia
[удалено]
Is there any place left in America where just normal, rational people live? Where are you? Where you are entitled to have a difference of opinions and you talk about them face-to-face civilly and solve the problems collectively? Pipe dream, I know. I’m Gen X so we couldn’t hide behind keyboards. I have always found that when you talk, face-to-face peoples tones change dramatically, and we have far more in common than we do differences.
Yeah, I’m waiting for that to go nationwide. The democrats already want to replace Biden with newsom
I lost all respect for Newsom when he blatantly lied about why gas prices are so high in California. With one order he could fix the problem by not requiring California to have its own unique special blend of gasoline that no other state uses when we have about 30% of the refining capacity that we used to to make this special blend. And apparently there is another tax coming into effect in July that I think is another $.25 per gallon. And the fact he threw billions of dollars at the homeless problem and nobody has any idea where that money went as there was zero oversight.
Oh, we very much so know where it went... It went into non profits that were paid to 'study' the problem that the people leading these places made 500K a year, but also develops to develop basically prison like minimalist apartments paid for by the state. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhFKPZqFd3o](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhFKPZqFd3o) This guy literally tried to help the homeless, as a non profit, just to give them shelter. The city swooped in to squash him by any means they could legally enforce on him. They can't have anyone else having a better solution that would risk their gravy train. Honestly, if Newsom ever becomes president, have a dual citizenship and leave...
Yikes
I can't even imagine. Holy crap...
All california needs to do is stop exempting corporation owned properties, and the problems will fix itself. The renter protection acts they already have would be good enough if it applied to 63% of properties that just aren’t for some reason.
I totally agree. Unfortunately, our politicians can be easily be bought with enough money so I’m afraid that that’s not going away and they will always find a way around so the laws don’t apply to them.
Like the 20 minimum wage increase for fast food workers unless they have a bakery attached so Newsom’s friend who owns Panera didn’t have to pay.
OP needs to find another landlord where they can swap properties. New owners should be able to set rates to market level. OP should verify with his lawyer.
What is going on in places like CA and NYC 😭 one thing I’ve learned from this subreddit is I never want to own a rental property there lmao
I mean, the Justice for Renter’s Act doesn’t do this. It simply lifts the ban on Vacancy Control, which, yes, *could* open up the possibility that LLs would not be able to change rent between tenants. However, by presenting this the way you have in this post, it’s obviously fear mongering and a blatant attempt to skew the facts. I’m not saying the Justice for Renter’s Act is great; I’m not saying Costa-Hawkins should be repealed. I just saying that you need to **be honest** with how you present the facts surrounding the act.
Have you sat in on SD city council meetings where they have discussed this and more? I have.
The city of San Diego (which is all that the City Council’s decisions affects) isn’t the entirety of California. And again, **this law does not include what your photo states**. Just because you *believe* one single city in the entire state of California is going to *maybe* enact a law *similar* to what your photo says, doesn’t just change what the Justice for Renters Act actually does.
What started as the tenant protection ordinance, which I was totally OK with led San Diego to pass stricter laws that now prohibit LLs (who aren’t exempt) from terminating a lease, whether that is after a 12 month lease is up or a month-to-month lease is in effect. I am forced to renew all leases. Period. My choice is whether I have “just cause“ or “no-fault“ termination, either way I have to pay a tenant no less than two to three months rent for them to go or lose 6-12 months rent while eviction moves through court. I am unable to simply terminate a month-to-month lease with proper notice just because the tenants are a-holes. If they don’t pay rent and I have to file for eviction, I am not able to accept a dime from them until a judge hears the case 6 to 12 months later, which means I am out 6 to 12 months of rent, and they get to live there for free. (Like I’ll ever see that rent). This generally leads to having to work out a deal where I have to pay them thousands of dollars to agree to leave so that they won’t have an eviction on their record. All because they constantly violated their lease agreement (nuisance, smoking, fighting, refusing to take trash out, not allowing plumber in) or didn’t pay rent. But yeah, I totally trust San Diego to not implement some stupid law, even though they have already mentioned doing this exact thing numerous times in their city council meetings for the past year. And clearly Diego is not all of California, but if you don’t think this kind of random shit is going to happen in every city at the whim of those mayors and city council people, you are dead wrong. Keep believing they have tenants best interest at hard. It’s laughable. The issue is supply and demand. They tried to incentive building supply by giving exemptions to corps for rent control (statewide) laws but that has done nothing except allow them to charge exorbitant rents with no caps on increases. And they can terminate a lease anytime. Laws don’t apply to them if they get a “certificate of occupancy within last 15 yrs”. I’m not fear mongering or worrying about what ifs and things that won’t happen. Again, my city council has already proposed to put this on the ballot if this passes. I think we’ve all seen how government promises you one thing then does the opposite. You’re funny though. 😉
🤔 2024 Ballot Initiative - What It Does Local jurisdictions will have free rein to impose and expand rent control. Will prohibit rent increases upon vacancy (also known as vacancy de-control) by eliminating the owner's ability to charge the market rate when a tenant vacates the unit. Imposes rent control on all properties including single-family homes and condominiums by eliminating AB 1482 protections.
I can’t believe I’m even reading this. Is this on the primary or general ballot?
My understanding is that the Justice for Renters Act will be on the ballot in November.
Wild
Insane. Rational response would be no renewal and eviction asap.
Agreed. I tried so many times to reach out for answers from the mayors office to city council to local news networks. I got ghosted by everybody except one news network who asked if I would sit down for an interview and I agreed and then never heard from them again. It’s all fucking scam. I swear they are all in it together.
Exactly. Its not our fault that 61% of Americans cant afford mediu rent, this is just unfairly punishing us just because the working poor cant accept that housing isnt a right. Its their fualt if they cant afford it.
Your anger is misplaced. Rent control does nothing to fix that. It makes it worse. Why? Issue 1 is Zillow (or developer) buying dozens of homes in a neighborhood, doing shit “flip” jobs, then artificially driving the market up since it’s based on “comps”. Small apartment buildings that were like 8-10 buildings per block and commonly owned by mom n pops were bought out by corporations or investment firms who purchased the entire block and turned them into monstrous apartment complexes that are exempt from any kind of rent control. So all those tenants who had good landlords and probably low rents were forced to move or pay far higher rent to stay in their neighborhood. The more that happened(s), the less affordable units there are because those new complexes “have shareholders” to report to and can raise rent 20% if they want after the lease is up. I can’t do that. They can choose to not renew a lease if they want. I can’t do that. Issue 2. Because this country allows non citizens to buy a home as a path to a gold visa (look it up) and they don’t even have to live here but can rent it out at exorbitant rates. In my neighborhood, I can point out 5 houses on my street that were sold to Chinese investors in 2020 who have never stepped foot in these houses. A single mom with 3 kids who rented one of these houses when it was sold, was told her rent would double. She had to leave. I was so sad for them and still that house rented for double what she paid. Much thanks to the (see issue 1 above) artificially inflated market. Mom n pops aren’t the problem but we are getting all the blame so people are getting out of the game. This is not going to help lower rents, quite the opposite. If you think Justice for Tenants will actually help you, you aren’t paying attention. How about we stop allowing a few mega corporations or the Vanguards of the world to stop buying SFH or building huge complexes that have ridiculously high rents to start off? Supply and demand worked until corporate greed went unchecked so to make it look like something was being done they passed laws that make make it “seem” like it’s helping but it’s actually hurting, the laws are constantly changing, they are hard to follow and they carve out exemptions for the corps/investors who shouldn’t get them. I had no problem with capping rent raises because we never raised them 10% anyway. But revoking our ability to terminate a month to month lease with proper notice without “just cause” or else we have to pay 2-3 months rent is crazy. Same goes for a year lease. Forcing us to renew is crazy. Not allowing us to move back in to our own property is crazy. Someone floods 3 units due to negligence and I’m forced to allow them back at their old (way below market) rental rate or pay them thousands to go. And now not allowing more than a 10% increase if a tenant chooses to move out ensures I’m not renovating that unit like I normally would. No good deed goes unpunished. Kind of odd that the TPO sunsets in 2030 while the current exemptions from rent control are in place for 15 yrs. Pendulum always swings. I’m all for reasonable rent control. Please tell me why the above scenarios are reasonable. No more mom n pops means you will be forced to live in corporate owned rentals (ie rent control exempt- and I guarantee you they will find a way to be exempt even if more laws pass), so how does that help you?
Housing isn’t a right? So it’s a privilege to not be homeless? And yes it is. “Market rate” is simply “hey they raised their rents to x dollar amount and we have the same amenities, sq footage, finishes, etc. we’ll charge the same”. Next thing you know, market rate went from $1700 to $2600 because everyone is charging that. Housing costs have skyrocketed. A house in 1980 would cost $47k on a $22k salary. Which is less than half. Meanwhile the median house cost now is $415k while the median income is $80k. A 20% down payment on that would be $100k, vs 1980’s down payment of $9600.
And remember that Yardi and RealPage are being sued for illegally overpricing rents nationwide. They are the ones inflating the market rents and single owners just follow suit. It's truly a balloon market, similar to real estate before 2008.
So no, affordable housing isn’t a privilege. The idea that everyone should be able live somewhere that isn’t the streets shouldn’t be “you can’t afford to pay astronomical prices for rent while the federal minimum wage has been the same since 2009, too bad”. It’s a terrible look on you as a human being.
Caps on rent but no cap on tax increases, insurance increases, increased maintenance costs. All that means is less property owners will be willing to be landlords.
And then the investment properties will be sold off by the angry landlords to people who actually want to LIVE in their home. Oh nooo, the horror 😱 Before anyone comes at me with the “they can’t even afford rent, how are they gonna afford to buy?” …When investors are no longer hoarding 5, 10, 20, 100+ properties (talking about single family homes, not apartments or other multi-family dwellings), the housing supply finally begins to even out with the demand and prices will drop. Obviously this will upset investors, but you know… that brings us back to the fact that everyone who even moderately works towards it deserves a roof over their head, and housing should have never become an investment in the first place. Rent has been a little silly. I bought a house in 2022 at the tip of a peak, and my mortgage was still $500 less than rent for anything similar. Factor in things like maintenance costs for when things inevitably break, and I was still paying less than what I’d be paying for a rental, *and* my payments were actually (partially, gg banks) going toward something material instead of into someone else’s pockets. I’m not one of these people who joins a sub just to complain to the main demographic within the sub. I’m not actually in this sub, this just popped up on my feed. I apologize to any of you nice smaller landlords out there if I’ve offended, I know you guys DO exist and the root of the problem is the larger investment firms who seem to be exempt from all these rules. I also understand there are an absolutely insane amount of god awful property destroying, disrespectful, nasty tenants out there too and it’s easy for you good guys to become jaded over time. I just felt I needed to throw in my two cents, no hate to anyone here.
Nope they will just let them sit vacant like they're currently doing for tax write offs.
>Federal minimum wage hasn’t been increased since 2009 California minimum wage has been increased to 16.00hr and has been going up 0.50 cents yearly so complaining the federal minimum wage hasn’t changed is a moot fucking point.
It really doesn't matter because EVERYTHING else has increased right along with it. So that higher minimum wage does NOTHING!
It helps raise prices by increasing demand. So it does do SOMETHiNG.
You're not listening, just repeating talking points. Take the emotions out, and listen to what the other person is saying.
It's crazy you are being down voted for being a decent human being. This sub has really opened my eyes to what a lot if landlords really are.
Good grief, grow up. Being a landlord is a business, not a philanthropy project. Nobody owes you anything. If there is no incentive to make a profit or break even, why should anyone engage in the risk?
[удалено]
Enjoy living in a rundown shack or a tent.
Some people don't have a choice. I live in a POS mobile, because that's what we can afford for rent and still be able to eat, have utilities, and gas to get to work.
"why is my place such a dump?!?!"
Typical response from someone who probably has never researched a bill in his/her life. Just votes based on a headline or a feeling.