Quote from @Julie Chai:
Quote from @Cody L.:
Quote from @Julie Chai:
Quote from @Cody L.:
Quote from @Julie Chai:
Quote from @Theresa Harris:
You have someone lined up, let them do it. The fact that your tenants had an airBNB operating out of the rental against the terms of the lease and your current PM didn't do anything doesn't say much. When you found out, you should have told your PM to handle it-that is what you are paying them to do. I can't imagine anything harder than a PM having the owner working with tenants and not keeping the PM in the loop. You've already been doing things for the eviction, I'd just keep doing it.
I've always kept my PM in the loop and had them communicate with the tenants for me the entire time. I've never went behind them and try to talk to the tenant myself. Maybe I didn't explain it right in my original post.... but bottom line, PM just wants their money and don't want to do the hard work. PM helped me with evictions before with tenants refusing to pay maintenance bill, but because this time they don't agree that tenant is breaking the lease, they won't help me this time.
What would you do if in my position? Lease agreements includes utilities with rent, tenants pay rent on time but using it as an STR, putting you in a negative every month, lease states "No Airbnb or VRBO"
I don't understand what about the fact they're doing VRBO/airbnb causes you to be negative?
We have almost 100 units we lease to people who do airbnb. We don't have a problem with it. They pay rent better than most tenants, take care of small work requests (per agreement) and we hold a fat deposit in case of default.
I'm at a negative because all utilities are included. Plus, I'm missing a security deposit from one of the units, and they security amount is less than their rent.
Still confused. The security deposit size or missing has nothing to do with them doing STR. And I understand you might be negative because of high utility costs and having them baked into the rent -- but I'm not sure what them doing STR has to do with that?
I don't see why someone doing STR with their unit would have more utility bills? I don't have a way to measure STR vs. LTR but given STR units are normally only occupied 50-75% (guess) of the time, it would seem they'd use less water? Less AC?
I'd have kept them in and collected rent while I tried to work out this problem. Now you have an empty (or soon to be) property, no management, litigation, and it's 1000's of miles away. In a market that would make selling very difficult (esp empty).
I hope you get this all worked out.
In more simpler terms, guests from STR don't care about saving electricity or water because they're not paying for it.... same goes for hotel guests, right? LTR guests usually pay their own utilities so they are more prone to saving energy and water.
Usually utilities are included or not based on the design of the property. Almost all of my properties have a single water meter -- so we just bake it into rent (no way to individually submeter, and I don't feel like doing RUBS, I'd rather raise rent to accommodate it)
When it comes to electricity, it's either individually metered or it's not. If it's individually metered, it should go in the tenants name. If it's master metered, then -- like water -- just bake into rent (or try to RUBS)
But if this person was NOT doing STR, they still wouldn't be paying utils as that's not how their lease is. Thus back to my original question which is why do you think the fact they're doing STR means the utils (that they already don't have to pay for due to the lease) are going to be higher?
I'm not trying to argue here as you can do whatever you want with your property. I'm just curious. I have about 100 units leased to a handful of STR operators and I've found that it works quite well for me (vs. LTR tenants). Less turn over. They take care of small repairs. They're more "stuck" to the property due to the sunk costs they've put in. They pay a small premium. The units are always kept up, etc.
