Skip to content
×
PRO
Pro Members Get Full Access!
Get off the sidelines and take action in real estate investing with BiggerPockets Pro. Our comprehensive suite of tools and resources minimize mistakes, support informed decisions, and propel you to success.
Advanced networking features
Market and Deal Finder tools
Property analysis calculators
Landlord Command Center
$0
TODAY
$69.00/month when billed monthly.
$32.50/month when billed annually.
7 day free trial. Cancel anytime
Already a Pro Member? Sign in here
Pick markets, find deals, analyze and manage properties. Try BiggerPockets PRO.
x
All Forum Categories
All Forum Categories
Followed Discussions
Followed Categories
Followed People
Followed Locations
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback

All Forum Posts by: John Boire

John Boire has started 1 posts and replied 6 times.

Originally posted by @Brian Hughes:

I'm in King County, WA and I've asked this question to various govt' and other experts before and it is clear that the expectation is that the voucher amount is subtracted from rent+utilities  BEFORE applying any income to rent ratio to the balance of the applicant's obligation.   In some way this makes sense because applying to total income first would imply only 1/3 (with a 3x income to rent ratio) of the voucher was for rent,  when in fact 100% of it is directly paid to landlord.   But it does mean applicant can qualify with potentially very little 'real' income.

Extreme example:   Applicant has $3 in monthly cash income and a $1999 voucher.     You are asking $1900/month + $100/month for utilities,  for a total rent+utilities of $2000 for an available rental that would be covered by the voucher.   You have a 3x rent to income ratio criteria.

After applying the voucher,  the applicant has $1/month rent obligation and $3/month in income,  so they qualify on the 3x criteria.   (yes,  even though it is absurd that they would be able to live and take care of the unit on $2/month)

I think you can also consider the applicant's OTHER housing expenses (not paid to you) for example an electric bill,  but you must use a schedule provided by the housing authority for utility type, region,and unit size, and consider any discounts or subsidies that would be given to the applicant on it.  

When qualifying an applicant,  you also have to consider OTHER subsidies being received by the resident as income.   For example,  if they receive SNAP (food stamp) benefit or even a free cell phone service,   that counts as income as well, but I believe that non-housing subsidies don't have to be counted 100% toward rent.   So it is entirely possible that you could be required  to accept somebody with ZERO verifiable cash income,  for example being required to accept somebody who mathematically won't be able to pay all the rent  (say they have $1900 sec 8 voucher on $2000 rent with 3x income ratio,  and $300/mo SNAP benefit, and zero verifiable cash income)  If you get that situation,  contact an attorney before doing anything else)

FWIW if you have reasonably strict criteria on prior landlord reference,  credit,  etc.  you will probably weed out most voucher holders though they are steadily passing laws restricting screening intending to make this harder to avoid.  That said if the applicant DOES qualify against all your well-designed criteria after applying the income test the way they want you to,  they probably aren't a much higher risk than any other new applicant and there are some benefits (Sec 8 kept paying during moratorium for example where a lot of unsubsidized lower income renters stopped).  

All that said,  I'm speaking from observation and questions I've asked to authorities,  I've yet to have a voucher applicant even apply after I discussed qualification standards with them;   and nowadays my PM handles it all.

You might want to go straight to the horses mouth and ask https://www.kcha.org/ on this, since getting it wrong may open you to a discrimination (on source of income) claim.   They are always looking for more landlords to work with so they will talk to you and answer your questions.

Thanks for the insight Brian!  Glad to hear others in King County are working through similar things.  Right now I'm following with what Brandon listed in his book for screening and it is far more in depth than I could come up with on my own. (600+ credit score, 3x rent, landlord references, etc.)  

I'll do more digging into the KCHA website too.  Thanks again!

Originally posted by @Theresa Harris:

Why would your rent be $800 below market value?  Using your example, she would still have to pay her half and the govt pays the other.

Good point, I had a misunderstanding of how section 8 worked.  I thought the value they gave based on bedrooms and area was the total amount you could charge for rent. It's actually the max amount gov't would assist with.  Thanks for highlighting and making me dig deeper :)

Originally posted by @Steve Vaughan:

I believe our policy for an applicant with a permanent,  on-going subsidy is still to require income of 3x rent monthly, but reduce it by the amount of their subsidy.

Say I rent one of my townhouses for $1200. Normal income min is $3600. This applicant could qualify with an income of $3600 minus what sec8 pays hypothetically. 

My advice as a long-time WA landlord is to stay away from reasons that involve income, criminal background or animals.   Pre-screen like crazy and never put your ph# in a for rent ad, especially if  you're on the West side.  

Before an applicant even gets the property address, I know how much they smoke and how many animals they have among other things.  The old first come, first serve law taught me a lot. 

Yes I've been advised to do very diligent screening from others as well.  Good to know it's possible but important to be a 'firm-but-fair' managers.

Originally posted by @Bill B.:

Good info from everyone above. But please change your 2x example to 3 or 3.5x rent income requirement. 

You’ll find that you’re actually requiring more and more income from the tenant. The amount section 8 is paying is only covering 3x of 1/3rd it’s amount in rent.

$1,000 rent and $500 voucher means tenant needs $3,000/mo to qualify. Minus $500 voucher means the tenant needs $2500/mo personal income plus the guaranteed $500/section 8 just to cover their $500/mo portion  (5x their rent share in income)

$1,000 rent $800 voucher means $3,000 minus $800 or $2200/mo to cover their $200/mo portion. (11x rental share in income) the more the government pays the more the tenant needs to have. 

It’s kind of perverse the more help the government gives them the better off they have to be to qualify  

You bring up some great points and it honestly took me a few times reading through to understand but it makes sense. Proportionally they are needing a lot more income to cover their portion of rent.  Thanks for the insight

You bring up some good points and yes it is a free website so have to read with a grain of salt.  I'm fairly new to the landlord game so just trying to make sure I'm following all the rules as best I can.  Found in other threads that stating 'the house has not been approved for section 8' is acceptable which makes sense so will probably go with that.  Thought about investing in a different state but for now the vision is to get some experience before we do.  We may have to move to AZ like @Bruce Woodruff :-)

I live in Washington State which is very tenant friendly.  I have read and used The Book on Managing Rental Properties as a reference and have always approached the Section 8 question from potential tenants with "income has to be from a verifiable source." as not to use any discriminating language.  However, I just found that it is now (I'm not sure when the law was passed) that you must account for the government assistance in calculating the income.  Here is the example from the site:

*Example: Maria applies for a unit renting for $1,000/month. Maria’s Section 8 Voucher will cover $600 of the rent. The landlord requires all tenants to have a monthly income that is twice the rent amount. Before, Maria’s income would have to be $2,000 to qualify for the apartment. Under this law, the landlord must subtract the voucher amount ($600) from the total rent ($1,000) before calculating if Maria’s income is enough. In this case, Maria’s portion of the rent is $400. So 2x Maria’s portion of rent = $800. Maria’s monthly income only needs to be $800 to qualify.

 We are currently trying to rent our house, which is not Section 8 approved.  If it were, our rent would be $800 less per month than the market value.  

Here is the link to the site where I found this information.

https://www.washingtonlawhelp....

I know rules and laws change all the time. I'm curious how other Washington landlords are approaching this situation?