Unfair madness! Landlords getting hosed.

General Landlording & Rental Properties
6yFollow

Unfair madness! Landlords getting hosed.

David J.
Investor · shawnee oklahoma · Member since 2017 · 194 posts · 148 votes

Some Perspective... 0.15%

That's the percent of American people who have Covid-19 at the time of this writing.  NOT even 1% of the total population.

Suppose the disease were to quadruple before this is over, that would only be 0.6%. Still not even 1%

I am not saying the Covid-19 pandemic is not serious. It is serious! But bear with me, I'm going somewhere here.

Percent of tenants with eviction protection 100%

Specifically in California landlords have been totally neutered.

THIS IS NOT RIGHT, THIS IS NOT FAIR!

Private citizens should not be compelled by law to provide free housing at their own detriment. As a landlord for 20+ years this is the most backwards and un-American situation I have ever seen. What good are constitutional protections, checks and balances if they only serve us when convenient? We need our rights, and freedom most when times are difficult. Where is the ACLU?

Do I think a tenant who has suffered a hardship outside of their control should be thrown out into the street? No of course not. But, 99.9% of landlords will do everything in their power to work with a tenant ALREADY, if for no other reason because they don't want to pay for turnover and vacancy.

I think some responsible laws could be put in place that prohibit abusive landlords from unfair evictions and also require landlords to work with tenants, but the current situation is totally 1 sided and unfair!

Consider, if a tenant loses their job they have options. They can apply for aid, they can look for an online job. They could take a temp position at a grocery store if they like. However, if a landlord has a tenant who can't (or wont') pay rent they can ask for rent and hope for cooperation but can do nothing beyond that to improve their situation.

This absurd! Is anyone thinking this through? How can this possibly not end badly? Allow me to list some problems.

  1. If a tenant hears they "don't have to pay rent", many will simply push it as far as they can regardless of their actual ability to pay or not pay. Why not cease the moment? Wouldn't you?
  2. If a landlord does put a 3 days or quit notice and the tenant doesn't comply. Normal law states that the landlord can not collect anymore rent AFTER the 3 days are up, or the 3 day pay or quit notice is invalid. Does this mean landlords should just allow the tenant to live free till September or until (heaven only knows) when they are able to evict? Does letting a tenant free load till September seem like a good idea?
  3. Most landlords would agree that tenants who get behind really land themselves in a circle of debt they can't climb out of anyway. Thinking a repayment plan with landlords can work is basically fiction. AKA nonsense.
  4. How long till landlords start getting stretched too thin and start taking matters into their own hands? Anything is possible, Violence, fake insurance claims etc? That is a scary outcome that I don't want to even think about. (Please nobody do this)
  5. How long till landlords get fed up and say screw it and just let the bank have the property back?
  6. How long till word gets out about how landlords are being treated and many future (would be landlords) say, no thank you? How many current landlords will just get out of the game. (never want to take that risk again)

TL:DR; This is a disaster and I don't even know what to do anymore.

PS: I do have abusive tenants who are purposely leveraging the situation and not paying simply because they don't have to.

17Reply
532 views

Most Popular Reply

Jay HinrichsBusiness Member
Real Estate Consultant · Summerlin, NV · Member since 2014 · 45k+ posts · 66k+ votes
6y
Originally posted by @David J.:

@Jay Hinrichs Simply because it's not a problem for you or 90% of others does not mean it's not a valid problem. Landlords are being denied their civil liberties and property rights. The implications of this are huge! 
Also restaurants and hotels all each have their own arguments to wage but it's apples to oranges. At least restaurants can do take out, and hotels can claim insurance or sell their space to the government as a make shift hospital. But I maintain this is out of scope for my point. Regardless, how unfair it is for them, it doesn't suddenly make this fair for landlords. Landlords should NOT be denied their rights!

@Amer Mallah I agree about not making projections. Only casting some perspective. We have a whole lot of fear and irrational thinking taking place. I sure hope we see some changes. We need solutions that protect tenants without allowing landlords to be helpless victims themselves. That's just trading one problem for another. 
I also agree that the screening process is going to get much more intense. Also, I wouldn't be surprised if rents go up to compensate for the whole new level of risk landlords were just made aware of. 

these are once in a lifetime issues ..  I mean just think of all the small business's that were forced to close.. who is going to rescue them

if anything landlords to my way of thinking have gotten massive help.. their tenants got 1200 bucks ( at least most) and increased unemployment.. then you have section 8.. If the tenants choose to pocket the money and not give it to the landlord that's not the govmits fault..  it just is what it is everyone is suffering..  I mean there is no bail out for us homebuilder developers  !!!  Or real estate agents who cant show houses  it goes on and on.. so like I said to me landlords have gotten huge help far more than many.. Not to mention mortgage forbearances etc..

If the landlord for whatever reason gets in financial difficulty because tenant misses one a few rent payments.. then I think landlord needs to revisit their reserves policies.

Podcast Guest on Show #222
JLH Capital Partners51 Review
WebsiteView Page
21Reply
See this reply in the discussion

166 Replies

Jump to latestLatest
  • Fernan Nava
    Rental Property Investor · Barstow, CA · Member since 2015 · 131 posts · 102 votes
    6y

    Righ on 99%. I have been feeling alone out here not as an investor but as an American. I want to feel pain and sorrow and and panic to be in sink with my fellow Americans,but I look at the numbers: percentage who have it, percentage that survived and I can bring myself to feel like that. I think the response to this virus is extreme on the wrong side. The first question that comes to my head is, who benefits monetarily politically or otherwise as result of this extreme response? At this point I don’t blame the people so much, they have been worked into a frenzy and that’s how people behave when in panic. I think one of the worst legacies of this virus is the further intrusion of government in the lives and businesses of Americans. My heart goes out to those that have lost loved ones to this epidemic. However, understand that when put in the right context the destruction of wealth, the lost of fundamental rights are a greater threat to all of us as a country. God bless our country now more than ever.

    2Reply
  • Eric Bilderback
    Real Estate Agent · Sisters, OR · Member since 2014 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    6y

    @Brian Bradley

    Great point man!  I remember reading Aristotle the philosopher saying he thought that societies, cultures, and governments should be influenced and ran by and for the benefit of the middle class.  Aristotle thought that the middle class had the most invested in society.  The rich will be fine no matter what happens and the poor are screwed therefore have nothing to gain or lose by the society.  Plato on the other hand thought the elites who were smarter had more expertise to run society.  I guess I am an Aristotle man!  Same debate thousands of years later.

    Happy Easter,

    1Reply
  • Michael Pempin
    Member since 2020 · 12 posts · 2 votes
    6y
    Originally posted by @David J.:

    @John D. I completely understand where you are coming from. I also agree with a lot of what you said here. My only objection is the idea that we are trading one issue for another issue.

    To be clear, I am not advocating for business as usual. I am advocating for landlord rights to defend their property from abusive tenants. At the moment landlords have ZERO rights' to our own property while still maintaining all the risk. Why does the buck stop with me? How about I tell the bank "Welp, my tenant refuses to pay rent, so you pay it"... No chance. And forbearance is a joke. In 3 months I have a balloon payment. Unlikely tenants will have caught up to cover this.

    I 100% want to support my tenants with a valid hardship. I do not want to pay a free ride for tenants who think this is a "chance in a lifetime" to get free rent. Something has to give!

    this is spot on...i dont see how someone can argue this...This has only been going on less than a month and there are already rent strikes?   really???  people are 100% taking advantage.  checks in mail, unemployment provided to every man woman and child...once those checks clear in next few weeks, these same people going to be fading rent payments while landlord gets screwed until when?  

    2Reply
  • Fred Cannon
    Rental Property Investor · St Augustine, FL · Member since 2019 · 264 posts · 279 votes
    6y

    @Jason J.i look at it this way, the chance of getting a new tenant is slim. I have cut my rent if half for those that have lost a job. With unemployment they should be able to pay. I am not putting anyone out on the street. I can do this because I don’t have mortgages. If you are leveraged then you are in trouble. For those who say the tenant should have enough saved well that’s a two way street. Hopefully everyone will recover soon but this is a lesson to all of us. CYA when you invest in rentals, something like this happens on a major scale every 10-15 years plus evictions every couple of years depending on how many properties you have. Leverage is not your friend and neither is the banker.

    4Reply
  • Emanuel Ohunwu
    Rental Property Investor · Dallas, TX · Member since 2019 · 88 posts · 55 votes
    6y

    Is there a lobbying group for landlords? Lobbying groups is something other business groups have.

    3Reply
  • Jennifer S.
    Investor · Wakefield, MA · Member since 2019 · 31 posts · 73 votes
    6y

    @David J. You may not be able to evict her yet, but you can definitely tell her you will give the poorest reference possible to anyone she tries to rent from in the future. I can't imagine anyone will want to rent to her. You should also mention that she is being disrespectful not only to you but to your other tenants who legitimately have issues paying and who want to pay and are actively working with you. That might be enough to get her to realize how stupid she is being. This is a Varsity Blues cheating scandel-esque slap in the face to good tenants who play by the rules. 

    For everyone talking about risk, this situation we are all in is so rare it's not really something you can screen for. You can rent to someone who exhibits all signs of being upstanding, but the fact is you never really know someone's true character until it itself is stress tested. But now that we know what some people are capable of, we can and should plan.

    1Reply
  • Eddie T.
    Rental Property Investor · NY · Member since 2013 · 844 posts · 350 votes
    6y
    Originally posted by @Russell Brazil:
    Originally posted by @David J.:

    @Russell Brazil forbearance is a joke. In 3 months I have a balloon payment. Unlikely tenants will have caught up to cover this. To your second point. It doesn't matter if landlords have reserves they should not be compelled by law to spend those reserves to provide free housing for abusive tenants with false hardships. While some tenants have REAL hardships, I am not talking about that. I am talking about a system that requires landlords to unfairly spend their own money to support extortion. Remember landlords are trying to survive the same pandemic and have their own families to feed. I hope we can get passed the cliche talk I am seeing in this thread and get down to the facts that something is wrong here with this policy.

     When you invest in real estate, you deploy capital to get an expected return based on the underlying risk of the asset and market.  To achieve higher rent collections during uncertain times, consider taking on less riskier assets.  Those in higher risk assets, will be most exposed to the current situation.  That is part of the risk of those assets.  Those in less riskier assets, are going to better positioned.  Investing isnt risk free. Thats why there is a return, because of the risk the investor takes on. Not comfortable with the risk, thats fine....reduce your risk levels.

     Russell risk is one thing. But when you have a bill working thru the state senate to forgive rents for 90 days, we are not talking risk we are talking theft of your rights by the government.

    1Reply
  • Eddie T.
    Rental Property Investor · NY · Member since 2013 · 844 posts · 350 votes
    6y

    @David J. I really hope property owners in California come together to get the laws that were passed last year repealed. 

    1Reply
  • Ron Flatt
    Investor · Hillsboro, TX · Member since 2017 · 358 posts · 245 votes
    6y

    Jay Hinrichs is right, April was actually a non event.  I cut the rent in half for one tenant, (a commercial tenant who was shut down).  I have one that has not paid at all waiting for unemployment, been with me 2 years.  One that was short 50 dollars but promised when unemployment came in.  and finally the one that the courts will not let me evict that I started March 1st.  Next month will be the one that counts, but I am working with my tenants.  I am only about the one that I had planned on evicting anyway. 

    Yes it is unfair to blanket, no evictions. But no one life is unfair, that is why I have told individuals not to over leverage.  In Texas, it will return to normal, and we will be available to evict soon, in some of the blue states, it might be a little tougher.  We need to weather this storm, some may need to talk to there banks.  If you have been a good customer and responsible most will work with you.  (Again, say this because I work with 2 local banks, not the huge conglomerates).  I know my bankers, they know me, we are going through this.  

    1Reply
  • Dan H.Pro Member
    Investor · Poway, CA · Member since 2015 · 7k+ posts · 8k+ votes
    6y
    Originally posted by @David J.:

    @Russell Brazil with all due respect, risk has nothing to do with my point. I understand risk vs reward quite well but it's moot. 

     Often When a statement states “with all due respect...”, they fail to comprehend what is intended to be conveyed.  

    0Reply
  • Kathy Utiss
    Specialist · O'Fallon, MO · Member since 2010 · 148 posts · 46 votes
    6y

    Many great comments here. Good to have so many different inputs.  I've been in asset management since 1994. Prior to the 08 crisis we figured out a way to stop it from happening. This concept has been approved since then. The issue is many people do one thing in this industry. That is talk. 

    In this industry rather you are a homeowner purchasing your 1st home. Or a property investor investing in whatever you invest in there are similarities among all of us in the way we purchase. We have to qualify with having jobs for xyz amount of time. Proof of that income. We all know the higher the score the more prospects someone has to rent or purchase any property in this country. 

     Many assets require large sums down to purchase. While the investor thinks the property will be beneficial to their portfolio there is an issue.  The homeowner faces this same issue. That is if something happens beyond their control they could end up screwed. 

    * Money down is lost

    *Income is lost

    *asset appreciation is lost

    *credit scores fall as income isn't always replaceable. 

    Some put their life savings into buying a home, business, or a income producing property. One can't predict life changing circumstances but they happen. Sometimes even if one has reserves they could be depleted in such conditions. 

    The banks insure everything on their side. Yet those of us that buy properties could lose it all. They don't INSURE the person putting the money up to purchase. There's no guarantee if you have to use their courts you will win. Even if you have money. 

    So the best bet is to insure your debt against default at origination. By doing such you can get an interest only loan. By prepaying your debt you keep what would be your usual principal payment for the life of your loan. You avoid usual reserve requirements. As YOU ARE ACTUALLY prepaying your debt into the future at a discount as well. So all the pitfalls you have above are avoided. If someone can't pay once in a while you won't be so hesitant to give a hand up. Many don't believe in not paying their way. 

    By insuring your debt at origination you end up with two assets --the property or business- a treasury that matures and pays off in 30 years. Bankers agreed to it cause they make more money using our idea. It's still best to make sure any property will debt service as you would accordingly. But the idea really puts real estate and banking on steroids.  If done correctly it could revamp incomes for many American's. Just like my life is a "True Ripley's Believe It Or Not Story" this is as well!

    1Reply
  • Kyle Godbout
    Investor · Omaha, NE · Member since 2015 · 366 posts · 184 votes
    6y

    I see what you are saying, however, there are things landlords can do during this time. Aside from some of the government loans that may be attainable for small businesses, talk to your banks. I have spoken with mine and they are allowing us to skip mortgage/loan payments of our tenants have been affected and can’t pay rent. I have business loans, so I’m not sure about personal ones, but this makes me feel secure and I have no worries at the time of my tenants lose jobs and can’t pay rent.

    If we evict everyone, that would compound problems that would be felt by all. I think I heard that 1/3 of all houses In The us are rentals. I’m not sure if this is accurate but that would be a ton of people put on the streets.

    0Reply
  • Jeff Ronningen
    Investor · Cincinnati, OH · Member since 2015 · 242 posts · 182 votes
    6y

    @John D. Paraphrasing...”Someone’s individual rights being trampled for the greater good.” That’s a slippery slope and similar to the justification used by some of the worst tyrants in the last century. Who gets to define the greater good? Does eroding private property rights serve the greater good? If landlords can’t evict why aren’t they getting relief funds? Why are individuals being given relief funds and being encouraged to not pay rent by eviction moratoriums?

    3Reply
  • Stephen KeigheryBusiness Member
    Rental Property Investor · New Orleans, LA · Member since 2018 · 716 posts · 555 votes
    6y

    I am a landlord and do not like these laws @Jason J. I feel compelled to point out that your argument is flawed. It is not just people who have COVID-19 that are effected. The majority of businesses that are non-essential are closed down and people aren't working as a result of the response to the pandemic. The unemployment numbers are astronomical and this is why the government are trying to protect these people who are temporarily out of work due to Government policy. I am not saying I agree 100% with the ban on evictions but I think it is more complicated than you are considering.

    Home Buyer Louisiana4.853 Reviews
    WebsiteView Page
    0Reply
  • Account Closed
    Investor · Chicago, IL · Member since 2014 · 169 posts · 29 votes
    6y

    @David J.

    Your first post started with the words "Some Perspective... 0.15%". Everyone has read what you wrote after that, yet no one has mentioned that what you wrote isn't the cause of your issue you are talking about. This has 0% to do with who actually has the virus, and 100% to do with who is affected by the pandemic. And that number is far greater than 1%. Most people in this country have taken a hit financially, meaning they may not be able to even cover their rent let alone anything else. 

    Unless I missed something, the government isn't saying tenants don't have to pay rent, they are saying that this is an unprecedented event affecting everyone and by stating that landlords can't evict anyone for the time being is their way of acknowledging that. At some point we landlords will be able to start evicting again if we choose, meaning tenants will have to make up for the payments they have missed, or else get evicted. You mentioned that you didn't like the idea of forbearance because you'll have a ballon payment at the end (and I completely agree with you which is why I haven't taken that route yet) but along with that balloon payment should come a balloon payment of your tenants past due rents.

    If you haven't already tried working with the one tenant who is causing a problem, I would suggest doing so. She may be saying that she's not paying you right now because you can't evict her, but in reality maybe she's just saying that because she wants to feel like she's in charge. Talk to her, let her know you understand the stress this is causing everyone and if she doesn't want to make the payments now then you can work with her on partial payments until she's paid in full. The "paid in full" part being the most important thing here, because eventually she will need to make those payments. Try killing her with kindness, that usually works.

    Now, if the government comes back at the end of all this and says renters that didn't make any or all of their rent payments do not need to fulfill that financial obligation then we have a real issue. I doubt thats going to happen though.

    We are in unprecedented times right now. In the end (and there will be an end) everyone will be affected by this. Unfortunately some people will never recover from it, but those that remain as cool, calm and collected (as possible) will make it through to the "remember the coronavirus" stage of life and will be better off for it.

    0Reply
  • Matt Humps
    Rental Property Investor · Marietta, GA · Member since 2018 · 29 posts · 22 votes
    6y

    @Jason J.

    Sorry it’s not moot and he was absolutely correct. Risk is both seen and unseen - regardless of your view of the world. It may not be fair, it may not be right, but it’s what’s happening. Those who are capable to bear these risks will survive and those who aren’t will fall by the wayside. Leverage works both ways as does return.

    0Reply
  • David J.
    OP
    Investor · shawnee oklahoma · Member since 2017 · 194 posts · 148 votes
    6y

    @Stephen Keighery Consider also that it may be more complicated than you are considering as well. Nobody doubts the good intentions of the law but trading one problem for another isn't helping. 

    Consider the mechanics of how a tenant landlord relationship works? Why would anyone pay rent if law no longer compels them to do so?

    We aren't talking about people with a REAL hardship. Those folks should be helped and most landlords would love to be flexible and partner through the dark period.

    However, neutering a landlord totally with a blanket removal of all rights leaves no room for the normal mechanics to take place and invites rampant abuse. 

    Why act as those policy with some balance can't be produced? Because it can and it should. The current situation is a disservice to all. 

    0Reply
  • David J.
    OP
    Investor · shawnee oklahoma · Member since 2017 · 194 posts · 148 votes
    6y

    @Matt Humps It is moot because this thread is NOT about risk nor one's "capability to bear risk"

    I NOT once claimed I was unable to pay my mortgage. This is not about that.

    The issue is that LAW should not compel me to accept theft with no recourse.  PERIOD

    Can you imagine any other business being compelled to provide free goods/services with no recourse? NO

    I pay taxes on my buildings, I pay my mortgage, I pay my business license etc. AND I don't want to be compelled by law to provide FREE services to those who ABLE and refuse to pay.

    Those in need who have a hardship I am GLAD to help and capability is NOT and issue. But those trying to abuse the situation should not be allowed to do so because that's not good for anyone.

    Those laying down and allowing government to steal their shirts scare me. 

    1Reply
  • Marcus Johnson
    Investor · Saint Paul, MN · Member since 2015 · 663 posts · 512 votes
    6y

    @Jason J.

    Is there a way to incorporate into the screening process who are essential workers and only rent to those people without being in violation of the Fair housing act?

    2Reply
  • Steve Vaughan
    Rental Property Investor · East Wenatchee, WA · Member since 2014 · 10k+ posts · 16k+ votes
    6y

    The courts probably couldn't process evictions in any sort of timely manner anyway. Most of us arent greedy ogers. An eviction moratorium didn't need to be shouted from the rooftops.  

    I've changed up my normal placement process.  Screening was already tightened massively after my state made it 3x harder to evict last July.

    I'm placing my VA and HUD assisted people normally. I'm placing private tenants with 29-day renewable guest agreements only until this settles.

    When my state instituted a first come, first serve directive to us (later struck down as unconstitutional) I adapted with harder pre-screening.  Nobody comes, nobody to be force-placed. Not only were open houses out the window, the equivalent of an FBI background investigation was conducted before prospects even knew the dwelling address.  

    When my state made it take tons longer and harder to evict? I adapted by tightening screening criteria for all.  A lot. Hand-ups happen a lot less often and that is sad for me.

    Make it so I can't evict at all?   I'll adapt to that by placing guests, not tenants.

    Summary rules that supersede all will require us to adapt and I doubt the regulators will like the result. We can be very creative.  

    6Reply
  • David J.
    OP
    Investor · shawnee oklahoma · Member since 2017 · 194 posts · 148 votes
    6y

    @Account Closed I think you and I are saying the same thing. I don't disagree with the intentions of the eviction ban. I realize it's purpose.

    You're also right that at some point tenants will have to pay in full. If you've been a landlord for anytime at all, then you know that will not happen. Once behind the odds of your tenants catching up or paying a balloon payment are next to nothing.

    As far as my problem tenant, I am certainly being patient and killing her with kindness but she has no interest is "working with me". It's a tricky situation for sure. 


    0Reply
  • Michelle Fenn
    Real Estate Agent · Cleveland OH · Member since 2015 · 213 posts · 275 votes
    6y

    While the government has temporarily suspended our rights, they have also provided means to correct address the issue.     IE the Simulus Check and liberal unemployment benefits.   The real problem for landlords is the media.   Headlines on the internet and in the newpapers announcing that there will be no evictions for 60 to 90 days.  Mortgage forebarance for landlords.    Unfortunately very few of our tenants read beyond the headline.    Buried in the 3rd or 4th paragragh is what Paul Harvey would call "The rest of the Story".  It is there that it is explained that the Stimulus check is to be used to keep a roof over you head and put food on the table.   Instead many think this is Government sponsored Christimas in April.  If you want to know what your tenats are thinking, create an account on Nextdoor app wherever you own rentals.  

    5Reply
  • David J.
    OP
    Investor · shawnee oklahoma · Member since 2017 · 194 posts · 148 votes
    6y

    Some folks here act like market forces are not a thing. Let's see, in California they made shoplifting NOT a crime. (but you still have to pay for your products). How did that work out? Massive theft like never seen before, that's how.

    Now California says not paying your rent will no longer result in eviction. (but you still have to pay your rent) How do you suppose that will pan out?

    Creating a bunch of new legalized crime during a pandemic is not good for society. We can do better is the point.  Let's HELP those who have hardship AND not create new problems in the process. It can be done but not if landlords don't have any property rights at all. We need some sort of balance.

    1Reply
  • Wendy Wu
    Homeowner · New York, NY · Member since 2013 · 13 posts · 6 votes
    6y

    My tenant already told me that they cannot pay the rent. They have not paid the April rent yet. I am personally own this house and pay the mortgages, high property tax, and insurance, etc. the monthly rent just covered by my payment. Without rent income, I am going to break. What can I do?

    2Reply
  • Tuval Barnea
    Investor · Alpharetta GA · Member since 2019 · 17 posts · 11 votes
    6y

    Took me a good hour to go through most of the comments and I can understand the different points of view, however, allowing a tenant not to pay for 4 months is going to cause a huge problem for both tenants and landlords. 

    Tenants who are taking advantage of the current situation and are not paying rent will have to, at some point pay a lump sum of all their dues, at that point, assuming it will be after the full 120 days, they have already used the money they "saved" on rent payments for other important things and they are less likely to have an amount equal to 4 months rent payment available at the end of that period. 

    1. At that point they will have to either break the contract or be evicted because the landlord won't be able to suffer anymore loss of income on top of the period forced upon him/her. 
    2. Even if the landlord is going to help out by splitting the 4 months debt over a long period of time, that's still going to have impact on the tenant. 
    3. Some tenants might also do the math and decide that dealing with eviction is going to be better for them than paying all past dues.

    For landlords, even with the CARES Act in place (which only helps if you have a government backed mortgage on that property and has many other side effects that can easily open a separate long discussion):

    1. Landlords have to continue paying for ongoing expenses and repair claims by their tenants (paying or not), so in addition to not getting any income, they have to pay out of pocket. 
    2. Then at the end of the period, if they went for the forbearance plan, they have to pay all their dues to the bank which is not going to be forgiving at all, so even if you took on the forbearance plan, you'd better put that money in a savings account just in case the bank will not agree to any settlement other than full and immediate payment. 
    3. Tenants will not be able to pay for the past months! That means that landlords will have to decide whether they go through eviction or they build a repayment plan for the tenants. Either way, they will suffer from it.
    4. Landlords who plan on BRRRing or buying new investment properties will face new situation where they are denied of mortgage only because they signed up for the forbearance plan.

    Bottom line is, it would have been much better if the government who is "trying to help" would have stayed out and let the landlord and tenants deal with whatever happens on their own. In 99% of the cases, tenant and landlord would have solved it internally.

    4Reply
Join the conversationCreate a free account to reply, vote on answers and follow this thread.
Log InJoin for Free