All Forum Posts by: Wesley W.

+1 on the month-to-month leases.  You don't want deadbeats having more rights by giving them a year's lease.  If they bawk at any part of your written lease, immediately give a notice of termination.  It might be financially taxing in the short term to have a vacant building, but the cost and aggravation of dealing with slow pays and non-pays is going to mess up your operating budget.  If they can't be trained IMMEDIATELY, rip off the band-aid.

Remember, it's not quantity of responses you want, its quality.  I realize it's a number game, but nevertheless.

I ask my screen questions right in my ad.  If someone responds and doesn't answer them, that tells me enough about that person at this point that I delete their email without a response.

Those that do answer the pre-screening questions all get a personal response, even those that don't qualify.  (I have templates I cut & paste for common responses.)  Successful pre-screened prospects get an email summarizing the on-boarding process (heads up on background checks, pet policy, etc.) and an offer to show the property.  I also include the address in this email and suggest they do a "drive by."  Since doing this, my no-shows have dropped off noticeably.

I used to do the phone, but ceased for reasons twofold: (1) many phone calls were from people that did not pre-screen themselves by reading my ad, and it was a waste of my time, and (2) many people prefer to email/text, so I am using the medium they prefer.

Good luck!

Hello all,

In trying to streamline processes, I'm yet again looking for some feedback.  We just recently purchased a small multi-family with some serious deferred maintenance (one step up from "distressed").  As part of the improvements, I replaced entryway doors on each building (these lead to a small vestibule with access to the exterior door of the apartments).  The doors were insulated steel, and were pre-bored with 2 holes.  I initially put a closet knob assembly in one hole (no locks, just a knob) and a 2-sided deadbolt on the top (key required to lock from either side).  My thought was this way the door "looked" secure from the street, yet no one could lock the door from the inside without a key (not issued to tenants).  I've come to learn from some recent threads that this lock may be against fire code.

What I am trying to avoid is putting a "regular" deadbolt on the door (that can be locked from the inside) since this is a common area and guests/delivery personnel will need access to it periodically (no doorbells), and I don't want to have to issue a second key to each tenant (someone moves out, now deadbolt needs to be rekeyed and everyone gets a new key...PITA).

My only two options as I see them:

Double key deadbolt: against fire code

Regular deadbolt: allows door to be locked (problematic for the reasons above)

Any ideas or suggestions?

Thanks in advance!

So, if my market won't really support the application fee idea, how does one avoid spending lots of time vetting an application from someone that hasn't put cash on the barrel head?  I spend time calling employers/landlords before spending for the background checks.  If I do that, and then I realize they are just "kicking tires", I've wasted time - my most precious resource.

Reflecting, this is how I got to the point of the "deposit to hold" agreement.  I don't do any real digging until I get a financial commitment.  Again, this might be because of my target demographic (C+) just being fickle.  It's easy for them to fill out an application; not so easy for me to screen it enough to offer them a lease.  In my current system, once the prospect puts down the deposit, I run the background check at my own expense - a "cost of doing business".  Many of my competitors don't run checks.  But, they get what they get and then I buy their dysfunctional building from them in 5 years.

I thank everyone for their thoughtful responses.

@Roy N.  I started my career as a landlord charging an application fee, but the market/class of tenant would not support it, and it put me at a competitive disadvantage.  In answer to your question, the screening is where I uncover some issues and thus return the deposit.

I like your idea of doing a block of showing and then reviewing applications on X date.  I guess I'm hypersensitive to losing good applicants because it happened a couple of times on our first building.

@Thomas S.  I like your idea of approving an application with a caveat the the unit still get shown (and ensuing applications reviewed) until a lease is signed.  I noticed you skipped the whole "deposit to hold" step and went right to signing the lease.  

Hi All,

As I continue to try and sharpen my RE game, I am going to solicit feedback on how people handle prospective tenants and the application process.

Here's what I do, and I'm wondering if there is a better way:

Prospective tenant likes the rental unit at the showing, fills out an application on site, submits their most recent pay stub and photo ID for scanning via smartphone (discussed via email as part of scheduling the appointment), signs a "deposit to hold" agreement (which gives me a 5 day right of rescission), and gives me one month's rent in cash as the deposit (which becomes first month's rent at lease signing).  Tenants that are "on the fence" or more measured just take an application with them.  A very small percentage of these folks actually reestablish contact and proceed with the application.

Pros: 

(1) ABC "Always Be Closing" - ask for the "sale" at the closing on someone who seems solid; "A" tenants don't have a chance to get placed by someone else in the meantime or flake out when it comes to meet for the receipt of the deposit to hold

(2) Streamlines the process IF the applicants check out (see below)

Cons: 

(1) sketchy people have dressed nice and behaved long enough for me to accept their deposit (and then I am aghast when I start doing my screening) which finds me awkwardly returning the deposit on someone who was quite as good in reality as they claimed on paper

(2) no time to do proper due diligence before accepting money

I know some landlords take several apps (either all at one showing or in series over several showings within a day or two, then contact their "best choice" to offer the unit to them.

My concern is there is a delicate dance that needs to be executed with great applicants, as they are looking for a place for the next month and can't sit idly waiting for a landlord to call them after reviewing their application.  From a tenant's perspective, they are losing valuable time and the "good" inventory is being snatched up - so they continue looking and applying while waiting for the call.

Please feel free to comment and offer feedback on the system I use (and / or) share your process and it's own pros and cons.

Thank you in advance!

Albany returns just got worse with the new trash fee they are charging owners of small multis.  Also, the City of Albany is notoriously tenant friendly.

My cynical guess is that it will stay lulled until the lease is renewed.

This paragraph definitively sold me on NOT RENEWING this tenant's lease.  Any tenant even threatening legal action against me gets targeted for a termination.  This business comes with enough inherent risk without someone tying up additional resources and ulcer stimuli with this kind of nonsense. 

With all due respect,  I think raising the rent to something unappealing to her is absolutely the wrong tactic.  What if she pays it?  It sounds like you and/or your PM are just trying to avoid conflict.   Just send her a proper notice of non-renewal at the end of this lease and, having learned from this experience,  get someone better in there.

+1 on the notion the PM is not efficiently managing your asset

This is a learning process, and you're doing the right thing by seeking the collective wisdom on these forums,  as I have done many times myself. 

Good luck!

@Samantha Klein Seems like a good way to build rapport provided you let them know this is a one-time courtesy.  Don't feel bad about being "greedy" as others have mentioned.  Your time is a finite resource and you have a written contract that essentially demonstrates that.  Do you consider your plumber greedy if he charges you for his services even though it was "just this once"?