Why we canceled a tenants direct deposit payment option…and why you should too after the 5-day notice.

[Michael S.]

Why we canceled a tenants direct deposit payment option…and why you should too after the 5-day notice. (This event pertains to an Arizona rental eviction issue, your states laws may differ...or be the same.)

Having direct deposit available to a tenant in arrears creates a situation where the tenant could potentially wait until a day before the court date and then make a partial rent payment, potentially leaving the landlord to have to resend the 5 days notice, re-file the court docs. Giving the tenant 20 more days of “free” rent while the new 5-day notice and court date is set.

This is due to: A.R.S. § 33-1371.

After the 5 day notice has been issued a partial payment creates a “re-set” for the tenant and the landlord must re-file to collect the remaining balance.

“After the five day notice, the landlord will most likely not be willing to accept partial payment because he will not be able to proceed with the case unless the tenant agrees in writing that the landlord can do so. A.R.S. § 33-1371. “Sourcehttp://justicecourts.maricopa.gov/CaseTypes/eviction.aspx

Our experience regarding a tenant from hell:

Overall our experience with tenants has been agreeable and often pleasant but in dealing with a large number of rentals you will occasional encounter the tenant from hell. Despite this, rental real estate still remains a great endeavor.

Over the past three months I have had a tenant become increasingly unreliable at paying rent on time.Late rent and excuses became more frequent.Filing the 5-day notice was done for each incident.Excuses ranged from “someone stole my identity” to medical emergency. Further investigation “deep Googling” later revealed that the tenant actually had their wages garnished for court related issues.In addition to the late rent, the tenant had always been a frequent complainer, we fixed each request. In an effort to be a “good” landlord the property manager went as far as to remove trees the tenant did not prefer.

After the most recent 5-day notice, the tenants behavior became increasingly aggressive.

- The tenant formally complained that a faucet was now dripping as if to imply that the home was un-inhabitable due to this.

- The tenant demanded the ability to pay rent via direct deposit.

- The most recent event displaying the tenants state of mind is they texted the property manger that rent would be available for pick up at the home in 48 hours.When the property manger went to home the male tenant repeatedly loudly screamed to attract witnesses why the property manger was coming to their home and harassing them. At this time the tenant unsuccessfully attempted to provoke the property manger into a physical reaction.

The request for direct deposit seemed the most harmless.The tenants request was granted and an account# and routing # were provided.However during this time I thought this seems an almost normal request, but why is the tenant so adamant about having direct deposit available and why now after the property manager has made paying rent so easy, including front door service?The answer can be found in A.R.S. § 33-1371. It was most likely the tenant’s intention to make a partial payment days before the court date and create the need to re-file. The option to direct pay was canceled 24 hours later and the account closed.

As of writing this, the court date for eviction awaits next week.

In hind sight there are some screening criteria an addendum that would help the property manager to avoid “hellish” tenants. But that is for another day/post