Hello fellow BP members, 

I'm not looking for answers, but I am curious if anyone with rentals in Baltimore City has dealt with the following situation:

Here's the scenario - I have a SFH rental in Baltimore City with a long time tenant. She's subsidized through Section 8, partially. Still paying her rent, but as of late, she's falling behind on paying her water bill. Not sure why. I informed her repeatedly if she's having financial trouble, then approach Section 8 on re-adjusting her rent portion until she has it firmly under control. Per the lease she's accountable for paying her water utility bills.

Now, here's where it's my problem.  Typically (in a place that makes sense), if someone fails to pay a bill, any bill, then the service is cut off by the service provider. That absence of service is more than enough incentive to get past due bills paid to restore service, especially if it's water.  Everyone needs running water where they reside.  However, Baltimore City doesn't cut water service for delinquent water bills, but simply places a tax lien on the property once the delinquent bill is over $1,000 over due and after failing to pay three consecutive delinquent water bills.  I hear NYC does the same, not sure why, maybe to save costs on continually cutting off and turning back on water for multitudes of properties.  In any case, it would certainly prevent further investment on my end on buying additional properties in Baltimore.  

To avoid any issues with the city, I paid the tenant's bill and informed Section 8.  My argument is that if the water service is never discontinued, then there's zero incentive for any tenant to pay their water bills in Baltimore City, at least on time.  

Again, I'm just curious if anyone experienced this.