All Forum Posts by: Chris Clemptor

When I moved in to my apartment, I decided that instead of giving a refundable damage deposit of 1000 I took the option of paying a non refundable 300 fee prior to move in so I wouldn't have to deep clean the apt when I left. 

I moved out of my apartment 2 weeks before the end of the lease. ( paid the rent in full) I had told 2 managers in person, 4 days prior.  I spoke to them both at the same time verbally that this was my intent and they said "ok".

When I moved out I contacted maintenance to let them know I finished moving and they could now access the apartment for a turnover, and they said "ok"

Two days after moving out I called the office again from out of state and let them know I had moved out and where my keys were located they said "ok."

10 days later I called the office again in order to find out the name of the renters insurance policy they use so I could cancel it.  It was at this time the manager mentioned they hadn't been to the unit yet and was scheduled 2 weeks after I moved out.

A month later I received a cleaning bill for 1700 dollars.  They already took away the amount they received from my insurance coverage of 1000 dollars.  So the bill was now around 700 dollars

It mentioned having to drill out the deadbolt because a few unauthorized tenants where living there and had changed the lock.  They itemized a bunch of cleaning expenses which were ridiculous prices like 100 dollars to remove each item left there.  If it was really true that unauthorized tenants had moved  in, they created this trash....But of course the whole thing could be fabricated by management and are just doing it because I didn't have a walkthrough prior to leaving and can now exploit that.

Seems like it's not my responsibility what happens after I move out when I've told 2 mangers and one maintenance personal that I plan to move out early and they said "ok got it" 

 Anyway I'm wondering what the best thing to do is if I get sent a letter from a collection agency.  Do I explain what really happened and that it's the fault of management to not go to the unit earlier and leave it unoccupied for homeless people to move in, or is it better to say I did a walkthrough the the manager before leaving and gave management the keys etc, so there must be some confusion or they are simply lying in an attempt to get more money from me.  Thanks

I plan on doing my own property management for a suburb house rental 9 miles west of downtown Minneapolis.  I look at properties for rent on Craigslist and Zillow, but they seem all over the place price wise, and the few that are houses with similar bedrooms, baths and size as my own house, are often miles away.  So then I look at majority of apartments, but I don't know how much more I should be charging for a house?  Should I pay a realtor to come over and give me their opinion?

I'm wondering if it would be a good idea to hire a real estate agent just to give me the going rate for my rental house.  I have looked on Craigslist and Zillow, but there just doesn't seem like many options in my area.  Also, the rents seem to be all over the place.  Is there a way to compare houses to apartments and then just add a certain percentage for a house?

I own a house in Minneapolis that I plan to rent out.  I will be living in a different state so I will not be able to show the house in person to potential tenants.  I would like to do as much of the property management that I can.  So far I've contacted one property manager.  I explained that I only want them to show the properties and set up the appointments to show the properties over texts, emails, phone with the potential tenants.  Once a person was interested, I would take it from there.  

    They said they would do it for 70 percent of a months rent (2,000) times .7= 1,400 dollars

My questions are:  What is the average amount of time a property manager spends doing this?  (I am wondering what they are making per hour).  Is this a decent price?

I will also need a person to clean and paint the unit when there is a turnover, and to make repairs when needed.  

I have only rented out the top portion of my house to 2 different tenants.  The first time there were about 3 people total who set up an appointment to look at the unit until I found someone interested.  The 2nd time was about 4 people. It must of taken less than an hour total setting up appointments over texts/emails.  

Hello,

    It's well known that prices of houses are very different in various parts of the country.  It seems like houses are cheaper in the Southeast of the US, but wages are also lower in general in those areas.  My understanding is that places like New York are expensive but wages are also higher there.  I make sense of this by thinking the same percent of your job wages are going to housing, so in a way it all equals out in the end.  Assuming that was the case, it always made more sense to live in a place with high wages and high cost of living because if the same percentage of your wages went to savings, you would have more savings. It makes sense to me to retire in the Southeast of the USA like Florida because houses are cheaper and since you are no longer working (retired) your money simply goes further there.  If you have no money coming in, just live in the least expensive state, makes sense. 

    I don't understand why Florida has inexpensive housing if it's bases on supply and demand.  They have a high population density.  Wouldn't a high population density show demand and therefore raise the cost of housing?

  More confusing is that the relationship of high wages/high cost of living  and low wages/low cost of living simply does not happen in a ton of places? Most places?  Its confusing as to exactly how this works out.  I currently live in Minneapolis and I like the idea of moving to Denver.  The current average house in Denver is about 200k more than Minneapolis.  Also, I'm a plumber and when I look up average wages of plumbers, they make like 7 dollars less per hour in Denver.  If I moved there, it would be a negative in the both ways.  I feel like I've never truly wrapped my head around this concept.  I can understand that more people want to live in Denver than Minneapolis so it has a higher "demand." But where it gets confusing how this all works out big picture over time is that you need a large percentage of low wage and medium wage workers to make your city function. Logically, more of your wages are now going just to housing, so you won't be able to spend money on other things, so it would seem logical that certain not as essential businesses won't exist in that city.  Also it would make sense you won't be able to save as much money because all that is now going to the cost of housing.

    I could move to San Diego and be even worse off.  I could buy 3 houses in Minneapolis compared to the price of 1 in San Diego, and to add insult to injury make the least at my job.     Somebody must be gaining for this?  Are the people who really profited from the this the original buyers of the property before it skyrocketed in value?  Does the disparity between rich and poor grow that much more in places with low wages and high cost of living?  I've been confused on how this all works.  I've never really understood how most people ever buy a house in California.

Thanks

Thanks to everyone who responded before, this forum is so great. I'm a first time landlord, I rent out half of my house.  I'm trying to find out my depreciation number and more questions have come up. I understand I can deduct the expenses of buying the house initially like loan origination fees/appraisal etc.  I initially bought the house 6 years ago with my brother who was on the loan with me.  1.5 years after I bought it I refinanced it in my name only and he moved out.  I am guessing I could include the costs associated with the refinance but not the original loan fees since they are kind of the same thing? 

How are outdoor improvements considered for deductions when you share a house with renters?  I'm assuming it's split 50/50? 

Also I'm wondering how I depreciate improvements I made to the property after the tenants moved in, and improvements I make into the future.  Do they each get their own 27.5 year depreciation period?

Some examples are after my tenants moved in, (all my own labor)  I added a hand rail to a fence/railing I have going along stairs about $ 225 worth of materials. I added a lot of stucco to the outdoor walls $200, cabinet lighting in their kitchen $300, fence,pergola for deck that blocks neighbors view, $200.  Would these each have their own 27.5 year depreciation starting from the date they were installed?

I'm trying to find out what my depreciation amount is. I just finished reading "Every Landlord's tax deduction guide." I am brand new to land lording and this will be my first time doing taxes with rental income.  I bought my house August of 2011 as a foreclosure for 85,000. I lived in the house alone until this past November I rented out half of the house to a few renters. I have always paid property taxes based on my house being worth 200,000.  Today I looked online for the first time to find what the "land value" is because I know I have to base my depreciation number on the value of the house itself and any material improvement and of course divide everything in two because I still live in half the house. My county has my land value at 90,000 and my house value at 120,000. 

My understanding is I have to use the number that I actually paid for the house plus any material improvement costs that I spent the renters unit. I have spent thousands of dollars on materials but I did 100 percent of the labor of the years. It seems like I could not even use 85 k  as my base number that I bought the house for because a percentage of that 6 years ago must have been considered land cost?

I'm guess investors must run into this issue since they are always buying houses cheaper than what the city says the house is worth.

Any suggestions?

Thanks in advance  

     I understand that you can subtract from your tax burden on a rental property using depreciation.  I also read that it's based on the house value only, not including the land.  I am wondering how most people figure out what number to use, to divide by 27.5?  Do you have to get an appraisal?

    A little bit more info about my situation is I bought a house, originally built in 1957,  5.5 years ago for 85,000.  I then spent the next 5 years living in it alone and renovating in my spare time, I personally did all the labor myself, and I would estimate I spent 60,000 on materials during that time.  I made the house into 2 units where I live in the basement unit, and I finally rented out the top portion of the house for the first time, 4 months ago.

    Some other confusing issues are the schedule E tax form allows me to deduct materials and labor. I did not pay any labor but I did buy 60k in materials over the last 5 years. How is this figured? Is this divided over the 27.5 year period? Also  when does the 27.5 year span begin? Is it when the first tenet moved in?

       Because of inflation ten years from now the house will most likely have a higher price so that higher number if divided by 27.5 would be more and would be a benefit to me having a higher number that can be subtracted from my tax burden. How does recalculating the 27.5 year issue work? Another weird issue to me is  if you get to deduct labor and materials and also deduct for depreciation it seems your getting double the benefit because if labor and materials made your house value double, this number divided by 27.5 would also be double what it was before, and since you subtract this from your tax burden, you pay less taxes in 2 ways.

Any help is appreciated.