All Forum Posts by: Greg Martin

It's definitely interesting to see the owners concerns vs the property managers concerns in this thread.

@Michael Smythe just to make sure we're on the same page.  So in the situation we are considering where the management company did nothing wrong and the owner did nothing wrong.  However, there is an allegation of not following Fair Housing laws.  You think the owner should be responsible for paying to defend the management company against those allegations, not the company actually in charge of advertising, screening, and managing the tenants?

Quote from @Michael Smythe:

@Greg Martin we don't disagree with what you've stated. Typically, this should fall under gross negligence and the PMC's E&O would cover.

EXCEPTION: applicant sues "just because they can"! 

We actually had this happen! 

Applicant just out of prison, with no good credit and just a few months on the job. We asked them for a cosigner, so they sent us cosigner credit info, but no income info. Cosigner had good credit, but we asked for income info - so, we could pursue them for nonpayment and maybe garnish wages if needed. Applicant filed Fair Housing complaint for discrimination. 

#1 - what did we do wrong?

#2 - who pays PMC legal fees for this?

#1 Sounds like nothing.
#2 Are you saying the owner should pay?  I would challenge with, what did the owner do wrong?  In reality, the applicant should pay, but we know that isn't going to happen.

I don't mind those examples, Michael. My concern are things like fair housing violations on their ads or screening process.  If Ive indemnified them or held harmless for everything related to managing the property, then I've agreed to cover that, when that shouldn't be me.

That's a good question.  I'm asking them to edit theirs a bit.  We will see what their response is.  However, their contract language is a determining factor whether I'll use their service or not. 

Blah, blah, blah?  It's pretty much the exact opposite of blah, blah, blah.  That language is in there for a reason and the verbiage is very critical to how an issue would be handled.  Obviously an issue never arises and if that's the case, then the verbiage is irrelevant.  But if something happens, then the specific language is very important.

I'm not an attorney.  I do work in insurance and have some rentals.  That language is trying to avoid using their E&O or GL insurance and making it go through your own owner's policy.  The question is when should that happen and when should their E&O/GL actually be applicable.  How that clause is phrased determines that and is pretty critical.  

Wow, just doing some research and the amount if incorrect info in this thread is shocking.

1)  There's a lot of different types of policies.  If you have a DP3 landlord policy, it usually has property and liability together on 1 policy and endorsements may impact both parts.  Others have commercial property and separate commercial liability. 
2)  Insurance companies have different verbiage in their policies.  Something true for 1 company may not be the same for another company.

3)  Additional Insured and Additional Interest are often used interchangeably through this thread.  Some companies automatically add Additional Interest and don't differentiate.  You have to look at your actual endorsements to confirm what was added, but they aren't interchangeable and they aren't the same.

*End rant*

Nevermind I found it.  If anyone else is looking, just do a search at the top, and then there is a filter results option that will let you narrow it down to the forum you are looking for.  Just different process than other forums I've used.

@Brandon Hall

Thanks for taking time to share your knowledge.  I read your BARRR article, which was very helpful, and it got me thinking on something else.  I had a claim from Hurricane Irma on one of my properties.  There were some shingles that blew off and a leak.  I got a check from the insurance company for this, and they are estimating and paying for a new roof, not just a repair of that part of the roof.

Would the fact that this is due to insurance claim let me deduct it like a regular repair, or will I have to capitalize and depreciate?  If depreciate is the right way, how do I account for the claim check so it doesn't show 3000 income but only allow me to depreciate the small percentage of the actual cost?

Thanks everyone for the info.  That was helpful, and we will see what we can do.  @Daniel Dietz & @Dave Foster that confirmed what I thought from reading other sites on the depreciation recapture, but I hadn't asked about what amount they depreciated.  I'm trying to get additional info, and we will see what happens.  Thanks again for your input!

Hey everyone, maybe I'm just missing it.  Is there a way to search a specific forum?  For instance, if I was trying to find tax related info on a situation and only wanted results from the Tax forum.  Is it possible on BP?  I'm not seeing that option.  Thanks!