All Forum Posts by: Nancy Roth

@Matthew Olszak and @David Michael you guys have a great point. But I also think there's value in the point that many have raised, which is about setting a tone early in the relationship. It's not about controlling the tenants so much as controlling the property. They do not get to do whatever they want, even if they pay the rent. They've already shown, at the very outset, that they have no regard for the most basic boundaries and I have no reason to believe they will change that. The manager thinks they can be made to change. But one thing I keep hearing from these comments is, how good a job has this manager done in putting them in there? I didn't even enter the conversation considering that, and the insight is really helpful.

This has been a great conversation, thanks to everyone for writing.

@Account Closed Ummm, I don't know these people. Much of what you've written here has no application to the question I asked. I'm sorry you've had a bad experience in your past rental practices but it has nothing to do with what I'm facing today.

@Bettina F. well I hope we are among friends here and can use shorthand. But point well taken.

@Bob B. Yes and yes. 

@Charlie MacPherson There are 19 protected classes in DC! That includes income source--so you can't turn down a voucher holder just because you don't want to deal with the bureaucracy. It's considered income source discrimination. You HAVE to take them unless you have another applicant you can prove is more qualified. Insane! I know a lot of people who refuse to do rentals in DC--and the city wonders why they have an affordable housing shortage.

Maryland keeps threatening to force landlords to accept HCVP clients, whether they want to or not--but haven't so far. 

@Joe Splitrock What a clear and helpful dissection of the issues. Thanks for this thoughtful reply and for taking the time to write it. 

I wasn't holding their legal status against them, and didn't mean to express an opinion here about current immigration policy. I was just wondering whether their status poses a risk to my investment, especially if they continue to conduct themselves badly.

@Deanna McCormick I know perfectly well why I'm on my third property manager, thanks very much. One couldn't get repairs done competently and was terrible at marketing. One communicated poorly and put a felon in my property that we had to struggle four months through the courts to eject. Then I took over managing it for a couple of years and did fine, but now I watn to expand other parts of my business and to do that I just had to delegate it again. That is why I sought a new property manager's support. 

He came highly recommended. Very knowledgeable. Of course I read his contract carefully. They can write anything they want in the contract but that doesn't mean they'll abide by it. The others didn't either. I've been talking to him every single day through this leasing process. But if I have to be present at the interview and qualify the applicant over his shoulder, and monitor the move-in to see what and who is being brought in, and go read the riot act to the tenant when they mess up, what am I hiring him for? The objective in hiring him was to free up my time for other things.

I believe you are reading into this question something that isn't there, Deanna. I'm certainly not perfect at everything I'm doing. I will always be learning and improving. But I just don't see the application of your comments to the situation I've outlined and I have to wonder what about this is making you so angry.

@Deanna McCormick Thank you.  As I mentioned, this is my third property manager.  Based on previous experience, I'm not at all sure I can get someone better, plus if he goes and they go, I'm stuck with a continued vacancy. There is no painless solution to this. 

@Charlie MacPherson Got it, thanks. OMG. That's appalling. 

@Charlie MacPherson I thought of that too. I don't think people who have no legal status are in a protected class. I think I'm on pretty solid ground that they violated the terms of the lease, twice.