All Forum Posts by: Susan M.

There's a lot to be said for long-term, good tenants.  Sure, you might be able to get $1K for units in that condition, but with the unknown of new tenants that could cause all sorts of problems, turnover costs, etc.  

If it were me, I would let them continue on their M2M plan and increase their rent to $800 and $820 for now and just play it by ear for future increases.  With M2M, you are free to raise the rent any time with notice so no need to plan for it.  If they remained good tenants and didn't cause any problems I would wait a year or so and raise closer to $900 then maybe up it another $50 or so in the next year or two.

Turnover is a profit killer.  I go with the long term good tenant every time.

Since you had already offered to pay $50, I would have done as you did and just sucked it up and paid the $65.  Not worth fighting over $45 in my book.  I also would have done as you did and offered to put them up in a hotel if they couldn't use their tub, assuming that's the only shower/tub facility in the home, even if it wasn't my responsibility to do so.  This is all assuming they were good tenants, otherwise "kick rocks".  

I would treat as you do other pets.  Sure, hamsters *should* live in a cage and only be out in the house in an exercise ball, but you can't control what your tenants let the little guy do.  It could pee in all sorts of little corners that you would never see, even on inspection.  By the time they moved and you found the damage it's too late.  I would charge normal pet rates/fees.

I second @Kevin Sargent.  All you need to do is see the damage a single cat can cause and you will never rent to people with pets again.  We just spent a year rehabbing a unit we purchased from an owner who had cats.  We had to tear out subflooring, drywall, support beams in the floors.  You could see urine drip marks on the joists.  We wore hazmat gear when rehabbing.  Your eyes watered when you walked in the unit.

Granted, if this had been a tenant of ours we hopefully would have caught what was going on sooner and evicted them.  This kind of damage happened over years, but we've had other properties with "friends" living in them who we thought were reliable, good pet owners and have had to strip flooring and sub-flooring after they've moved out.  No amount of money is worth having to make these repairs.  It's disgusting.  I'm rehabbing a unit right now that a friend lived in a few years ago with two cats.  I didn't think there were problems when they moved out, but having just torn out carpet I found several areas the cats had peed.  They were the only tenant with cats.

I feel like the only people who rent to tenants with pets are people who just haven't had any bad experiences yet.  All it takes is one horrible situation to really turn you off.  Granted, if you own hundreds of units and charge them all fees and extra rent maybe you can cover that one-timer that gets destroyed, but as a smaller investor the risk just isn't worth it.  We manage to find good tenants without pets.  Sure, maybe it takes a week or two longer, but it's worth the wait for us.

We had a tenant bring in bed bugs.  She knew she did it, she had it treated, she paid the nearly $1000 bill. She moved out. Never even asked us to cover it.  The heat treatment is expensive so if that was your quote that's in the ballpark that I've seen for costs related to heat treating for bedbugs.

You can try to make the tenant pay for it, even by using lease clauses, but it's my understanding when push comes to shove it's a habitability issue and you as the landlord are responsible for remedying the situation.  Plus you don't want a full-fledged infestation so it's in your best interest to have it treated if a problem really exists.  Hence the beauty of month-to-month leases because for us, a tenant brings in bedbugs and costs us a grand to get rid of them they're likely getting the heave-ho.

My concern here is that you had someone come in and inspect.  If you hired a professional and they didn't find any evidence of bed bugs then I'm going to be suspicious.  I might consider hiring another company for an inspection and widening the net a bit to tell them to look for ANY bug infestation, but if two pros come back and say the place is clean I'd tell my tenant there's nothing I can do if no one can find a problem.  I'd tell the tenant they were welcome to pay for treatment.

We're trying to move all our rentals to the same color.  Easier for our painter = cheaper.  Sherwin Williams ProMar 200 in semi-gloss for walls and trim in Dover White.  It's not trendy, it's not fancy, but repainting after every tenant because the matte walls are scuffed has become one of our biggest expenses so we're trying to get some more durable paint on the walls.

We have several condos with condo fees and they have our home address listed as their contact address.  Bills and communications are sent to us at home.  We want to be aware of what's going on (we're also on the board so that helps).  I would never trust the tenants to pay the fees themselves.  I own the property.  If the fees fall behind it's me they're coming after, not my non-paying tenant. 

We don't have a PM so I can't really answer that part of your question, but I don't see why they couldn't be responsible for paying the fees for you as long as you really trust them to do it.  In any scenario where it is ME they're coming after if a bill isn't paid, I prefer to pay it myself.

We have invested pretty much solely in condos (all same complex) for many reasons.  Whether or not it's a good investment depends on a lot of factors.  We are buying low, renting high, have low condo fees and sit on the board so it's a good investment for us.  

@Don Young, I don't consider it "spite", I consider it "tenant training".  :)  You may be the beneficiary someday of some of my better trained tenants.

Good luck, I hope it works out that he isn't trying to screw you over.  Gives all landlords a bad reputation that isn't necessarily deserved.

It's unfortunate that you and the landlord don't have better records of how the money was handled but I think you have plenty of evidence that you paid the deposit.  Would he have let you rent if you hadn't paid it?  I doubt it.

It's also unfortunate that you don't have better records of the condition of the premises because that could come back to bite you. So, my opinion is that you need to let this play out a little longer. You just moved out on the 3rd, he has 30 days to return your deposit.

There are legal ways for you to handle this if he doesn't return your deposit, the first of which is a demand letter you send him if it's not returned within 30 days.  There's lots of good information on this page:

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/security-de...

I would lay off for a bit now.  Few things irritate me more than tenants demanding their deposit back a few days after they've moved out.  I am very clear on my move outs that I have 30 days to return, that it takes me at least a week or so to get in the unit and do a full assessment and that I will return their money and a deductions worksheet if applicable within 30 days and I always do, but I hate when tenants call me a week after moving out asking for their money.  Honestly this makes me wait until day 29 to mail their check.  You need to give the landlord some time to do whatever he needs to do without bugging him about it.

If you haven't received the money by day 29 or so it's time to get your demand letter together and follow the process. Send it registered. For that kind of money I would absolutely pursue small claims court if the landlord doesn't respond.  And yes, you're owed interest for all the time he held the extra $950, so two full years of interest.  I'm a small time Ohio landlord and even I know this law which is why I never collect more than the rent for the deposit.

And if he ends up returning your deposit and it's pretty much in full or the deductions are legitimate, I would probably let the interest go.  Not worth my time to bother with it, but this is only if all or most of your original deposit is returned.  I guess I feel like most landlords can make up ways to take deductions, so if he doesn't do that and returns full deposit then I would consider it a wash and move on.