All Forum Posts by: Ihe O.

No we don't .

Judges are more likely to  whatever the heck they like when the cameras aren't rolling, so if you are reaching those sorts of conclusions maybe you should watch some more Judge Judy.

Let's look for a minute at the reverse of your argument so it can be exposed for the fallacy that it is. 

Suppose the heating system breaks down in winter and the tenant is planning on going on vacation anyway and so does not enforce his right in the lease to a timely repair.

Under your interpretation that  means he is no longer allowed to enforce that right then next time the heating breaks down, but no sensible landlord would ever reach that conclusion.

See you don't understand what a contract is for. It's not there to tell you how to run your business, it's there to set out the rights and obligations of the parties. It helps to know the difference.

That's a complete myth.

A lease is a contract so the law of contract applies. If it were true then it would apply to other contracts. Which means that an employee could argue that his employer can not fire him because he did not enforce his contractual right to terminate him the last time he committed a fireable offence.

So if they call your bluff and decline  to remove the pet  what are you going to do.

Absolutely None of this is  good advice. 

First of all leases articulate rights and obligations. You are not required to enforce your rights.

Secondly you are not obliged to have a universal pet policy across all your buildings. Where it would be a problem is if you allowed some applicants pets but not others FOR THE SAME property.

Finally the priority of a first time single property landlord is to keep the rent coming in, not playing hardball over an extra pet in a rental.

How many of the things in this article have anything whatsoever to do with whether a applicant will pay their rent

https://bit.ly/2vXF3Ps

Exceptions. Loads of them. Contrary to what you assert, credit scores don't measure debt to income ratio because Equifax and co usually don't know your income.

The ratio they do measure is credit card debt to total credit limit and that has a huge impact on your score once you go over the approved threshold  even though it may have zero correlation to your financial standing, see my initial post on this thread about what happens to your credit score when you take advantage of interest free credit promotions.

The core objection is that you are misinterpreting the true meaning of a credit score. Credit scores are  designed to rate a persons profitability to the credit industry. Thus people who borrow irresponsibly (because it's expensive) on their credit card and pay back are rewarded with high scores, people who make judicious use of interest free credit are punished with low ones.

That and the fact that several things that matter far much more to a landlord such as overall net worth and rental history are not measured but a ton of things that are irrelevant are. 

If it is so effective and such an advantage how come you are always on here talking about evicting people.

You do realise that a person  can have a credit score below 650 despite never having defaulted on a loan...... on second thoughts you probably don't realise that. 

But you don't know whether I disagree with any of that because you didn't understand what I said, even though it was also in plain English.