Skip to content
×
Try PRO Free Today!
BiggerPockets Pro offers you a comprehensive suite of tools and resources
Market and Deal Finder Tools
Deal Analysis Calculators
Property Management Software
Exclusive discounts to Home Depot, RentRedi, and more
$0
7 days free
$828/yr or $69/mo when billed monthly.
$390/yr or $32.5/mo when billed annually.
7 days free. 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: Account Closed

Account Closed has started 14 posts and replied 990 times.

Post: Mortgage and Rent Cancellation in New Bill

Account ClosedPosted
  • Investor
  • Milwaukee, WI
  • Posts 1,012
  • Votes 1,230
Originally posted by @Scott Passman:

The landlord relief bill comes with a lot of strings attached to it. The stipulations to receive these funds are as follows:

Requirements - Landlords who receive relief funds through the HUD program must agree to the following fair renting terms for a period of 5 years:

i. a rent freeze;

ii. just-cause evictions;

iii. mandatory documentation with any just-cause eviction;

iv. no source of income discrimination;

v. coordination with local housing authorities to make new vacancies eligible to voucher holders;

vi. provision of 10 percent equity to tenants; and,

vii. no admissions restrictions on the basis of: 1. sexual identity or orientation, 2. gender identity or expression, 3. conviction or arrest record, 4. credit history, or 5. immigration status.

viii. Additionally, landlords cannot attempt to collect any back-rent when the moratorium is lifted,

ix. they cannot retaliate in any way against residents and

x. they cannot report residents to debt collectors or debt services to harm their credit. e. Recoupment – If any of the conditions of Section III(d) are violated, the federal government can recoup the relief funding.


Number 9 is of particular concern, but I don't know the details about what exactly provision of 10% equity to tenants entails. I won't be taking the gov't up on this offer should this pass and I would guess that any property owner who can make the payments without the assistance wouldn't voluntarily shackle themselves to these restrictions either.

 Whoa whoa whoa. Hold it. Stop. Who is proposing this? I can't be the only person to see how bad of an idea this is.

Post: Where are the renters going to go will market get crushed

Account ClosedPosted
  • Investor
  • Milwaukee, WI
  • Posts 1,012
  • Votes 1,230
Originally posted by @Account Closed:
Originally posted by @Jay Hinrichs:
So was listening to an economist today that specializes in working with REITS and other top players in the industry

he got on MF

His point was as things shake out..  A and B rents will go down  and C renters will leave to live in nicer units putting pressure on lower end rentals  Cap rates go up on the nicer stuff  and well values drop across the board.

I wonder if we will see that in SFRs as well..  if there is competition for tenants  ??  rents go down people paying 800 all of a sudden can move to a nicer home.. the 800 rent gets lowered to 600 so its not vacant.. ??

if this does come to pass I suspect landlords want to do everything they can to keep their existing tenants. ?

This is a very interesting discussion.  I've been listening to a lot of NPR economist shows and unfortunately, I find too many of them to be way too removed from the real life of a lower-income person.

What they aren't aware of, in your particular case, is the fact that most renters - especially C class renters - don't have money to move, except for dire situations.  Moving is really expensive, and they are very aware of this.

Also, they would be really aware that even if they were to get into a lease with a guaranteed monthly rent for one year of a nicer apartment or home, if the economy was to improve after one year and the rents were to go back to a normal price afterwards, that they then wouldn't be able to afford that unit after their lease was up - and they'd have to pay to move again.

I was renting apartments during the 2008 crisis years in a great neighborhood, but they were bare bones units, so a good deal for the area.  So, my tenants were very budget-conscious types of tenants.  When my tenants left during that crash, they only left because they'd lost their jobs and most, if not all of the tenants we lost during that crash left because they'd lost their jobs and they moved out of state to move back in with parents/relatives until they could get back on their feet.  

Only one tenant negotiated with us to get a lower monthly rent because the market prices had come down.  We rented M2M only.  They showed us printed-out Craigslist ads showing similar apartments renting for less money, and we lowered their rent accordingly.  But, we both knew that this was a temporary deal, and they didn't want to spend the money that it would take to move somewhere temporarily until the rent would go up beyond what they would want to pay, once the economy improved.  It was worth it to us to lower the rent temporarily to what newer tenants were paying.  Now, in that situation, that made sense.  It didn't include the costs of moving twice - in and back out of a better apartment for less money temporarily.

But, I think the economists in the show you listened to were people who were never lower-income, or budget-conscious tenants themselves and never rented to any as managers or owners, because this is just not what any of them would do in real life.  They aren't going to A) spend the money it costs to lose part of their security deposit, which they know always happens when they move; and B) deal with having to move again when inevitably the rents will increase again when their lease is up.

Their theories only work if they're dealing with people who are wealthier - who would never be C tenants in the first place. Unless you're talking about wealthy people who happen to be renters, renters are people who are very conscious of the costs of moving and they don't take those costs lightly, if they can absorb them at all.  For most, they just don't have savings accounts of one to two months rent, plus moving costs and costs to transfer utilities, etc.  

Plus, many are conscious of wanting better references as far as longevity at their residences and how that affects their credit and references.  They don't just move willy nilly for a short-term change in monthly rents.

The cost to move just to have a nicer apartment for a year, just doesn't make any sense to these people.  I just don't see it happening.

 Not to be rude / get off the main topic - But I love the point that most renters do not move on a whim for cost reasons. I think there is also a factor of hassle. This is why I go month to month without worry, and wonder why landlords value long term leases, which to my view only benefit the tenant (of course some areas require LTL). Jay points out later he thinks this is more of a regional/cultural issue and maybe that's the fact - I dunno - but it still seems to me most people do not want to up and leave on a monthly basis and will most always stay at least a year. Of course these are not normal times. Anywhos...back to the original programming.

Post: Inherited tenant - behind on rent. Digging up selling trees

Account ClosedPosted
  • Investor
  • Milwaukee, WI
  • Posts 1,012
  • Votes 1,230

I'm sorry, but I find this story humorous in times like these - first signs of the hustle - lol. I think others have said enough about what you could/should do, I'll add it's good for a laugh.

And, you won't have to spend money pruning and cutting it down later! Some people see trees as value-adds, I see them as expenses, even in my own yard. Which reminds me, I have a couple trees that need to go in my rentals.

Also, you live in (western) WA - lol - I live in WI - we both know there is no real need for more vegetation!!! You'll have a jungle in a year if you just let it go.

Post: Where are the renters going to go will market get crushed

Account ClosedPosted
  • Investor
  • Milwaukee, WI
  • Posts 1,012
  • Votes 1,230


Hard to say. My guess is yes, the rental market will decline. Of course if we magically return to where we were then we will be where we were, but I don't see that happening.

Owning still makes a ton of sense. Rates will likely never go back to a place where renting is the better option, so this will continue to hold the rental market down. Prices could fall if rates go up, but again I don't see that happening to a degree where it causes people not to buy, just to pay less. I think the days of earning from a savings account are over and we have traded them for lower mortgage rates. I think new starts will likely fall as more stock becomes available, due to reasons explained next.

I think the higher earners are not as safe as they think, and that will probably help the rental market.

However the lower earners are all screwed so any gains from the higher peeps stepping down is going to be lost here and then some.

I think we are likely looking at a lot of doubling up in housing / moving in with relatives / roommates / etc - so that will hurt the rentals. Though the folks that rent per bedroom might do great. This is what will cause stock for owner-occupied to increase and therefore hurt new starts.

Unless we see hyperinflation where prices increase and wages do too, we will probably see rents flatten or even decrease as demand goes down.

No money means no demand - don't need to be a Pulitzer winner or possess a crystal ball to see that coming.

So the answer will be the hustle. Those with better marketing and better units will win, while those with junk units and no marketing will fail. I think this hurts a bigger operator more than it might a small guy who knows how to hustle.

For me I plan to make things worse (and better) on myself by requiring first/last/damage up front in all cases. This will decrease my renter pool significantly but that's actually the goal, believe it or not. It's how I plan to survive long-term in the hood. But I can do that, because I'm small and don't have 100/1000 units to fill. My strategy is long-term, financially stable, property preserving tenants - they are out there and I intend to go get them. I intend to offer emergency credit with respect to the last months rent I hold, so a renter can access that money if they hit a bump. I expect that service to offset the pain of paying last months up front. A bit of a hard sell, but frankly I hope it catches on. The damage deposit insurance companies that are coming around might be game changers too.

Post: Tapping in to my parents home equity ???

Account ClosedPosted
  • Investor
  • Milwaukee, WI
  • Posts 1,012
  • Votes 1,230
Originally posted by @Account Closed:

Thank you all for the feedback. Maybe I should've been more detailed on my initial post. This all came up when I was telling my parents about my real estate investments. I currently own real estate investments, two of which were bought by taking out a second mortgage on my primary residence to use as a down payment. My parents asked me if the same could be done with their home to invest in rental properties. This is when the question came up whether it'd be worth it taking money out of the home to invest. My parent's thought would be if I (on their behalf) could take the equity out of the home to invest into real estate so they could use the additional cash flow during their retirement. So to restate my question a little clearer, would them taking cash out of their home be better than a loan or would it be the same? 

@Andrew S. Once again, I appreciate your feedback but I don't appreciate the negative assumptions you're making, first that I "don't seem concerned about the risk to my parents" and second that I would not compensate them as financers of the deal and would "take advantage of them".

Also @Ana Marie B. and @Mark Durham I appreciate your real life examples.  Although I feel that comparing using money to overly invest in a primary residence is quite different than strategically placing the money in a real estate investment.  I feel as though you are comparing apples to oranges.

 Uhm yea, little details like your parents approaching you to help them and not the other way around is important to the discussion - lol.

Thread title "Tapping into my parents home equity???"

Maybe a better title would have been, "My parents are considering tapping into their home equity"

Post: COVID-19 vs. Basic Freedoms

Account ClosedPosted
  • Investor
  • Milwaukee, WI
  • Posts 1,012
  • Votes 1,230
Originally posted by @Gary L Wallman:
Originally posted by @David Dachtera:
Originally posted by @Gary L Wallman:
Originally posted by @David Dachtera:

@Gary L Wallman,

Here's where you went off the track:

"Tell that to the millions of immigrants who risk life and limb trying to get to the 'Land of the Free' for economic reasons. More people die of poverty then any virus."

Escaping poverty and oppression are NOT "economic" reasons. Those are socio-political reasons. Immigrants accept the risks of escaping oppression and seeking freedom only to find more oppression and even atrocities at the hands of the U.S. Government.

 David,

With all due respect, if you think trying to escape poverty is not an economic reason you need to hunker down with a good dictionary.

... and if you think poverty is all they want to escape, you need to study up on the world, in general. 

 David,

I'm always amazed at how people can try to justify their ineptitude by being discourteous to others.

I obviously never said anything about what encourages all immigrants to flee their homes to come to the US. I can't possibly know that any more then you could.

I simply stated that many come to escape poverty and that is obviously an economic reason. Not sure why you don't understand that simple fact, Jack. 

 So uhm...are you being discourteous to make a point or do you not realize you're doing it right back??? Just curious. LOL.

I was just having this very conversation with my sister - heated arguments that get ugly fast - lol. I mean, passion is fantastic and it's great we all get riled up over the issues that are important to us. Yet, nobody has all the answers and everyone is not always going to agree. I know it's easier said than done and I aint no saint when it comes to the matter either.

I really think that as a society, we pretty much try to avoid these sorts of conversations. The old rule of never talk politics, religion or money - lol. And obviously that's because it gets out of hand pretty easy. But, I truly believe it's really important that we have these conversations too and I think the fact we never have them leaves us with low skills to navigate them respectfully. So, hopefully, we can work through all that and learn to communicate and debate a bit better. For all the flaws of our government leaders, they are often pretty good at that (not always - lol).

Post: Adding a Tenant with a DUI on Record

Account ClosedPosted
  • Investor
  • Milwaukee, WI
  • Posts 1,012
  • Votes 1,230
Originally posted by @Anthony Wick:

@Account Closed. So, you would not rent to this guy, and/or not let him move in with the girlfriend, who has a good history with the landlord? We all have our own criteria. I would have run the background, just like the OP did. And I would have no problem adding him to the new lease. Hey, if the GF can afford the place on her own, I feel good about putting both their names on the lease. A DUI from 5 years ago? Not a problem. Divorce rates are 50% in the U.S. Every tenant(s) carries some risk. 

 Not what I said there my friend. I said I don't like it, would give me reason for pause, and suggested the OP do a month to month. I do month to month always, but not everyone else does, and not everyone else can, sometimes because their area doesn't allow it. I think the difference of opinion here is mostly that some would go full steam ahead without a second thought and some would think it's a red flag. To me it's a red flag. If I only rented to people without red flags I would never rent to anyone.

Post: COVID-19 vs. Basic Freedoms

Account ClosedPosted
  • Investor
  • Milwaukee, WI
  • Posts 1,012
  • Votes 1,230

I happen to think discussing rights and the economy and the virus relate to real estate. I also think with the thousands of discussions and threads here on BP, that anyone who thinks this discussion is not relevant to them or their real estate endeavors could easily go find another BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR thread and dive in.

For me the most pressing issue to my real estate endeavors is the virus. Will my tenants have enough food is my concern. What will they do when they run out like one of them already has. What will happen when more of them run out very soon? Will there be rioting? Will my properties burn? Should I be looking into my insurance coverage? Their ability to move freely and go out and earn is all that is stopping them, and me - I have a mortgage on my own house too, and my financial survival affects my ability to invest. So, the right to move about freely relates to my real estate business as far as I'm concerned. I respect that others may not have the same opinion about that.

As far as this or any discussion teetering around the particular issue, I have no problem with that. It's my belief and also something I find valuable, to work through these issues together with discussion. Reading the opinions of others helps me do that. It helps me see things I might not have considered relevant or even thought of, and even allows others to show me that my thinking might be off - I'm open to that. And like all forums on the internet, I find I must sift through the nonsense to obtain the nuggets of value. I see that as an acceptable trade-off, and do not expect my answers to be handed to me in a nice little package. When a nice little package is what I desire, I read a book.

Post: psycho contractor pours concrete down drains because he was fired

Account ClosedPosted
  • Investor
  • Milwaukee, WI
  • Posts 1,012
  • Votes 1,230
Originally posted by @Matthew Paul:

I would love to hear the contractors side to this event . To go to those lengths there is more to this story . 

 This post bothered me. 7 votes bothered me too. So I kept reading it, wondering how anyone would post such a thing and how anyone else could vote for it.

But I suppose maybe I read too far into what you wrote. I too would like to hear the contractor story. And yes, I think sometimes clients portray themselves as angels when they have behaved badly.

That said, I wonder if you believe there is ever an instance when this sort of thing would be the appropriate response to a deal gone bad?

Post: psycho contractor pours concrete down drains because he was fired

Account ClosedPosted
  • Investor
  • Milwaukee, WI
  • Posts 1,012
  • Votes 1,230

Straight-up nuts. I hope the best outcome for your efforts to recoup your losses and hold this person responsible. A tall and delicate order to be sure.

As far as some of the responses here that imply somehow there is another side of this story - wow - I'm not sure if I'm more shocked with the contractor or some of the responses here.