All Forum Posts by: Chris B.

Greg, interesting view. This may be due to a difference in rental rates of our respective areas. I know a 2200 Sq foot, 15 year old home in OC rents for $4.5k so maybe an extra $50 to $100 a month is peanuts. The same home in Tucson rents for $2k. If it were an apartment renting for $800 it would be even more significant and add 6 to 12 percent to the income stream. When you add in PITI costs, a small time landlord may really appreciate the extra income generated. Also, in my area pent rent is the norm and renters here expect it. Raising the rent and not charging for pets would significantly reduce the number of people interested. $100 more in rent can cut your applicant numbers in half here.

As mentioned,  do not quit claim until there is a successfully completed deal and get an attorney involved to create the contract.  That aside, your daughter will want to be off the loan also as any late or non payment of the mortgage will affect her credit and they can come after her if needed.

Caroline has some creative solutions.  I don't think you have an option but to take it out and redo it, hopefully with a better quality material.  It's a small wall and shouldn't cost a lot.

it looks, like you have some wiring issues on the home also that may be a safety hazard.

Only you can control your income and that is your current hurdle. You need more cash coming in. With sufficient income, you get the bank's attention and qualify for loans. That aside, with limited income, I suggest when you are ready, focus on a duplex or a smaller SFH which you can live in and rent out the additional unit / rooms. Once acompished, take the income stream you generated to save up for your next property and repeat.

There is a risk, possibly very small... I don't know exactly, but it's there that a tenant will try to dispute credit card charges after the fact and if somehow successful, you may be out one or more months of rent.  Maybe it's paid with a stolen credit card.   Research what you need to do to protect yourself from chargebacks.  Between my photo copies of government ID, lease where they initial and sign all over, and the signed application with all of their personal information which I verified through a background check, I think it may be difficult for them to succeed with this.

I feel a tenant should always pay the credit card fees.  They are welcome to submit another form of payment if they don't like it.

who doesn't like paying with a credit card and getting all of those points.  And if the landlord doesn't charge me the fees, I'm going to always use a CC.

I just had a roof redone on a rental.  Estimate was $15k.  I asked if they would offer a deal if I pay via check instead of CC.  They offered $200 off.  I get more from points so I just paid the whole thing with a CC.  They probably got dinged about 3.5% or $525 from the card.  I would have taken a discount of $300 to $400 and we both would win.

I recently switched over to Innago and they accept credit card and AHC Payments.  Tenant pays all fees and the choice is theirs.

The state where the property is located typically has the ramifications outlined pretty clearly and can be found online.  In my state, as a landlord, we need to make a good faith effort to clean up and re-rent the property and can charge the tenant who left for the vacant period up until it is re-rented with a 2 month maximum plus any other reasonable charges such as repairing tenant damage.  Hopefully after 1 day there, your house is still in good shape.  It doesn't matter if they were Section 8 or not and the same rules apply.  Section 8 is there just to pay a portion of the rent and pretty much nothing else. In your case, you should already have the full deposit and the tenant's portion of the rent.  Otherwise you should not have given them the keys.  Hopefully you will also eventually get that 1st month's portion from the government.  Based on my state's rules, I'd recommend keeping everything you have currently and try to re-rent it.  If it re-rents quickly, you can return some possibly.  Good luck collecting from them any additional left outstanding.

 Thank you everyone for the additional resources and thoughts.  I looked thorough all of them.  The document Nathan shared in particular provides a wealth of information and provides some fairly clear guidance straight from the official source.

Thank you for this insight.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but in your case, you establish the fact that there will be such an animal prior to signing a contract.  If not, please provide some insight on how you might handle this after a contract is signed. 

Thinking about this, it seems reasonable to require the tenant to tell you as soon as they know they plan to bring an animal onto the property. so the paperwork you referenced can be assessed.  Thanks!

Thank you for the replies.

Russell, can you help me understand where this requirement is legally stated?  "Someone with a service animal does not need to declare it." I don't see any reference to this in document you referenced, but it may be elsewhere.

The application question doesn't ask anyone about a protected status; it asks if there is an intent to bring an animal onto the property. Perhaps I should reword it if it provided that impression.

I feel asking an applicant if they will bring an animal onto the property is not comparable to asking the person about their disability, race, sex, sexual preference, etc... If that animal happens to provide a service, its still an animal and I don't see anything that precludes asking about it.  There is no question asking anything about the animal or the person's disability on the application.

This is my opinion and I'm not a professional in this area so I acknowledge and support the comment stating an attorney should be consulted. I also appreciate the feedback everyone has provided as this introduces different thoughts and viewpoints to consider.

Thank you for the reference to FHEO-2013-01.

Here are some interesting excerpts from the document:

"Housing providers are to evaluate a request for a reasonable accommodation to possess an assistance animal in a dwelling using the general principles applicable to all reasonable accommodation requests. After receiving such a request, the housing provider must consider the following: …"

"A housing provider may not deny a reasonable accommodation request because he or she is uncertain whether or not the person seeking the accommodation has a disability or a disability related need for an assistance animal. Housing providers may ask individuals who have disabilities that are not readily apparent or known to the provider to submit reliable documentation of a disability and their disability-related need for an assistance animal. If the disability is readily apparent or known but the disability-related need for the assistance animal is not, the housing provider may ask the individual to provide documentation of the disability-related need for an assistance animal. For example, the housing provider may ask persons who are seeking a reasonable accommodation for an assistance animal that provides emotional support to provide documentation from a physician, psychiatrist, social worker, or other mental health professional that the animal provides emotional support that alleviates one or more of the identified symptoms or effects of an existing disability. Such documentation is sufficient if it establishes that an individual has a disability and that the animal in question will provide some type of disability-related assistance or emotional support."

The document goes on to state you should not ask someone for documentation if the disability is readily apparent.

Given the disability is not readily apparent, my take away from this document is that it states the landlord should be asked to make accommodations for the animal request. It does not imply a tenant can bring in the animal prior to asking. And if this topic is to be discussed prior to bringing in the pet to the property, I think it is reasonable for a landlord to ask. I don't see anything in this document referenced stating it is inappropriate for a landlord to ask what animals will be moving in. In addition, in many cases, the applicant must provide appropriate paperwork from a licensed professional if the landlord asks. The only way to start this process is either the applicant informing the landlord or the landlord asking the applicant.

One additional thing in the document Russel referenced is the declaration that ESA does not receive this protection:

“The revised regulations specify that “the provision of emotional support, well-being, comfort, or companionship do not constitute work or tasks for the purposes of this definition.”  Thus, trained dogs are the only species of animal that may qualify as service animals under the ADA (there is a separate provision regarding trained miniature horses ), and emotional support animals are expressly precluded from qualifying as service animals under the ADA “

NOLO for Arizona also states this:

"Neither the ADA nor Arizona's service animal law includes what some people call therapy dogs or "emotional support animals": animals that provide a sense of safety, companionship, and comfort to those with psychiatric or emotional disabilities or conditions. Although these animals often have therapeutic benefits, they are not individually trained to perform specific tasks for their handlers. Under the ADA and Arizona law, owners of public accommodations are not required to allow emotional support animals, only service animals."

https://www.nolo.com/legal-enc....

I've converted to being a pet friendly landlord.  It seems over the past few years that 75% of the applicants have pets so it makes sense to do so.  Conversion of flooring to accommodate this is expensive and I charge extra for pets now.  Many people try to get around this by claiming their pet is an ESA.  I'm OK with that if they tell me ahead of time and I process the paperwork and if seemingly legit, we get the addendum signed and we are good to go.  No fees for that animal.  If not, its a pet fee for you.  Some applicants don't notify you until the last moment unfortunately creating an awkward situation.  Therefore I have modified my application to include the following statement:  "List any pets, service animals, support animals, or other animals you will bring onto the property. If you have none of these, write I have no pets, service animals, or support animals."  I also have a statement that any falsified information on the application will lead to denial of the application or a termination of the lease.  There is no intent to violate any ADA policies on my part, but I feel someone that does not list their animal on my application when asked with the question above is providing a false answer and is subject to denial.  What do you think about this?  The denial would be due to falsification information on the application instead of whether they have an ESA or not.

I do have current tenants with ESAs so I have a track record of not rejecting them.  I also am aware a superior method of dealing with this situation will to accept a different qualified tenant first and not reject them at all.  I'm just curious what the thoughts are on this approach.

I also just discovered petscreening.com today and will be looking into that.  The tiered pet rent scale is interesting but I'm not finding anything on what goes into their grading system.  If I can understand why a pet gets a certain number of PAWS, then I can better judge an appropriate rent fee for that tier.  Thanks!