All Forum Posts by: Piper D.

I would find someone else.  The lack of communication would do it for me.  Having to check in once is one thing, having to ask 2-3 times is unacceptable.  I only have a few properties and used a large property mgmt firm when I first started.  They were horrible about communication and getting my properties rented.  They also billed me for services not performed (I don't think they were intentionally trying to swindle me but more that the office staff was disorganized with their record-keeping). 

My current manager is excellent. A coworker recommended him.  He operates on a smaller scale, but he communicates with me promptly.  If I contact him I hear back within one business day, but usually before that.   He screens well, has found me high-performing tenants, and any turnovers have been smooth.  By the time I even realize a lease renewal is coming up, he has probably already talked to the tenant and has a game plan ready if the house needs to go back on the market before he even calls me. I literally worry about nothing!  

Life is too short.  The whole reason you're using a PM is so you dont have to deal with the property yourself.  I would move on.  

Thank you everyone for the great feedback.  @Jill F., this particular property is in TN.  @Theresa Harris, I had the vents/ducts cleaned when the original dryer was replaced  8 months ago; they were also done prior to the tenants moving in, which was 4 months before that.  

The tenants are a young couple, first time living out on their own. @Mary M. We did mention to them to make sure to empty the lint traps regularly after the first dryer was replaced (apparently they did not know they had to do this), but since we are out of state we can't check on this regularly.  I am hoping my repair guy will be able to tell if he thinks the current dryer is broken due to tenant negligence/misuse.  I am aware this may not be able to be proven unless it is a blatant error on their part, so I am ready to eat the cost of either a repair or another replacement dryer.

I do realize it's not their fault that its hard to get replacement parts.  This is nobody's fault.  I was more or less thinking along the lines that IF it is determined they have abused/neglected the appliance, if, going forward, it might be better to make them responsible for costs of repair/replacement (perhaps they might be more cognizant of taking better care of the appliance if they know they might be on the hook if they break it).  As it stands right now, they have no repercussions if they don't maintain it properly.

@John Nachtigall & @Luciano A. I totally see your points.  I was thinking more along the lines of if this is determined to be a repeat problem caused by tenant misuse/neglect of said appliance.  Yes, when you rent, you pay for the convenience of not being responsible when something breaks, BUT if the tenant's misuse caused it to break then I see that as a different issue.  

For those that said I should be buying new: I have shied away from this idea with this particular property mainly because my husband and I are toying with possibly moving back into this house within the next year or two (we had to move temporarily for his work) and if so, I am planning a major remodel/upgrade to the laundry area with all new top of the line appliances at that time.  However, I suppose it may not be a bad idea to get a new dryer now with an extended warranty to not have to deal with repairs for the remainder of the tenancy.  Definitely something to consider.

Thank you for the feedback Wayne!  If you could prove the tenant was at fault for the damage (ie, was negligent by not cleaning out the lint trap, etc) would you bill them for the repair/replacement cost in that case?  

I have tenants in my SFH rental who have been there a little over a year. About 4 months into their tenancy, the gas dryer I supplied quit working. It was 7 years old and I couldn't get a replacement part, so I purchased a 1 yr old dryer from a friend and had that installed. In just 8 months the replacement dryer is no longer working properly (sounds like same problem as last time- the clothes aren't drying completely). I am awaiting my repairman to arrive and diagnose.

These are decent tenants, paying market rent. But, my annoyance comes with the fact that it is difficult to get replacement parts for anything right now due to supply chain issues, leading me to have to find, buy, & pay for installation of another appliance vs a simple cheap repair each time something breaks. I don’t want them to get into the mindset that they don’t need to take care of the appliances very well because the landlord will just keep replacing them at no charge.

Might it be worth amending the wording in the lease to say that after this repair, I will continue to provide the appliances (or namely, the washer/dryer) as a courtesy, but they will become responsible for repairs or replacement? They are on a month-to-month lease. Or am I overreacting by doing this?

@Greg H. she is traveling in rural KY and that is where the rental is located. I looked up the law in KY and it is actually 48hrs notice to enter the premises. I'm not sure if it's different being a STR but a tenant is still a tenant..... I am still encouraging her to leave. She can deal with the financial aftermath later but like others have mentioned, you can't put a price on safety...

As a landlord myself (albeit not of many properties and none of them STR) I am curious what you would all do to handle this situation if you or a loved one were in it:

My sister is a traveling surgical tech on a contract in a very rural area.  She is in a short-term rental, fully furnished, all utilities included (Air BNB type but she is renting directly from the landlord and not via the website).  She has been noticing things were misplaced in the home and set up some security cameras inside because she is single and traveling alone.  There have been at least 4 recorded instances of the landlord entering the home when she is away, and there was one instance where he attempted to let himself in with his keys WHILE she was home (apparently he was surprised to see her show up at the door when she heard the ruckus).  The landlord lives in an apartment next door.  These were not emergency instances, and there was no maintenance being done when he came inside- it appears he's simply "curious".  Nothing has been stolen but she's getting freaked out.  There was no prior notice of intent to enter the premises. The lease does not have any wording about inspections.  

As a landlord, I would never even consider doing this unless there was a legitimate emergency; otherwise I would give proper notice.  I told her to get out ASAP, but with it being such a rural area there are apparently no other available housing options and no hotels.  She is going to see if the hospital will let her out of contract a bit early or if they can assist her with leads on housing (even though she will lose the rent money she has already paid on this place).  

What are potential options in this case? Confront the landlord (it seems he does not realize she has security cameras) and risk him getting angry? Leave him a letter asking him to provide notice of entry? Call authorities when the cameras alert her that he's inside? Small claims court to try to get rent money back after leaving? This particular state requires a minimum of 24hr notice of landlord entry and there is nothing in the lease that would contradict this. I cannot imagine that a STR would be any different than a longer term rental in terms of tenant privacy? Again, it's not like this is a year-long lease she's asking to break because her landlord is violating privacy- her rent has been paid for this short-term assignment and she would simply like her right to "quiet enjoyment" of the property.

I would not feel the need to justify a $20 rent increase to my tenants, especially in this market where I know I could get another tenant immediately.  Also, if the tenant is even slightly aware of the current rental market, they probably know they are better off paying the $20 increase vs trying to find another place.  It's highly likely they're not going to understand (or care) about your business costs.  I would not even argue back and forth with them about this.

Time for the "Happiness Clause" as many of the professionals here talk about.  Respond very sweetly, and in writing, something along the lines of "It's obvious you are not happy here, and I want my tenants to be happy."  Offer to let them out of the lease early with no penalty.  If you search "happiness clause" in the search bar you will find many threads on how others have worded this to their tenants.  You're not kicking them out, you're "allowing" them to leave early because obviously your place is so horrible in their eyes....

Pretty sure they will drop the argument about the $20, and hopefully quit being so high-maintenance when they realize you're not going to pander to them.

When I bought my first house before I was married, I rented out one of the rooms.  Cleanliness issues for sure was the biggest thing I dealt with!  I think people have different ideas of what constitutes a clean house.  I'm not a "clean freak" by any means, but it got a little old when I was the only one running the dishwasher (I had a roommate who would load it full then NOT run it?) and cleaning the common areas, like a previous poster has mentioned.  To me, some of this stuff is common sense, but apparently that's a flower that doesn't grow in everybody's garden....

Especially when it comes to sharing a bathroom- if you have 2 full bathrooms I would keep a bathroom for myself and let the tenants share a 2nd bathroom between them, especially if you think things not being clean would bother you in the slightest. When you advertise the room advertise it as a bedroom with shared bath with a 2nd tenant- that way whoever rents it is already cool with the idea and knows up front they will have to share.  

I recall one roommate I had in college where we both had dogs- the landlord had made a huge exception by allowing us to have 2 pets in the house, yet I was the only one who picked up waste in the yard or vacuumed up dog hair inside.  If you're allowing pets I would put stipulations in your lease regarding cleanup of waste and shedded hair.  In my opinion allowing a stranger AND their pet is just another potential layer of issues to be had, and I would avoid it as the homeowner if you can.  

I would also definitely put something in your lease about overnight guest rules, quiet hours, parking spaces, etc.  I think it might be kind of hard to put cleanliness "rules" in the lease and actually enforce it.   Every time I tried to discuss the issues I always ended up being the bad guy.  It's hard to screen for this unless someone is outwardly a total Pigpen though- the ones I had issue with in my home had clean vehicles and apparently were just very lazy with their living space and/or thought that I would clean up after them like their mother...

You may want to delegate lawn care and snow removal to a landscaping service so its one less thing for everyone to worry about.  

Definitely spell out all of your stipulations in your lease, and if I had to do the roommate thing all over again in this day and age, I would screen just like I would for renting out an entire unit as far as background check, references, etc.  Especially with some eviction moratoriums still in force and the backlog of court cases, the last thing you want is a roommate who you can't get rid of!  And personally, I would make the lease "month-to-month" if you think you can get away with it, just in case things aren't working out like you thought they would.  

I have never divided them up into separate escrow accounts.  I'm not sure what the rules are for your state though regarding an escrow account for security deposits.  

I had an incident where two grad school roommates moved in together, and one roommate decided to move out early, about 2 months into the lease.  I had received the total security deposit in full from the one tenant who did NOT move out early, even though both were on the lease.  (I think Tenant 1 may have paid the deposit and had Tenant 2 pay her back after the fact, so one had reimbursed the other for her half, but that's not my issue to get into). Tenant 1 stayed by herself and finished out the lease alone.  

Since I was given the total deposit from one single tenant (the one who stayed), I told them they had to handle it amongst themselves and that the security deposit would be refunded from me when the lease was up, the tenants out, and the house left in good condition (and paid to the original person that paid it).  Because on paper, it appears that Tenant 1 covered the entire security deposit, regardless of what the two of them agreed on between themselves.

If I remember correctly, the tenant who stayed may have personally refunded the 2nd tenant from her own account, then when the lease was up, I refunded her the total security deposit when she left the house.  I make it clear to tenant roommates that I'm not getting in the middle of their personal disputes.  I'm honestly not sure what I would have done if they had both paid me security deposit portions individually- I would have had to check the laws of my state.  Also, it would have changed things if I was paid the deposit separately from both tenants.  In this case, I got the full deposit from one person.  

Again, this was 2 unrelated classmates entering a lease on a house together- this was not a "rooming house" type situation where you might be renting all your bedrooms on separate leases.  

I'm just asking this out of curiosity from all the experienced landlords on here, but to piggyback off the original poster's situation, is there a way to legally reject a potential tenant who just proved to you that they're likely to be a pain in the a**?  But at the same time not violate any discrimination laws?  

Because it this was me as the landlord, even if the applicant DID pass with an adequate background score, the fact that she is already causing trouble before even being approved for a lease would make me want to deny her application! (and this has nothing to do with discrimination or whether or not her dog is a service animal, just the fact that she's already threatening the landlord). 

It sounds like the original poster hasn't even denied her yet, he simply called her previous landlord and then questioned the potential tenant....