All Forum Posts by: Jonathan R McLaughlin

Ouch. 

As a practical matter if the tenant has any tactical sense (and it sure sounds like they may) they could probably challanege a scrivenor's error defense by claiming ignorance of the landlord's "big business" thought process:  "I thought maybe he had some reason for it, my friends suggested maybe it was tax issues, or insurance or that kind of thing or maybe he was doing something illegal and I would be in trouble if I said anything. I figured he had his reasons,  I didn't say anything because I didn't want to change his mind or get in trouble"

Not too credible, granted, but no less credible than "I didn't realize the mistake for 11 months" and you are quite likely to find a highly amused and perhaps not too sympathetic judge, especially if small claims or housing.  

And as others have pointed out, they are likely judgement proof for that kind of amount. Maybe you get a month judgement or something like that [at best] and a week in the headlines...hit "reset".

Hi Juan, Add to your cost the requirement that you house the tenants while performing the deleading work. They--and especially the child--can't be there during the process and MA law requires you to supply housing. Leaving aside actual risk, once there is known lead and a child in the unit this MUST be done. Also, strict liability means even if the child has lead poisoning from another source you would be likely to still be held responsible. How about make the current owner do it? Make that offer and see the price come down further I suspect... Good luck!

Good advice in the above posts that they have seized control of this relationship in an unhealthy way and you need to take it back. Some of your actions set the stage for this though, and it may be worth looking at your actions to help avoid these situations in the future.

1) you showed them an apt. in one condition--when they came back after your move out you had created new damage ("chipped paint from taking things off"/"moderate scuff marks". They mentioned this at the inspection. If they had done this you would have used their security deposit to fix, yes?

2) they rented a house with a water softener ("we intended to move it") and checked to make sure it worked and was staying--it wasn't but that wasn't mentioned to them

3) they rented a house with a heated pool, learned the heater didn't work and asked you to deliver what you promised. 

4) you say "we want to keep our equipment in good condition" and use a regular pool service--but you haven't kept it in good condition (the heater didn't work and you didn't know it) and regular maintenance is a  minimum standard of professionalism, not an above and beyond thing 

Now, I'm not saying they ARE reasonable or that you are the bad guy, but part of what set the stage for this is you not delivering the product you promised, then being irritated at the tenants for asking for what they were promised.

Flip this around to their position for a second: 

they show up, there's noticeable damage that wasn't there before, lots of stuff they thought worked didn't, landlord argues about making it right and seems not to think it matters, contractors don't seem to respect them or their time (why do you believe the owner not them by the way?), landscaping work is shoddy and unprofessional and repairs, if done, are done on the cheap at the landlords convenience, nothing indicates its going to change...fine, we better make sure we stick up for ourselves or he will take advantage of us on everything.

I mediate in housing cases and see the magistrates work through stuff like this. You might be surprised about their view of the situation...

Hi Jestin,

It sounds like they actually meet your criteria (the 700 smart move) but you have an additional worry about the loans?

As a practical matter college student loan debt is a weird animal, as you have had a taste of in your own experience, many people incur it in pre-adult phase when they weren't very responsible (don't ask me how I know!) and it becomes like a chronic illness for an otherwise healthy person when they are adults.

Most folks in that situation put rent in a very different mental bucket than loans. I'd be more concerned about collecting as a loan officer than a landlord about a high DTI ratio resulting from that kind of debt. With good (and real) landlord references the loans alone wouldn't scare me much.

@Bernie Neyer

Hi Bernie, this statement:

 First, let me point something out. In small claims you are barred from using an attorney. You may consult one, but his fees are not usually recoverable.

and some of the other implications in your post regarding different states are simply not correct for every state. 

I am a mediator in MA small claims court, have seen a number of landlord tenant issues where people routinely use attorneys and magistrates allow for fee recovery. It is not mandated, but it is not banned. This is true even in mediation where attorneys are allowed.

The magistrate has a great deal of discretion in MA small claims (which go up to $10,000) but I have never seen them bar an attorney from court.

Oh boy, Alarm bells chiming...it's thin as you have observed, and one of the one of the advantages of multi-units that size is some economies with the one roof etc, but with the units split up like that...? I see lots of Capex. etc in your future

Feel free to PM me, have interest (and interests) in the area.

I know of at least one structure to do this which passes IRS muster, but it is likely to be prohibitively expensive: Form the LLC Draw up a promissory note from the llc to the IRA Structure the note as a convertible bond with a fixed interest (which can be adjusted by mutual consent) Note converts to equity upon sale (equity kicker) Hurdles: I believe this is bank dependent but common...IRA will have to own less than 20% of the equity so as not to be on the note, so the IRAs interest received should work out to about 50% of the return minus the 20% in an equal partnership UBIT will need to be paid in the financed portion (not awful) Bank needs to be informed and agree to the bond being in second position You will likely need an IRA custodian sign off Don't try this at home! You need a lawyer, accountant and IRA expert conversant in this, not to mention perhaps other attorneys to protect your interest in the partnership. Doesn't seem worth it for a property at this price, but it is possible.

Ok, I know this is a tough situation, but you keep complaining about MA laws even though you are not taking advantage of them. You weren't required in ANY way to give her an extension, for instance. You let her sign an agreement late, you didn't create a lease for her, you aren't going to small claims court...which by the way is much less stacked against you than you believe. That's all on you.

"dragging my feet, its MA...I'm not allowed to serve eviction until the 30 day notice expires, it expires a few days ago and my initial plan was to give the tenant a 1-month written extension...." What?? 

Your attorney said 6 weeks to 2 years and you are assuming its the worst case scenario, and so far the only delay in the process has been caused by YOU. You aren't helping yourself and you are trying to shift all the responsibility off of you. 

Count the # of times in your post you complained about MA laws and compare it to the # of actions you have taken.

Actually, Greg S. I agree with you. I meant to focus on a market price that is desirable and reflects the value of the apt. Do that and I do think you get multiple tenants

"Market rate" is a concept much bandied about but little thought about. Would you agree that at any given time its a range? A reasonably narrow range that is pegged to the specifics of the micro neighborhood and condition. 

I like the notion of being equal in price and slightly superior in function (size, condition)  to the competition. You can have success the other way too. Like any other product, people see  value as a function of both price and quality.

I should stress I'm not trying to start a debate, just clarifying what I meant in the last post. I think you consistently offer excellent advice, advice that I've been reading for a while now. 

Now, about "dead equity"....:)