Investor · Lucas, TX · Member since 2010 · 620 posts · 352 votes
Does anyone else have these rental registration programs where the City forces you to pay a yearly fee to register your rental property?
Where they force you to allow a city inspector in every time a tenant moves in. Even if the tenant objects to the invasion of privacy.
Where if the inspection fails (due to not just legitimate health and safety issue but frivolous things like flaking exterior paint) you have to pay for a re-inspection each time until the property passes?
Where if you don't comply you can be fined thousands of dollars per day by the City?
Investor · Southeast, MI · Member since 2012 · 2k+ posts · 1k+ votes
13y
We have inspections in most cities. Some are every two years and others are every three years. It is just a big revenue grab for the city.
Another thing is that they go on a fishing expedition looking for work that was done without a permit. How many times have you purchased a house with a newer furnace that was there when you purchased? Get ready to start paying for permits for work that you didn't do.
Real Estate Investor · Hampton, VA · Member since 2012 · 562 posts · 109 votes
13y
My area doesn't have that "Thank God", only time you have inspections is if the codes and compliance gets a complaint or if a landlord participated in the Section 8 program..sounds like a hassle to have rental properties in that area. Is this mandatory in your area?
Real Estate Agent · Virginia Beach, VA · Member since 2012 · 2k+ posts · 1k+ votes
13y
Both Raleigh, NC, and Chesapeake, VA, now have rental registrations, both fairly new requirements. The Raleigh one just requires payment each year, I believe, so far, at least, no interior inspections yet. The Chesapeake one, not sure on requirements as I haven't actually registered it yet. I'm being obstinate about it because I've received a check every month for over 12 years from CRHA as it's a Section 8 home, so they've known it's a rental and they already do an interior inspection once a year, so I do not feel the need to notify them or pay an additional registration fee. For all I know, it's not even necessary due to being Section 8, but haven't looked into it as I'm prickly about suddenly needing to register when I already keep my rentals in better shape than most owner-occupied people's homes, so their reasoning that landlords should pay because rentals require more attention from the city doesn't make sense to me. I'm sure this is just a new way to bring in new revenues, like most of the grantor's taxes or transfer taxes enacted during the housing boom. Now that there is no housing boom, you'd think they'd suspend the grantor's tax, but it doesn't seem to work that way.
Investor · North Richland Hills, TX · Member since 2011 · 789 posts · 403 votes
13y
Robert Steele more and more cities are doing this. Haltom City was the first one I knew about a few years ago, but now others do it. The inspection is really more of a walk thru, to make sure the house is inhabitable, from what I've seen and heard. I kind of understand it in a way I guess..if you have a city like Haltom, or Watauga, where it seems the whole freakin city is rental, then the city wants to try to do what they can to keep it from just becoming a total slum, and having crack houses. When someone goes to get the water turned on, that "flags" the city that an inspection needs to be done.
I think the last one we had was in North Richland Hills if I remember correctly.
Full-Time Investor · Charlotte, NC · Member since 2009 · 2k+ posts · 1k+ votes
13y
charlotte is trying it out..at first, it's advertised as a program to know the whereaboutsof all landlors..i can see it eventually becoming a tax however
Lexington, KY · Member since 2009 · 2k+ posts · 1k+ votes
13y
Lexington, KY does not have such a program in place, and I hope it does not add one anytime soon. While I do understand the purpose of a program like those mentioned, I do not agree with it. It will just become more bureaucracy that does not meet its intended purpose and likely turn into another revenue stream for local governments.
Investor · Southeast, MI · Member since 2012 · 2k+ posts · 1k+ votes
13y
We have inspections in most cities. Some are every two years and others are every three years. It is just a big revenue grab for the city.
Another thing is that they go on a fishing expedition looking for work that was done without a permit. How many times have you purchased a house with a newer furnace that was there when you purchased? Get ready to start paying for permits for work that you didn't do.
Full-Time Investor · Charlotte, NC · Member since 2009 · 2k+ posts · 1k+ votes
13y
you're exactly right James Vermillion....Charlotte City Council said the purpose was to know where to get ahold of landlords..however, that is already public record, so this seems a little redundant...second of all, they said it was to punish landlords who repeatedly have crime occur at their property....Shouldn't we just punish the people who are committing those crimes instead of pushing the blame onto someone else?! Third of all, this will create more paperwork for the city, and someone will have to do the work, and someone will have to pay for it signed, a very frustrated landlord
Lexington, KY · Member since 2009 · 2k+ posts · 1k+ votes
13y
Originally posted by Bryan A.:
you're exactly right James Vermillion....Charlotte City Council said the purpose was to know where to get ahold of landlords..however, that is already public record, so this seems a little redundant...second of all, they said it was to punish landlords who repeatedly have crime occur at their property....Shouldn't we just punish the people who are committing those crimes instead of pushing the blame onto someone else?! Third of all, this will create more paperwork for the city, and someone will have to do the work, and someone will have to pay for it signed, a very frustrated landlord
Bryan, you would at least they could at least come up with a better lie about why a program would exists. As far as crime, did they explain how they intend to "punish" these landlords? Are they going to punish them for the crime they did not commit? Are they going to pass a new law that landlords are responsible for all crimes committed on their property? The whole thing is crazy if you ask me.
And doesn't your last point sound good...another city worker to deal with and another layer of paperwork...joy!
Full-Time Investor · Charlotte, NC · Member since 2009 · 2k+ posts · 1k+ votes
13y
James Vermillion, they plan to punish with fines..the problem is the wording of the whole thing is very poor and leaves a lot of questions still...in fact, an attorney in the REIA reviewed it and supposedly (i was not present) said it was some of the worst legalese he had ever seen...for instance, the multiple crimes could be a result of bad tenants, or just the environment...a drive by may or may not be the landlords fault, but they'll still fine the landlord for that..same for a noise complaint, domestic distrubance, etc. again, the problem is they're punishing the wrong people...make the jail times lengthier for marijuana possession if that's the issue--don't fine the landlords bc their tenants are smoking weed..how does that teach the tenant to get in gear and become a better citizen? it's just another example in this country of how we're not holding the right people accountable
Investor · Las Vegas, NV · Member since 2012 · 119 posts · 104 votes
13y
In North Texas more and more cities are requiring rental registration. It started around 2004 and has picked up steam in the last few years. There have been many lawsuits centered around right to privacy and calls for a statewide ban, but for now the requirements are there.
Inspections are required in Dallas, Hurst, Richardson, Garland, Carrollton, Coppell and Little Elm to name a few.
The inspections are required when the property is first put into service as a rental and then again within 30 days of a new tenant moving in. I make sure inspections are done before tenants move in so they are not inconvenienced by the process.
On the positive side, the inspections are designed to make sure rentals are a safe and healthy place to live. If you are an effective landlord you maintain your property and should have no problem meeting those standards.
Problems arise, however, when a city requires arbitrary items in rental properties. The city of Garland has gone back and forth on the issue of window screens. They required window screens but then backed off this position when tenants were being charged for replacing damaged or lost screens. The requirement may be back by now. The increasing fines and fees are also an issue for landlords as many cities move to yearly inspections.
As a responsible landlord I support efforts to make sure rental housing meets some minimum safety and health standards. Unfortunately, we cannot rely on ALL landlords to properly maintain their property. Because of the few slumlords the rest of us fall under regulation. I do think it is time, however, for landlords to come together in an organized fashion and work with cities for policies and procedures that work.
Developer · Garland, TX · Member since 2008 · 8k+ posts · 4k+ votes
13y
Hi Lynn, welcome to BiggerPockets. Thanks for your input on DFW rental regs. Why don't you tell us about yourself and your investing at New Member Introductions?
Real Estate Investor · The Woodlands, TX · Member since 2012 · 20 posts · 5 votes
13y
Yes, I have a SFR in Oak Ridge North which is north of Houston and just east of The Woodlands, TX. I found out after I bought the property that there was a rental registration with the local government agency - the city. I would liken it to their way of assuring their community doesn't become a "slumlord" rental community and therefore preserving the property values of home owners. I paid the $250 once upon renting it out and supposedly every year but we'll see if they enforce it. I'm definitely not going to volunteer to pay it as my property is safe & clean.
Real Estate Broker · Conroe, TX · Member since 2012 · 165 posts · 46 votes
13y
@chuck (can't tag from phone?) - what is that considered? The Woodlands or Shenandoah? That's news to me. All of my stuff has been in Montgomery, TX. Hopefully Conroe doesn't do this too.
Investor · Lucas, TX · Member since 2010 · 620 posts · 352 votes
13y
Originally posted by Bryan A.:
charlotte is trying it out..at first, it's advertised as a program to know the whereaboutsof all landlors..i can see it eventually becoming a tax however
Yes, beware. They started it in Richardson a few years back as "oh we just want to keep track of rentals". The next year it was "oh now we need to do inspections". The following year it was "oh and now it is going to cost you $50". This year it was "oh now it is going to cost you $75".
They find out whether it is rental or not by comparing the name on the city water utility bill to the property tax records.
It is mandatory. Thus the $2K/day fine if you don't comply.
I think it is a breach of ours and our tenants 4th amendment right.
Lexington, KY · Member since 2009 · 2k+ posts · 1k+ votes
13y
Originally posted by Robert Steele:
Originally posted by Bryan A.:
charlotte is trying it out..at first, it's advertised as a program to know the whereaboutsof all landlors..i can see it eventually becoming a tax however
Yes, beware. They started it in Richardson a few years back as "oh we just want to keep track of rentals". The next year it was "oh now we need to do inspections". The following year it was "oh and now it is going to cost you $50". This year it was "oh now it is going to cost you $75".
They find out whether it is rental or not by comparing the name on the city water utility bill to the property tax records.
It is mandatory. Thus the $2K/day fine if you don't comply.
I think it is a breach of ours and our tenants 4th amendment right.
$2K dollars a day? You have got to be kidding! I have heard of real criminals getting fined FAR less than that for crimes. If that happens here I think I will have to organize some sort of protest!
Investor · Lucas, TX · Member since 2010 · 620 posts · 352 votes
13y
Originally posted by Lynn Andris:
The city of Garland has gone back and forth on the issue of window screens. They required window screens but then backed off this position when tenants were being charged for replacing damaged or lost screens. The requirement may be back by now.
I read that the Texas Association of Realtors sued the City of Garland a year or two back for $1.3MM over their rental registration program - which they have since toned down considerably.
Investor · Central Valley, CA · Member since 2012 · 6k+ posts · 3k+ votes
13y
Rental registration is not common in the areas that I work and and live in. Even some of the cities in CA with rent controls don't require registration. But Berkeley has it all. Registration of each unit with type, start date for the current tenant, and initial rent. Tenants can withhold rent while the property is unregistered or if the rent ceiling is incorrect. The registration of the unit and rent ceilings are public info and available online. In other places it might be a tax grab, but the administration and bureaucracy of the Berkeley rental board has to use up more than they collect.
Full-Time Investor · Charlotte, NC · Member since 2009 · 2k+ posts · 1k+ votes
13y
Robert Steele, it's a joke in charlotte..part of the statute requires a home address on record for the landlord..ya, like anyone is giving that out! one of the many questions i have (possible gray area/loophole) is how they view the difference between this and a owner financed sale where the seller still holds title such as a contract for deed or even a lease option. maybe i'll just give each tenant an option to purchase or something! tic
Investor · Lucas, TX · Member since 2010 · 620 posts · 352 votes
13y
Originally posted by James Vermillion:
$2K dollars a day? You have got to be kidding! I have heard of real criminals getting fined FAR less than that for crimes. If that happens here I think I will have to organize some sort of protest!
Oh I am not kidding. It is right there in the ordinance although I have not heard of it being applied.
The closest I have heard of was was a court case brought by a landlord against the City just last week. The landlord elected trial by jury. The landlord had registered, paid the fee and set up a schedule for the inspection. All on time. The tenant refused the inspector entry and the City fined the landlord - go figure. The jury sided with the city and the landlord got hit with a $1,500 fine.
Investor · Sherman Oaks, CA · Member since 2008 · 6k+ posts · 3k+ votes
13y
Originally posted by Bryan A.:
Robert Steele, it's a joke in charlotte..part of the statute requires a home address on record for the landlord..ya, like anyone is giving that out! one of the many questions i have (possible gray area/loophole) is how they view the difference between this and a owner financed sale where the seller still holds title such as a contract for deed or even a lease option. maybe i'll just give each tenant an option to purchase or something! tic
I am talking about a CFO and a Lease on my blog, which is different to a Lease with Option.
Investor · North Richland Hills, TX · Member since 2011 · 789 posts · 403 votes
13y
Robert Steele I hadn't even thought of it from a property manager position....YIKES!
I was thinking from a small investor point of view.
I would have like to have been in the court room for the case you mentioned.
Everything in real estate, when it comes to state/city law/ordinances....seems to be a domino effect.
TX was the first state to draft legislation re: lease options...then others come on board.
I don't know which city was the first to pass regulations as far as rental inspection, but I can assure you they all watch what others have done and follow suit.
Again though, here in this area, the "inspections" are nothing more than a walk thru, but I'd still be interested to have sat in on that court case.