All Forum Posts by: Michael Temple

This sounds like a live and learn moments here. I don't have anything in my lease that addresses this specifically. It will definitely be in there the next time for sure. I am updating the lease today.

I will check with a pest company and see what they say.

I received this text this morning from one of my tenants...

"Good Morning, Mike! We have been seeing a TON of spiders and bugs in the house, and were wondering if it would be possible to get it sprayed. Please let me know what you think"

A couple of background facts...

1. I did an inspection on the house 2 weeks ago and found the place very clean and well maintained. I specifically asked if they were seeing any black ants in the house, which sometimes come in during the early spring. (We lived in this house for 15 years). They mentioned nothing. Now, this text only 2 weeks later.

2.  This couple is a little persnickety, they tend to text more than I would expect for what I consider small issues, but the house is a nice house in a great suburb and they are paying a high rent.

3. When we lived in the house it was not uncommon to see spiders and some bugs in the early spring/summer. It wasn't a TON as she says, but like most houses, there were some for sure. I don't know what a "TON" is, but I suspect she is blowing this out of proportion since I didn't see any issues when I inspected.

I would just like some advice on how I should respond and/or handle this. I am not really in favor of sending a pest crew over there for a lot of money when I don't think there is a real infestation here of any kind and what they are experiencing is normal from the time we lived there. However, I also don't want them to think I am simply ignoring them either. I would love some advice on this. Thanks!

Congrats! Awesome job on it.

I learned a lot from your post, thanks!

@Sam C. great point about HUD having deep pockets. I was already warned about them by a couple of people in my REIA group. It turns out a couple of members a while back ran afoul of them and were almost destroyed in the process. I generally hold your sentiment about most matters that involve a lawyer. I figure if I have to involve a lawyer I have already lost just because of the massive legal fees I will end up paying in the end.

@Thomas S. I totally agree. I have used my own standards in the past based on who I thought had the strongest application. However in my case none of them were in protected classes, but still I could see how in the wrong situation they would file a complaint with HUD and to me what was simply picking the strongest applicant based on credit, job, income, etc. is suddenly twisted into discrimination.

@Levi T. OK, now that makes sense at how they arrived at that conclusion. Convoluted government thinking is how they did it. I was wondering how an unprotected class was somehow getting protection from HUD and Fair Housing. I also see how the blanket policy would get you in trouble under their convoluted thinking.

@Thomas S. I also see your point about what happens when you start having some flexible policy that changes based on the situation. I can see how that might actually get you in MORE trouble potentially because if HUD could ever say your flexible policy has a pattern or is in a way discriminatory in a particular case you are in trouble again.

The bottom line is this is a potentially dangerous issue no matter how you slice it. I am going to check with my real estate attorney who has dealt with our local HUD agency and get his guidance on this. 

Thomas,
Thank you, that was helpful. Like I said, I certainly don't want to discriminate against anyone, but at the same time I have some investments in upper-middle-class neighborhoods and the neighbors would be quite angry with me if I allowed a violent felon or some other horrible crime to move next door to them. The HUD rule didn't say exactly what I am allowed to consider when reviewing the application and I figure that was by design so they have the latitude to pursue whatever issues they want and leave others alone. Which does not make it easy for those us that want to do things right, but need to successfully manage our investments as well.

@JohnUnderwood do you think that would also protect you from a HUD claim of Housing Discrimination? Also, do you like the standards they use to accept or deny individuals? While I don't want to run afoul of Fair Housing rules I also like the ability to set my own standards on who I will and will not accept. Perhaps that is just setting me up for disaster.

I was reading this article on the site...

https://www.biggerpockets.com/renewsblog/advanced-...

It says that a new HUD ruling says landlords can't have a blanket discrimination policy against people with a criminal record. The article makes a link to an NPR interview that essentially says you can't have a blanket policy, but says you won't always be sued if you consider a criminal record in your decision making. Of course, it doesn't say where that fine line is at.

OK, as with most bureaucratic stuff from the government I am confused. Are we allowed to screen out people with a criminal record or not?  In the article, he seems to suggest that landlords can, but just can't have a blanket policy. OK, so as long as I don't have a written policy that says I will never rent to a convict, but what am I allowed to screen them out on. He doesn't seem to give a definitive list of what is acceptable criminal behavior and what is not. This just smells like a HUD trap, where they are really vague about this so that they can essentially nail a landlord if they want to, but as the landlord, you don't really know when you are breaking the law. Anybody have any insight on this because I do run a criminal background check and I am trying to figure out if I am even allowed to use the thing.

Thank you for your comments. That is the direction I was leaning as well.

I have a mundane question here. I have a property that has a solid wood swing set in the backyard. It is getting old now and the current residents don't want to use it. So I am determining what to do. I thought when I first started renting out this house that this would be a nice add-on for a family with young children and families are often the ones to rent this property. However, after the current residents said they didn't think it was safe and didn't want it I started wondering if I was creating an unnecessary liability for myself, i.e. I provided a swing set that a resident or one of their friends got hurt on because it was old and something broke.

So my question is should I replace it as a nice bonus to families with children or totally remove it because it is a liability I should try and eliminate?