For those that "haven't been affected by eviction moratorium"

For those that "haven't been affected by eviction moratorium"

Flipper/Rehabber · Indianapolis, IN · Member since 2014 · 54 posts · 144 votes

For those of you who say the eviction moratorium doesn’t/hasn’t affected you. I’m here to tell you it does. If you own rental property, but “haven’t had any issues”, 12% of mom and pop housing providers- your colleagues- have been forced out of the business due to the moratorium. Laws around the country are preventing housing providers from running background checks, criminal history, credit history, eviction history. You haven’t had any issues YET. If you own your home, or wish to in the future- the government has set the precedent that it can tell you what you can and cannot do with your property. The Biden administration has also stated they wish to eliminate single family zoning altogether. You may lose that right, or opportunity. This affects you. If you have gone into a contract with someone- where you agree to do something in exchange for something else- the government has now said they will not honor that contract. This affects you. As a housing provider and real estate professional, I have personally had very minimal issues or losses myself. But I will fight this- because it’s tyranny and blatant government overreach. The beauty and success of this great United States of America has relied upon having rights- The right to own property, the right to make decisions about our bodies and beings. This country provides opportunity to any individual- from any race, gender, or background. In particular, the housing industry has created an incredibly diverse group of entrepreneurs and success stories, that can be shared with future generations. These fundamental rights are slowly being chipped away and I challenge those of you who say “you are not affected” to stand up and fight with us. Make a donation. Share with a friend. Volunteer your time. DO something. Your livelihood is next.

55Reply
150 views

Most Popular Reply

Nathan GesnerBusiness Member
Moderator
Real Estate Broker · Cody, WY · Member since 2010 · 28k+ posts · 41k+ votes
5y

My market is a good example of this. I manage nearly 400 rentals and didn't have a single non-paying tenant due to COVID. But the government, media, and politicians keep pushing more and more "benefits" to renters that stop paying. The rhetoric really ramped up in the spring as the eviction moratorium was nearing an end and federal dollars were pushed to help tenants catch up on rent. As soon as the ERAP money came available, I suddenly had tenants paying late or not paying at all and then applying for ERAP money. It's just a cash grab. Here's the real funny part: every business in town is begging for workers and my 14-year-old was able to grab two jobs and earn over $2,000 a month this summer which would have been enough or every single one of my tenants claiming they need assistance. Our government created a problem then teaches people how to game the system to grab free money while leaving the Landlord (mostly females and minorities) twisting in the wind.

The DIY Landlord Book4.7248 Reviews
See this reply in the discussion

77 Replies

Jump to latestLatest
  • Investor · Philadelphia, PA · Member since 2015 · 3k+ posts · 3k+ votes
    5y

    @Dan Heuschele

    Yes I do agree with you that a lot of people agree with you. It has been that way for a long time.

    But to me residential is residential. Splitting a single into a duplex has no real effect on the neighbors. It’s a minimally invasive way to add housing supply, taken on only by those who elect to for themselves.

  • Real Estate Agent · Baltimore, MD · Member since 2016 · 45 posts · 34 votes
    5y

    @Laura Guy

    This is a great post! One of my properties was affected and it took me 8 months to get the tenant out. It's not right that we don't have the right to evict tenants not holding up to their end of the contract.

  • Dan H.Pro Member
    Investor · Poway, CA · Member since 2015 · 7k+ posts · 8k+ votes
    5y
    Originally posted by @Max T.:

    @Dan Heuschele

    Yes I do agree with you that a lot of people agree with you. It has been that way for a long time.

    But to me residential is residential. Splitting a single into a duplex has no real effect on the neighbors. It’s a minimally invasive way to add housing supply, taken on only by those who elect to for themselves.

    So you think 1) the zoning should apply to property type but not the density?  In both cases the owner is choosing to do what they desire with the property they own without consideration of the impact on neighbors.  2) that people should not be able to choose to live in an area that ensures low density?  You do not understand why someone would choose to want to live in a rural, low density area?

    My belief is maintain the options for people who enjoy the cities (my Mom, she loved city life and grew up in Berlin) and for those who prefer low density options. My Dad's area used to require 4 acre lots per house, but they now must be permit an ADU and a JADU on these lots. 3 units per 4 acres is low density, but it does change the rural feel of the area. The community had many years ago passed the prop that limited the lots to 4 acres so the majority wanted the low density and people who purchased there understood these limits. The majority of the people who live there have horses, goats, chickens, dogs that run free, etc. Higher density changes the feeling against the wishes of most of the community and contrary to what was in effect when they purchased. I believe people should be able to purchase in these low dense rural areas and have the type of community that was implied by the zoning when they purchased.

  • Rental Property Investor · Toledo, OH · Member since 2017 · 257 posts · 215 votes
    5y

    @Laura Guy I agree this violated property rights and privately negotiated contracts. I don't care which president was in office when it started or ended. It was a huge overreach across the board. It also didn't help tenants, but hurt them. They are still responsible for the past due rent. Depending on how far behind they are most will not ever be able to pay off that debt, pay current rent, and live. So, despite the back-patting going on in D.C., this didn't really help anyone, but probably hurt too many to count on both sides of the fence, i.e. property owners and renters.

    A fellow investor I know with over 50 years of investing experience says "A situation no matter how bad, or grave the circumstances can still be made worse by the government." 

  • Investor · Philadelphia, PA · Member since 2015 · 3k+ posts · 3k+ votes
    5y

    @Dan Heuschele

    “Higher density changes the feeling…..”

    This is the Karen argument.

    Being able to zone away people not like one self is not a constitutional right.

  • Dan H.Pro Member
    Investor · Poway, CA · Member since 2015 · 7k+ posts · 8k+ votes
    5y
    Originally posted by @Max T.:

    @Dan Heuschele

    “Higher density changes the feeling…..”

    This is the Karen argument.

    Being able to zone away people not like one self is not a constitutional right.

    To me the karen is the person that feels they can change what the community does not desire solely because they desire it.  Damn what the majority desires.  Damn the lack of choice that will eventually result.

    If a person wants to live in a high density area, they should buy in a high density area (or at least an area zoned for high density).  If they want to add a unit (or 10 units) they should purchase where the current zoning allows the addition.

    I fear these low density rural areas that want to maintain properties that allow horses, goats, off leash dogs, etc. will eventually vanish (at least in the suburbs of highly sought areas like coastal CA). 

    I want to maintain the choice for people who want to live in low density areas (as well as those who want to live in high density areas).

    You and the Karens do not appreciate that some people want to live in low density areas and that choice should be an option (just as it should be an option for people to live in high density areas).

  • Real Estate Investor · Williamson County, TX · Member since 2011 · 1k+ posts · 961 votes
    5y

    @Laura Guy Where did you get the 12% statistic? Thanks.

  • Investor · Phoenix, AZ · Member since 2018 · 420 posts · 388 votes
    5y

    @Max T. rent controls and a moratorium on evicting military personnel during a war time are a far cry from what’s gone one here.

  • Investor · Philadelphia, PA · Member since 2015 · 3k+ posts · 3k+ votes
    5y

    @Dan Heuschele

    That choice will always exist in the boonies. Preserving low density in greater metro areas (suburbs) has been a mistake on so many levels.

  • Rental Property Investor · Austin, TX · Member since 2018 · 40 posts · 17 votes
    5y

    Really great thread, thanks for starting it. I think your initial recommendations were spot on -  participate in the conversation, and vote. On BP we are kinda / mostly on the same page or have an understanding of how these laws practically impact RE, but it’s people outside of the industry that at times lack understanding I think. I have friends that have said things like no one should be allowed to own 2 homes, that will help boost home ownership for all.

  • Flipper/Rehabber · Indianapolis, IN · Member since 2014 · 54 posts · 144 votes
    5y

    @Whit B. I agree! I didn’t agree with it under Trump either

  • Flipper/Rehabber · Indianapolis, IN · Member since 2014 · 54 posts · 144 votes
    5y

    @Steve Vaughan take legal action. Which is exactly what we are doing.

  • Flipper/Rehabber · Indianapolis, IN · Member since 2014 · 54 posts · 144 votes
    5y

    @Michael Temple lol!! Amen!!

  • Flipper/Rehabber · Indianapolis, IN · Member since 2014 · 54 posts · 144 votes
    5y

    @Marian Smith

    .

    https://www.globest.com/2021/06/30/eviction-moratorium-forced-12-of-small-landlords-out-of-business/

  • Bruce WoodruffPro Member
    Contractor/Investor/Consultant · San Diego / Phoenix · Member since 2021 · 12k+ posts · 15k+ votes
    5y
    Originally posted by @Erik Applegate:

    I have friends that have said things like no one should be allowed to own 2 homes, that will help boost home ownership for all.

    Well your friends are a) quasi-communists, and b) idiots

  • Rental Property Investor · Cincinnati, OH · Member since 2020 · 84 posts · 81 votes
    5y

    @Laura Guy

    Really we just need to educate people that by pushing all the risk and responsibility onto the property owners and no responsibility on tennants only increases the cost of housing and further pushes it into the hands of institutions that will never have an incentive to work with tennants or be responsive to them.

    The states with the most regulations have highest costs for those respective goods.

    The government's job is to setup the sandbox then let the kids play.

    The moratorium wouldn't have been so bad for landlords had the government distributed the billions in aid it promised to pay rents. But unfortunately those funds only 10% got distributed.

    We can do mortariums and social safety nets if we are willing to do the leg work BEFORE you actually have to use it.

  • Dan H.Pro Member
    Investor · Poway, CA · Member since 2015 · 7k+ posts · 8k+ votes
    5y
    Originally posted by @Max T.:

    @Dan Heuschele

    That choice will always exist in the boonies. Preserving low density in greater metro areas (suburbs) has been a mistake on so many levels.

    It does not exist in the boonies in CA. The ADU/JADU rules are statewide.

    I do not believe the cities need to keep increasing their population/density just because more people want to live there.  There are plenty of places for these people to move and have a home in this large nation that does not require any change of zoning.  People feel entitled to live where they want and believe they should be provided cheap housing to live there.  There is plenty of cheap housing in this big nation.  Those people do not want to live in those locations.  

    My city has the nickname the “city in the country”.  It used to apply more than it does now.  The idea was a city that had significant open space, fairly low density housing, and a country feel.  To achieve this, you have to limit density. 

    There are plenty of cities with higher density for people who want higher density living.  These cities typically have many properties that the zoning allow higher density than is currently provided.  Vertical builds can optimize existing zoning.  

    The zoning existed to help define the residential area and provide some confidence that the area was going to match the residents desired place to live going forward.  Changing the zoning negatively impacts the owners who purchased with certain beliefs based on the existing zoning.  it is removing low density choice.  


  • Rental Property Investor · Burlington County, NJ · Member since 2019 · 540 posts · 771 votes
    5y

    @Victor S. Re: your take on the Biden Admins’ 1031 plan, I understood that it would eliminate it for those making more than $400k. Even were 1031s to be gone, we still believe that, on balance, the benefits to real estate investors of government policies FAR outweigh the costs. 

    Glad we can disagree respectfully though. Continued success to you iin your investments!

  • Jay HinrichsBusiness Member
    Real Estate Consultant · Summerlin, NV · Member since 2014 · 45k+ posts · 66k+ votes
    5y
    Originally posted by @Dan H.:
    Originally posted by @Max T.:

    @Dan Heuschele

    That choice will always exist in the boonies. Preserving low density in greater metro areas (suburbs) has been a mistake on so many levels.

    It does not exist in the boonies in CA. The ADU/JADU rules are statewide.

    I do not believe the cities need to keep increasing their population/density just because more people want to live there.  There are plenty of places for these people to move and have a home in this large nation that does not require any change of zoning.  People feel entitled to live where they want and believe they should be provided cheap housing to live there.  There is plenty of cheap housing in this big nation.  Those people do not want to live in those locations.  

    My city has the nickname the “city in the country”.  It used to apply more than it does now.  The idea was a city that had significant open space, fairly low density housing, and a country feel.  To achieve this, you have to limit density. 

    There are plenty of cities with higher density for people who want higher density living.  These cities typically have many properties that the zoning allow higher density than is currently provided.  Vertical builds can optimize existing zoning.  

    The zoning existed to help define the residential area and provide some confidence that the area was going to match the residents desired place to live going forward.  Changing the zoning negatively impacts the owners who purchased with certain beliefs based on the existing zoning.  it is removing low density choice. 

    some of the biggest wealth and take away of wealth is created by zoning moves both up and down.

    Myself.

    I bought a little 4 acre tract in Sonoma county in the mid 90s for 25k  just held it would not perk so not buildable.. well town grew around me .. brought me into the city up zoned me to multi family and we sold it for 2 million..   we benefited right ??? I did nothing to create this value add other than I did think it would grow as a freeway interchange had been built some years before .

    now the down side.. I have an option on 120 acres in HIllsboro Oregon for 5.5 million..  have had it since 09..  we got moved into the Urban reserve ( currently non buildable farm land) celebration time.. then the thousand FIENDS of Oregon went to the state and through back room politics they redrew the line and now we are out of the reserves and probably have to wait till about 2035 to come in..  IN the urban reserve todays value 50 million plus  out of it not even what i paid for it..  although I did get an offer from a big developer last year for 8 mil but we are holding on for the gusto.. I might never see it but my grandkids will.

    As for landlords feeling screwed its a for profit private enterprise deal with it.. just like every other business deals with govmit regulations those that can succeed those that just whine and complain they just fade away. 

  • WorldWide · Member since 2016 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    5y
    Originally posted by @Ron Brady:

    @Victor S. Re: your take on the Biden Admins’ 1031 plan, I understood that it would eliminate it for those making more than $400k. Even were 1031s to be gone, we still believe that, on balance, the benefits to real estate investors of government policies FAR outweigh the costs. 

    Glad we can disagree respectfully though. Continued success to you iin your investments!

    don't believe it's tied to one's income. good luck to you as well. 

    Biden Proposal to Eliminate 1031 Exchange Spurs Investment (therealdeal.com)

    Joe Biden wants to trash the 1031 exchange (biggerpockets.com)

    Biden administration capital gains and 1031 exchange (biggerpockets.com)

  • Investor · Philadelphia, PA · Member since 2015 · 3k+ posts · 3k+ votes
    5y

    @Dan Heuschele

    You own the property. Not the neighborhood. Not the zoning of the neighbors. Things change. You can pivot with the change or if you really don’t like it, sell and move. And yes, there will continue to be rural places that don’t fill up with duplexes even though they are allowed to.

  • Real Estate Investor · Austin, TX · Member since 2015 · 214 posts · 234 votes
    5y

    My "portfolio" (2 homes) has been running at 50% economic occupancy, with one of the tenants using the moratorium as a shield to not pay. Although I understood mentally this was a possibility before I acquired the last one, experiencing this directly in a more visceral way has made me realize I don't want to take the risk of owning more rental SFH's. Although diversification is the way to mitigate this, I think multifamily is a far better asset class that provides better diversification, scale, etc. I'd rather leave it to the professionals to deal all the problems and invest alongside them as a silent partner. The more regulations and harder it is for small landlords, the more it benefits those with sufficient capital to deal with all the problems and navigate the increasingly complex legal and regulatory landscape.

    Agreed with the OP that the heavy hand of government will continue to shape the housing market, as it always has. As society becomes more complex, larger groups such as corporations and private equity groups will benefit from regulatory capture and rent-seeking behavior. Power and capital will become more concentrated in the hands of fewer people. If you can't beat 'em - join 'em.

  • Bruce WoodruffPro Member
    Contractor/Investor/Consultant · San Diego / Phoenix · Member since 2021 · 12k+ posts · 15k+ votes
    5y
    Originally posted by @Ron Brady:

    @Victor S. Re: your take on the Biden Admins’ 1031 plan, I understood that it would eliminate it for those making more than $400k. Even were 1031s to be gone, we still believe that, on balance, the benefits to real estate investors of government policies FAR outweigh the costs. 

    Glad we can disagree respectfully though. Continued success to you iin your investments!

     Your take(s) so far are based on the concept that Government is 'not all that bad' , but you fail to recognize that Government should not be involved in, or taxing most of the stuff it has it's finger's in anyway.....WADR :-)

  • Rental Property Investor · Austin, TX · Member since 2018 · 40 posts · 17 votes
    5y

    @Bruce Woodruff yes agreed, some of my friends are! But I’m trying to help educate them. 

  • Bruce WoodruffPro Member
    Contractor/Investor/Consultant · San Diego / Phoenix · Member since 2021 · 12k+ posts · 15k+ votes
    5y
    Originally posted by @Erik Applegate:

    @Bruce Woodruff yes agreed, some of my friends are! But I’m trying to help educate them. 

    Every one we educate is a good thing!

Join the conversationCreate a free account to reply, vote on answers and follow this thread.