Forgive me if this has been posted before. A search didn't find anything. As you probably know, the Democrats in the House passed the Hereos Act, A part of this bill calls for a Federal Ban on evictions of any residential property for non payment of rent. This is extended for 12 month after the pandemic is over. No recourse for landlords. I rely on my properties (which are paid for) for my living expenses. Also in there is a provision stating the back rent will be forgivable. If the Senate passes this bill, I may be without income for a loooong time. Does anyone know any more about this?
Forgive me if this has been posted before. A search didn't find anything. As you probably know, the Democrats in the House passed the Hereos Act, A part of this bill calls for a Federal Ban on evictions of any residential property for non payment of rent. This is extended for 12 month after the pandemic is over. No recourse for landlords. I rely on my properties (which are paid for) for my living expenses. Also in there is a provision stating the back rent will be forgivable. If the Senate passes this bill, I may be without income for a loooong time. Does anyone know any more about this?
You ever notice how so many bad laws, acts, groups and movements are titled in such a way that it is considered shameful to oppose them?
It's a well written article but it did not mention anything about the weekly $600 unemployment bonus that people were eligible to receive if they got laid off from their job. The weekly bonus is basically rental assistance and actually helps cover a vast majority or even all of a low income or middle income family's housing cost in many areas. I do think many more of the smaller landlords will start feeling the pressure from the eviction moratorium once the weekly unemployment bonus comes to an end.
Why not offer renters incentives to pay a year of rent upfront? 10%-15% off? Just an idea that popped up in my head reading this.
In Pennsylvania, that would be illegal. A Pennsylvania court ruled that prepaid rent is just a security deposit under a different name, and thus in Pennsylvania a landlord is limited to being able to collect up front money (total of deposit and prepaid rent) not in excess of the security deposit limits that are in the state landlord tenant law.
This act really stands for :
House Employees Raiding Of Everyones Savings (HEROES)
How about:
House Employees Ruining Our Established Systems
Maybe we should have contest ;)
@sudhanshu singha @jr c
The article also seems to be promoting the "Heroes Act" which is frankly scary, but not surprising for Time.
It is unconstitutional for local governments to pronounce leases virtually null and void by enacting rent and eviction moratoriums.
With the Left it is always symbolism over substance, emotionalism and nothing is ever thought through thus leading to the dreaded unintentional consequences.
Forgive me if this has been posted before. A search didn't find anything. As you probably know, the Democrats in the House passed the Hereos Act, A part of this bill calls for a Federal Ban on evictions of any residential property for non payment of rent. This is extended for 12 month after the pandemic is over. No recourse for landlords. I rely on my properties (which are paid for) for my living expenses. Also in there is a provision stating the back rent will be forgivable. If the Senate passes this bill, I may be without income for a loooong time. Does anyone know any more about this?
You ever notice how so many bad laws, acts, groups and movements are titled in such a way that it is considered shameful to oppose them?
Yep, Patriot Act comes to mind.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/d...
I can see self evictions increasing. Landlords will become desperate IF they don't collect rent after 3-6months and have to continue paying utilities in a property that tenants are living rent free.
I don't pay my tenants utilities? Do you?
In some of my properties, I pay utilties. In ALL my properties (save a few of the homes), I pay water.
Due to the pause in evictions, my managers have started to shut off water to the building for 1 hour a day, and install shut off valves between the main, and each unit. If someone isn't paying for months, and is basically saying "F you, you can't get rid of me", we're turning off their water, pulling their meters/breakers, shutting off gas, etc.
My managers don't get paid much hourly as they're paid mostly on property performance. Meaning they might make $10/hr base but on a property that should bring in, let's say, $30k a month, they might get 50% of all money after $25k. So if they collect $30k in a month they make an extra $2,500. That will take their $10/hr to $24/hr (most managers average $25-30/hr after bonus)
BUT, if they have a bunch of deadbeats not paying, that $30k/month property might only bring in $25k. So that's $2,500/month out of THEIR pocket. Being taken from THEIR family. So I'm not telling them to do anything about it but they're doing what they need to do to deal with freeloaders since the court refuses to step in.
My own rentals are out of state, but isn't it illegal in CA to turn off a tenant's water, even if they are not paying? I know it is in my local area.
I'd assume so. But I don't invest in CA. I feel (personally) in blue areas, I'm not even the owner of my properties. The state is. But since I pay for water, why should I pay someones water bill out of my pocket when they're not paying for it via rent?
I'm pretty "rich" in terms of I live very comfortable. yet the gap between me and the super rich is **GIANT** WTF do I care how much Bezos makes?
If I design a widget that I can sell and make $10 per, and I sell 100m of them, which makes me $1b of profit, what concern should that be to anyone else? The people who bought my widget benift as that widget was worth more to them than the $ they handed over. Somehow if I only sold 1000 of them, thus making $10,000 that's "better" ?
Why not offer renters incentives to pay a year of rent upfront? 10%-15% off? Just an idea that popped up in my head reading this.
Well, like I mentioned earlier if you've got enough assets to pay a full years worth of rent why wouldn't you buy instead of rent?
Because not everyone WANTS to buy? Not everyone can qualify to buy. Some people want flexibility. Some people that have enough to buy *something* are saving till they can buy something even better.
It's called freedom. Stop being so opposed to it. Let people do what they want with their own labor/time/money. It's such an odd white liberal savior complex coming out all over the place right now.
If we are talking about a widget as in a computer application it is probably no concern to anyone. On the other hand if it is something which other people actually have to produce for you, it is their business if they aren't paid a fair wage.
And by the way, I don't know anyone who has enough assets to pay a full years rent up front that wouldn't prefer to buy. Of course they should be free to do so if they want. Good luck finding someone who wants.
https://www.american-apartment...
Actually, the language states that landlords can not use past evictions against applicants again. It also takes away credit score checks, criminal checks, and mandates you rent to any section 8 applicant. It looks like government control of private property.
Actually the new laws for section 8 mandate actually SAVED me during this pandemic! It became mandatory in January 2020 that you had to rent to any applicant with a section 8 voucher. I had 2 or 3 tenants that had vouchers, now I have 5 tenants that have vouchers across the 9 buildings/properties I own. So far their rent was always paid 100% of the time and I have not had any issues with them as tenants.
So while some laws are ridiculous, I can now understand why some laws are now mandatory. Years ago section 8 was secluded to "the projects" which were city owned buildings in low income areas with high crime rates. So all the neighbors were on the program. I know in very few states "The Projects" still exists, but it is less common today. I think this started to change in the 2000's but became mandatory here in California statewide by 2020. I still perform criminal checks and credit checks though, but if the tenant has good references, good credit, and no criminal background then I accept them.
I think eventually ALL properties will have to rent to people with pets though. I feel the way things are going, many pet owners are in an uproar over the fact many landlord or apartment ads mention "no pets allowed". When and if that happens I will have to accept pets in some of the properties that I currently do not accept pets in. I look at it this way, I am there to serve the community and offer them a place to live, they pay me, and give me good reviews. Sadly we now live in a time where a bad review or ANY review can make you or break you. If you have bad reviews you will lose business to your competition. So by adapting to new laws I am not only giving my tenants a benefit, I am also increasing my tenant volume, I make a profit, I then invest in more properties.