Would you evict a 102 year old woman?
Joe A.Business Member
Realtor · Waco, TX · Member since 2018 · 76 posts · 80 votesWould you evict a 102 year old woman?
Most Popular Reply
Real Estate Broker · Cody, WY · Member since 2010 · 28k+ posts · 41k+ votes
7yI think they're pretty generous giving her 90 days to move.
I think the real crime here is that families no longer take care of their elderly. It's cool she's able to live on her own but that's going to change any day now. If I had a relative that age, I would be encouraging them to move in with me so we could keep an eye on them and help them. I certainly wouldn't leave them out on their own, paying rent and exposed to unscrupulous contractors or landlords or door-knockers or whatever.
The DIY Landlord Book4.7247 Reviews
163 Replies
- 7yRobert TinkerPro MemberRental Property Investor · Round Rock, TX · Member since 2019 · 251 posts · 159 votes
@Joe Alford 30 yrs of rent, that landlord has made a bundle off of her. He should keep her just to say thanks. If he wants market rent it can't be that long of a wait and she will be leaving this world.
@Joe Splitrock, you make several good points about how we should evaluate our decisions, especially when thinking "long-term."
However, I would not say using our family, friends or the media as the basis against which we should measure our decision-making in all cases. The idea of evaluating decisions against "the public" is a shame principle. Would I be ashamed if my mom or my neighbors knew I did X?
But, sometimes shame is unjustly given. For instance, over 50% of younger Millenials have favorable views of socialism and unfavorable views of capitalism. It is also known that some families will reject adult children who become very successful financial, especially if they don't "share the wealth" in ways they want. Would we encourage young real estate investors hoping to make millions of dollars reject the opportunity because it would make them unpopular (hated perhaps?) with many members of their cohort and/or family?I think this was a very tough decision. I doubt the guy just said, "Screw the old bag, I'm kicking her out." This is why I don't think anyone can say he was heartless. It is true, however, that the LL might now wish he hadn't done it simply because of all the "piling on". Social media can be a beast, even when you're in the right solidly by your own standards. This too: sometimes we make decisions for reasons that other people cannot or will not understand, and the decision-maker is under no obligation to explain his/her choice in ways to make others agree or understand. So I tend to favor grace over moral judgment.
Nice talking with you.
- 7yJay HinrichsBusiness MemberReal Estate Consultant · Summerlin, NV · Member since 2014 · 45k+ posts · 66k+ votes
Originally posted by @Joe Splitrock:
Originally posted by @Anthony Wick:
@Joe Splitrock Wow. You sir, took more liberties and presumptions into this story than anybody else that responded. I read the article. I missed the part where the landlord was rich and a greedy A-hole. Did the article even state the landlord has owned the place for 30 years? I also missed where his kid was a spoiled brat. I have no idea where your angry post came from, but as you are a BP Moderator, it was disappointing.
This was the Fox News version of the story, so you are going to get a certain view point. There are other details reported by other news outlets. The landlord has three similar units in the complex, one of which was vacant last year. He could have given notice to any of the three tenants, but he chose the longest term tenant. It is rent controlled, so most likely he chose her due to lowest rent. He is using a rule in rent control that allows you to evict if family is moving in. He probably sees it as win/win, get your kid a place to live and escape rent controls. The landlords parents purchased the property and she has been a tenant with their family.
I am not angry. I just don't agree with the constant drum beat that you need to treat tenants like dirt to make a profit. Then landlords who try to treat tenants like customers, get called "emotional" or "hobby landlords" and told we are doing it wrong. Treating people right is good business. It is better business than prioritizing profit over relationships and reputation. I see business as a long game and abundance mentality as the key to success. Profit comes through doing the right thing, not at the expense of others. That is my personal opinion.
also in reality it depends on were you are financially in your life or business cycle.. I can see beginner landlords many who are undercapitalized to begin with or don't have much in the way of reserves .. they have to treat things different than well position and cash reserved landlords who may look at this as a form of charity or giving back to a long term tenant..
Having been in the court house steps and foreclosure rescue game for decades.. I have had my share of what do I do situations..
90% of the courthouse steps deals which are owner occ.. are all sorts of drama and trauma.. I suspect I have lost 100s of thousands not just thousands but hundreds of thousands by letting hold overs stay well past what was legal and all for free..
Keeping in mind in our market CA OR Wa were I did the majority of this activity someone who actually loses a house to me on the court house steps has been living in it already for at least a year if not 2 or 3 for free.. I know this is different than landlord tenant relationships
end of the day we all have our perspective on what is right or wrong.. and how far we want to go to help our fellow americans.
- Rental Property Investor · Ankeny, IA · Member since 2017 · 2k+ posts · 3k+ votes7y
@Joe Splitrock Fair enough. You clearly had more information available than was presented on this thread or the original link.
Originally posted by @Joe Splitrock:
Originally posted by @Anthony Wick:
@Joe Splitrock Wow. You sir, took more liberties and presumptions into this story than anybody else that responded. I read the article. I missed the part where the landlord was rich and a greedy A-hole. Did the article even state the landlord has owned the place for 30 years? I also missed where his kid was a spoiled brat. I have no idea where your angry post came from, but as you are a BP Moderator, it was disappointing.
This was the Fox News version of the story, so you are going to get a certain view point. There are other details reported by other news outlets. The landlord has three similar units in the complex, one of which was vacant last year. He could have given notice to any of the three tenants, but he chose the longest term tenant. It is rent controlled, so most likely he chose her due to lowest rent. He is using a rule in rent control that allows you to evict if family is moving in. He probably sees it as win/win, get your kid a place to live and escape rent controls. The landlords parents purchased the property and she has been a tenant with their family.
I am not angry. I just don't agree with the constant drum beat that you need to treat tenants like dirt to make a profit. Then landlords who try to treat tenants like customers, get called "emotional" or "hobby landlords" and told we are doing it wrong. Treating people right is good business. It is better business than prioritizing profit over relationships and reputation. I see business as a long game and abundance mentality as the key to success. Profit comes through doing the right thing, not at the expense of others. That is my personal opinion.
I treat my tenants well. I provide them a safe and nice home. The tenants I like I let their rent go below market a couple/few hundred dollars because it is easy for me to keep the current tenant and less risk than finding a new tenant. I view the slightly below market rent as a win-win for me and the tenant.
However, if the RSO rules allow me to terminate the lease on the tenant that is the most below market rent then that is likely the tenant that I terminate the lease on. It is one thing to have rent a couple/few hundreds below market rent and another thing to potential have rent over $1K below market rent. I do not like any of my tenants enough to want to supplement their rent >$1K/month. It does not mean I treat my tenants like dirt; it means I do not like any of them enough to supplement out of my pocket their living by over $1K.
By the way, I do not care if anyone thinks I am a hobby landlord because I let my good tenants rents go below market. I have been doing this a long time. I know how much a good tenant versus a bad tenant is worth to me (the risk is worth less than $1K/month but over $200/month). I know of the hassles of turning over a place and finding a new tenant. I know how fast vacant time adds up financially. For my units, 1 month vacancy means about 1 year at $200/month.
Just because I would evict the 102 year old tenant does not mean that I treat my tenants like dirt. It means I do not like a tenant enough to supplement their rent by what is dictated by the RSO. Note this is all assuming the RSO regulations permit me to terminate that tenant; sometimes they dictate who you must terminate.
I also do not feel it is my responsibility, if the RSO rules do not allow it which seems to be the case here, to be supplementing a rent that much.
- Rental Property Investor · Mcallen, TX · Member since 2013 · 37 posts · 12 votes7y
I suggest finding a community social worker that can help with placement. CCAD Community care for the Aged/Disabled will step in and help to find housing. If there is a shortage of money, then by default there will soon be a shortage of food.
- Realtor · WV · Member since 2018 · 454 posts · 310 votes7y
@Joe Alford I haven’t read the article to see the specifics but No way I am forcing out a 102 year old.
- Investor · United States · Member since 2018 · 565 posts · 356 votes7y
no never. There are some things you just don't do.
- Real Estate Broker · Indianapolis, IN · Member since 2014 · 3k+ posts · 2k+ votes7y
My thoughts when I read the question was... Is she behind on rent?
But seriously, I wouldn't evict. I would work on getting her placed somewhere else. We've got a gal we bought a house from that is elderly and needed some time to find an apartment. We've let her stay for 6 weeks so far free of charge. - Real Estate Coach · Member since 2018 · 246 posts · 216 votes7y
SHE HAD 102 YEARS TO BUY HER OWN HOUSE. PLUS SHE PROBABLY LIVED THROUGH 10 RECESSIONS. LMAO
Originally posted by @Joe A.:
https://www.foxnews.com/us/102-year-old-california...
This guy is evicting a 102 year old woman so his daughter can move in to the apartment. The woman had been living there for 30 years! I know what I’d do. What would you do?
Edit: Ah, I see this is a non renewal of lease. not a non-payment of rent. Pretty misleading title by the reporters.
- Rental Property Investor · Phoenix, AZ · Member since 2013 · 919 posts · 911 votes7y
@Dan H.. GREAT POST.
@RESTofYOU: MOST of you are calling this an eviction, just like the media.
This is NOT an eviction!
I would think that intelligent real estate investors would know the difference between an eviction and an end of a lease?
The media has an axe to grind: Bad, bad, evil landlord. We need more govt control.
Landlord was NOT evil. Lease came to an end as it was month to month. The rent control part is a little different deal, but doesn't really matter.
The lease was over, landlord wanted the unit back. The reason does not matter.
- AZ · Member since 2019 · 8 posts · 4 votes7y
We just went through a similar situation, my mother is 89, she has been renting the house that she originally owned herself but after she retired in her mid 70's, she decided to let it go through a short sale. The new owner of the home through this short sale allowed her to stay there and rent it because she kept it so clean and they preferred that over new tenant issues. Well after several years, the new owners fell into the red and decided to sell the home. The home sold practically overnight 32 days before my Moms lease was to end. My mother got a letter stating they weren't renewing the lease due to the sale and before I even knew it sold overnight, the natural researcher in me kicked into high gear to find the truth. I didn't see any listing nor that it sold, I kept checking all month long, nothing. Fortunately, she has been wanting to leave Florida and come closer to me (Phoenix) or my sister in (Albuquerque) and my sister found a place immediately for $600 all utilitites included, 1 bd - 1 bth down the street from her. Yeah!! and thank God, we were able to move her out in 3 wks flat. My Mom is very young at heart and didn't want to live in senior housing and she got her wish. It worked out perfectly and now my Mom is near one of her daughters. Now....back to the owners, I still wasn't sure if they just wanted her out so they can increase the rent by $200 which they could easily do for that home, I kept a note on my calendar to continue looking for confirmation that they indeed sold the home and finally, this week I found the deed transfer to the new owners the day after we moved my Mother out of Florida.
Moral of the story: 1. My Mom did want to leave that rental and come closer to her daughters and 2. The owners fell in the red and needed to sell the home and did properly give my Mom 30 days notice which is when her lease ended. All worked out as everyone intended and we can watch over my Mom closely now at her young at heart age of 89. :) ♥
- 7yColleen F.Pro MemberInvestor · Narragansett, RI · Member since 2013 · 8k+ posts · 4k+ votes
We have this scenario with a family member who is in a similar situation 30 years in the house and 80 years old. She is renting from a church and they can't even make the taxes with what she is paying. You all think they should keep her? Could they help a lot of other families with that money instead of just her? They are working with her but she does need to move for everyone's benefit even if it is tough. The devil is in the details for these situations.
@Joe A. I am in the situation now that my son can't find any thing he can afford in the location he needs to be to work. He is barely making a decent wage. That certainly colors my views on keeping someone else's family housed out of pocket. This 102 year old woman could have tons of money to pass on to her family we don't know that either so it isn't a one size fits all solution.
Originally posted by @Robert Tinker:
@Joe Alford 30 yrs of rent, that landlord has made a bundle off of her. He should keep her just to say thanks. If he wants market rent it can't be that long of a wait and she will be leaving this world.
30 years of RENT CONTROLLED rent, the lady has made a bundle off the owner in terms of what he's received vs. what the market would otherwise dictate.
Normally a buyer and seller of a good are equally benefited (or at least both benefited, otherwise the transaction wouldn't take place). But when the government is forcing one party, that isn't the case. And here, the government is forcing the landlord to take less than he could from someone else. Which means he's giving her (via government force, not out of kindness) a gift. Not the other way around.
- Rental Property Investor · Yorba Linda, CA · Member since 2013 · 100 posts · 65 votes7y
That's not an eviction in CA. Evictions in CA are through the courts and there is a Judge making a legal judgement on the case.
Serving a 90 Day notice to terminate a month to month tenancy is simply saying "I as a landlord (adult) is not continuing a month to month contract with you Tenant (another adult)".
There is a huge push by the insane liberal left to change words and their definitions...
The media, politicians and the leftest activists in California have been pushing the "eviction" narrative for the last few years and they are really ramping up the incorrect use of the word to be a catch all phrase for any lawful ending to a term contract. It is extremely dishonest and as a LL frustrating. Sadly, the left is winning this fight over the correct definitions; landlords who know the laws are now using the term eviction incorrectly due to the fact that the narrative is being pushed so heavily by advocate groups.
Sadly, the left in CA wants all housing to be subsidized for everyone and to control all zoning laws stripping away local zoning authority to give free handouts to all. The state is going to be left with ulta high end market rate housing and gov. subsidized housing with nothing in the middle. What could go wrong?
Originally posted by @Phil Christian:
That's not an eviction in CA. Evictions in CA are through the courts and there is a Judge making a legal judgement on the case.
Serving a 90 Day notice to terminate a month to month tenancy is simply saying "I as a landlord (adult) is not continuing a month to month contract with you Tenant (another adult)".
There is a huge push by the insane liberal left to change words and their definitions...
The media, politicians and the leftest activists in California have been pushing the "eviction" narrative for the last few years and they are really ramping up the incorrect use of the word to be a catch all phrase for any lawful ending to a term contract. It is extremely dishonest and as a LL frustrating. Sadly, the left is winning this fight over the correct definitions; landlords who know the laws are now using the term eviction incorrectly due to the fact that the narrative is being pushed so heavily by advocate groups.
Sadly, the left in CA wants all housing to be subsidized for everyone and to control all zoning laws stripping away local zoning authority to give free handouts to all. The state is going to be left with ulta high end market rate housing and gov. subsidized housing with nothing in the middle. What could go wrong?
In new york, the left media changed the term for a burger or home invader to something like 'unwelcomed house guest'. I'm not kidding. I'll try to find the tweet.
- Rental Property Investor · San Diego, CA · Member since 2017 · 439 posts · 578 votes7y
@Alan Grobmeier
Just told tenants I’m selling a rental in Huntington Beach for this reason. Taxes and the looming threat of rent control and other regulation are making it less appealing to own rentals here. I’ll probably rebuy when the time is right but strictly for appreciation. Even considering selling my primary and becoming a renter again....
- Rental Property Investor · Phoenix, AZ · Member since 2013 · 919 posts · 911 votes7y
@Tanner Marsey, Huntington Beach is not on the rent control list, per this website below. Are you doing a 'pre-emptive' strike? ;-)
https://www.caltenantlaw.com/RCcities.htm
- Rental Property Investor · San Diego, CA · Member since 2017 · 439 posts · 578 votes7y
Originally posted by @Alan Grobmeier:
@Tanner Marsey, Huntington Beach is not on the rent control list, per this website below. Are you doing a 'pre-emptive' strike? ;-)
That’s exactly what I’m doing. That was just one of my many concerns. Mostly the boa fees, rising taxes and the overall current state of CA.
Join the conversationCreate a free account to reply, vote on answers and follow this thread.