All Forum Posts by: Michael S.

I have an applicant that listed a single previous residence on her application. After calling the previous landlord, I discovered that my applicant was not on the actual lease with the landlord, but was likely a subletter of one of the lessees. Previous landlord can't release details about someone for which I don't have a signed authorization. My applicant may or may not have ever been on a lease personally before. 

Do I just treat her as if she has no previous rental history? 

Try to get authorization from the person she sublet from? 

What do you guys do in these situations? I'm eager to fill this vacancy, it's been ~ 2 months, but I don't want to rush into a situation with a bad tenant. 

I have an individual interested in applying for a vacant townhome I own, but is asking whether or not a bankruptcy filing will be an automatic 'no' for the application. I haven't dealt with bankruptcies and am only marginally familiar with the implications. 

This potential applicant filed for bankruptcy (I assume Chapter 13) 9 months ago, and is in the process of converting it to Chapter 7 to get rid of their house and move back to their home town (where my rental is located). It is my general understanding that to convert to Chapter 7 from 13, you have to not be able to afford the payment plan the courts originally ordered...

Anyone had a similar situation? Thoughts on whether this is an automatic deal breaker? 

Thanks for the input guys!

Unit is part of a 4plex. Each unit has a small (8'x10') deck on the back, maybe a foot or less off the ground. They are in fine structural shape, but are probably due for a refinish. 

One of our new tenants (have rented for 2 months) contacted us asking if they could sand and repaint their deck. Part of me wants to let them go ahead since it needs it, but I'm leery of whether the job will be done well. 

Do you guys generally let tenants do updates like this? If so, do you have them sign an agreement stating they will be held responsible if the job is left incomplete or worse off than when they started? 

@Kim Meredith Hampton - thanks for the advice!

The IC approached me after they saw the unit for rent. They have a lot of need and work with several other property owners in town. I checked with a few of them, and none had any major headaches and said the tenants were generally very clean and collecting rent was never a problem, since the IC wants to keep property owners happy so they continue to rent places to their refugees.

I've checked the unit myself a couple of times, and it's true, it's nearly as clean and tidy as the day I put it up for rent. Compared to the type of tenants that generally rent and live in the area my unit is in, this was a huge plus. Hopefully this hiccup is not the norm!

As far as the deposit is concerned - the tenant that has moved out paid half of the deposit. My first thought was that she would forfeit this since she did not meet the requirements for having it returned (no written notice, no cancellation fee paid, at least yet). Then when a new tenant moves in, they would pay the missing half of the deposit. Is this incorrect for what you are suggesting? 

Another question - you mention the vacating resident needing to pay rent until the unit is rented (up to two month's worth). The verbiage of the lease is that the two month's rent she is liable to pay is a cancellation FEE, and not to be treated as rent, since she has vacated the unit and broken the lease early. To me, this means she pays the 2 month fee (or 1 month fee since another tenant is still in the unit?) regardless of how fast I can get a new tenant in. Is that not accurate? 

I worked with my local International Center to place two refugees into one of my units. Two single women that don't know each other, but this is apparently status quo for how the International Center places their incoming refugees that need an apartment.

Before I rented to these to ladies, the IC guaranteed them employment within 90 days, and their rent is paid by a stipend from the US government. They are both on the lease, and they split the security deposit and monthly rent bill.

I just got a call from one of the tenants brother (neither woman speaks english very well), saying that his sister has moved out of the apartment and wants her name off the lease. I explained to him that she signed a year long lease, and that there were penalties associated with breaking the lease early. I got the sob story about not being able to afford it because she doesn't have a job. At that point I told him I would speak to the IC and give him a call back.

I'm waiting for feedback from the IC at the moment. I don't quite understand why she can't afford it since her rent comes from a grant, and if she doesn't have a job yet, she will shortly (she's been in the unit for 2 months). But that's all for me and the IC to figure out. 

I see a few options:

1) Let her leave, assume I won't get blood out of a turnip, and have the IC place a new refugee with the current tenant. She would of course forfeit her security deposit.

2) Attempt to enforce my lease policies. She should have given me 30-day written notice to vacate and a 2-months-rent penalty fee for breaking the lease early. I seriously doubt I will see any of that.

3) Cancel the lease outright, since I'm not sure the existing tenant can afford it all by herself for long, although I could be wrong. Then look for new tenants. I don't like this option, since I don't want to necessarily displace someone that didn't do anything wrong. 

I'm in uncharted waters here, because these girls don't have any of the normal IDs or means of submitting them to collections. I have their Alien#'s and names, but that's about it...

And how do I treat the existing lease with the tenant that's still there? Have her sign a new one? Would the new lease be retro-active, or just a brand new lease effective the day we sign? I don't have any verbiage in my lease about what happens if just one tenant decides to up and leave with no warning... Is that something I should add?

Thanks!

I have a pet clause in my lease that says "No pets, birds, or animals of any kind allowed on premises without written consent of landlord and Pet Addendum signed".

When my tenants moved in, I asked them if they had pets, they said "no". When I went over the lease word-for-word, I pointed out that no pets of any kind were allowed.

Come to find out, my tenants DO have a small caged bird. When I confronted the tenant, their response was "It's just a small bird, not a cat or a dog". When I reminded them of the lease and the terms (along with the associated fees for pets), he said "If you're going to charge me for the bird I'm just going to give it away." 

I hate to be an a**hole here, but I don't appreciate the tenants hiding it from me. Do small birds do damage? Should I waive the fee, or set the boundaries for what is and isn't allowed, especially when it was kind-of behind my back?

Thanks Everyone - turns out the original teller I spoke with was just misinformed. I went in and spoke to someone else and had no issues depositing the money order with no charge!

@Account Closed -

When I took a MoneyGram money order to my bank, they told me they didn't cash/deposit those, and that I'd need to go to the issuer to cash it. MoneyGram seems to be sold at Walmart, and they charge $3 to cash them. 

I called my bank back, and am getting conflicting responses about whether they do or don't actually cash them. May have just had a new teller when I first talked to them.  

If you accept money orders as payment, do you generally require the tenant add an extra amount equal to the cost of cashing the money order? Or is that something you, the landlord, pay for?