Rental Property Investor · Red Bank, NJ · Member since 2017 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes
Until the preliminary (free) application is done and I meet them for a showing- everything is via text and email. It is a recent decision which is already paying off.
An exchange that re-affirmed my decision:
"Blah, blah, blah, interested"
"Sure, we require you complete this free application and then we will contact you for an appointment to see it."
<late> "Oh, I just saw you don't allow pets (even though it is the very first, middle and last line of the listing), is that a firm rule?"
"Yes, sorry, have a nice day"
"But even if the dog is well behaved and house broken, so cute... blah, blah, blah."
"Yes, sorry, have a nice day."
<later that evening> "Even if it is a service dog? Because it is a service dog"
"No, a service dog is not a pet, please complete the application and we will reach out.... blah, blah, blah..."
Why did you keep responding? In particular, why did you keep responding with an apology as if you are doing something wrong? You continued to engage so they continued to look for a weak spot. Once they switched the animal from a pet to a service animal, you were legally forced to respond and now you may end up renting to these master manipulators. They played you like a fiddle.
Why did you keep responding? In particular, why did you keep responding with an apology as if you are doing something wrong? You continued to engage so they continued to look for a weak spot. Once they switched the animal from a pet to a service animal, you were legally forced to respond and now you may end up renting to these master manipulators. They played you like a fiddle.
Why did you keep responding? In particular, why did you keep responding with an apology as if you are doing something wrong? You continued to engage so they continued to look for a weak spot. Once they switched the animal from a pet to a service animal, you were legally forced to respond and now you may end up renting to these master manipulators. They played you like a fiddle.
I rent in a vastly different market than yours. My state is run very differently for multi-family landlords than others. My state funds many organizations that pretend to be tenants. They inquire about Section 8, children and number of them, service dogs, etc. What you see as being played I see as operating within that paradigm. I will never be accused of saying something verbally which is contrary to the law in my state and the only evidence which will ever be presented is that of pleasant landlord conducting his business.
Once I informed them of the service animal all communication ceased, so I do not understand the fiddle? Additionally- they would have to demonstrate such a claim.
If I was in a market which was "pro-landlord" and did not have every branch of my government: legislative, executive and judicial, looking to impair my business, then perhaps I would do things differently.
But one thing is for sure, if I did operate in such "landlord friendly" market I would not presume to tell a fellow, successful, landlord in a more restrictive market how to conduct himself. I operate successfully in a state many investors won't even consider...
OK, I see my original response came across too harsh. To my knowledge, there is no law anywhere in this country that requires a Landlord to continue responding to an applicant. They weren't qualified, so that's it. You are under no obligation to continue communicating with someone. As long as you treat all applicants equally, there won't be a problem.
I get test callers to my office. My staff refers them to our website where the policies are published for all to see. If they ask questions that are already answered in the policy or advertisement, we ignore them. Here's how you could do the same:
Applicant: "Blah, blah, blah, interested." Landlord: "Our application policy is attached to this email. Please review our policies and the advertisement carefully to ensure you qualify. We will not respond to questions that are addressed in the policies or marketing. The application is online at [website]. The application fee is non-refundable under any circumstances."
What do you do after that?
Applicant: "The ad says no pets. Will you take a service animal?" Landlord: <silence>
Applicant: "Will you accept payments on the deposit?" Landlord: <silence>
Applicant: "The ad says rent is $1,200 a month. Is that negotiable?" Landlord: <silence>
Applicant: "I don't have time for an application because (insert excuse). I can pay you the entire year of rent in cash today." Landlord: <silence>
Applicant: "My credit score is really low because my husband drove us into debt and ran off with my mother, leaving me to raise 14 children on my own. Will I still be approved?" Landlord: <silence>
Applicant: "I love this house! It's perfect for me, but I won't be able to move in for three months. Will you hold it for me?"
Landlord: <silence>
If you have a written policy that addresses these questions, you'll never have to spend time answering them and you can never be accused of discrimination because everyone gets the same answer, in writing. If they can't / won't read the ad or the policies, then don't rent to them.
By engaging them I have drawn out the fallacy of the "service animal." They have continued to refer to it as a pet, then as a well behaved pet... by drawing them out I have demonstrated that they had never viewed it as a service animal.
The converse to that would be to ignore them and have their messages continue to jump to the top of my Zillow feed (be it under the same or a different email). And I think we can both agree that she would have pulled out the "service dog" on one of those "non-replied messages." Now she is invested, she is on a crusade against a jerk! She is that all too familiar American who is being victimized and she will rally the momo's of facebook... and some state agency will tell her- "you don't even need it to be a service dog, it be an emotional support animal." No thank you. By demonstrating my command of the law in a quick reply she realized she was dealing with a professional landlord who knows the law and that she was completely outmatched.
No service dog owner will ever refer to their animal as a pet when applying for a rental- likewise no pet owner is going to be able to have their pet certified as a service animal.
It does not cost me anything for a quick reply which serves as a record and it precludes my getting a lunatic over invested.
Engage to diffuse.
*Nevertheless, there are certainly times when it is fruitless to engage further, and had this persisted I would have had sufficient ammunition to defeat any challenge to discrimination. Getting back to the importance of text and email... especially in these anti landlord times.
By engaging them I have drawn out the fallacy of the "service animal." They have continued to refer to it as a pet, then as a well behaved pet... by drawing them out I have demonstrated that they had never viewed it as a service animal.
The converse to that would be to ignore them and have their messages continue to jump to the top of my Zillow feed (be it under the same or a different email). And I think we can both agree that she would have pulled out the "service dog" on one of those "non-replied messages." Now she is invested, she is on a crusade against a jerk! She is that all too familiar American who is being victimized and she will rally the momo's of facebook... and some state agency will tell her- "you don't even need it to be a service dog, it be an emotional support animal." No thank you. By demonstrating my command of the law in a quick reply she realized she was dealing with a professional landlord who knows the law and that she was completely outmatched.
No service dog owner will ever refer to their animal as a pet when applying for a rental- likewise no pet owner is going to be able to have their pet certified as a service animal.
It does not cost me anything for a quick reply which serves as a record and it precludes my getting a lunatic over invested.
Engage to diffuse.
*Nevertheless, there are certainly times when it is fruitless to engage further, and had this persisted I would have had sufficient ammunition to defeat any challenge to discrimination. Getting back to the importance of text and email... especially in these anti landlord times.
I think the feedback by Nathan was intended to be helpful.
Seems like you have a system that works well for you.✅
