All Forum Posts by: Richard C.

This whole thing is hilarious.

Under the common law concepts that many posters are relying on, the FDA has no authority to intervene in the business relationship between a owner of a handful of pills, and the prospective buyer. Its mah propurtaaahh!!!!

But guess what? You fight the FDA, you will lose.

I own 5 cars. Was 6 a week ago. If I sell 4 of them this year I am fine, sell a fifth and I need a license. And I actually own and have title to those.

I can assign a contract. Except when I can't. Where there is a compelling state interest (as in preventing people from being taken advantage of be unscrupulous operators) the state can and does intervene.

I happen to think Ohio has gone a bit too far. But they have the right to, and if you fight them you will lose.

http://www.ledgertranscript.com/news/townbytown/peterborough/12180835-95/peterborough-landlord-charged-with-threatening-tenant-and-tenants-dog

I use an LLC. Two, in fact. But I don't pretend not to own them. And you can look them up in about 30 seconds on the Sec of St website anyway.

I have always thought it a bit strange that people will rent from a landlord, who has the keys to the place they sleep, without knowing anything of his background. But that landlord wants to know the tenant's complete history before trusting her with property.

That may be why a landlord in a town where I own a house was just arrested for threatening a tenant with a knife. A real prince of a guy, that one. Which everyone who actually knew of him was aware of, but of course not all tenants are that lucky or do that level of research. I wonder if he conceals who owns the place? I bet he will have to from now on!

The bottom line is you are engaged in a business relationship. A transaction. There is no "boss", only parties.

I treat people with honesty and respect, and expect the same. I will not do business with people I catch lying to me. Which means I wouldn't rent from many of you, frankly. And for that matter, if I know you habitually lie in your business dealings (as by concealing your ownership from your tenants) I will probably not buy from you. Or patronize your non-real estate business.

Some of us are funny about honesty and respect.

Hey, why be honest, right? It isn't like you expect the tenant to be honest with you.

Why let them contact you directly if they have an issue? It isn't like you expect them to say something before they run to code enforcement or the local fair housing organization.

Why not hide behind a corporate entity and claim that, "I'm not the owner, this LLC is"? It isn't like you would object if a prospective tenant's pay stubs were all printed up at home, from an LLC of which they just happen to be the sole owner.

AMIRIGHT!?!

So if she is now late on the June rent...

...you have to give her a 3 day notice to "fix" that. Let's say you do that tomorrow, June 4th. She gets until Saturday, the 7th. Or maybe Monday the 9th, depending on what CA considers a "day."

After that runs, you give her a 30-day notice to vacate. That takes her to somewhere between July 7th and July 9th. Unless she has lived there a single minute longer than 1 year, in which case she gets 60 days, and she is there until August 8th.

So far, you have been able to do nothing that is going to show up on her credit report, or impact her professionally. So she can stay PAST the date she wants to, with ZERO negative impact to her. Or she can stay and fight, and you go to the next step.

She fails to vacate on July 7th/August 8th. Now you can file a complaint and have it served. Let's say a miracle happens and that service occurs on July 8th/August 9th (haha).

She gets 5 days to respond. It is July 14th or August 14th.

Court date is set. Maybe you are lucky, and it is set within 10 days. It is July 24th, at least, before you are in court.

You win, and get a writ of possession. Now you actually have something that will show up on her credit report. The sheriff is your brother-in-law, and that is served 3 days later. July 28th.

She gets 5 days to vacate. It is August 3rd, at least, or potentially as late as September 4th.

Now you get the place, do all of your turnover stuff, and start showing. You step right to it, and have a tenant in place on August 15th.

But this is all worth it, because you got to add a 30% surcharge for the 23 days past the lease term she wanted to stay.

Looks like chest-thumping to me. Now, if it were me, I would let go of the 8 tenths of 1 percent of the annual rent that is represented by that surcharge, to save the 25% of annual rent that you will lose in this process.

Or, you might consider talking to her, telling her that she can stay the 23 days, and you will waive the surcharge if she cooperates with a reasonable showing schedule.

Of course, she might not be aware of all of this. Its not like she is a real estate agent or a property manager...oh, wait.

But that is just me. By all means, follow other posters' advice to show her who is boss.

Which doesn't happen until July. So my point stands.

That depends on whether "last months rent" means the rent for last month (which I doubt, as it should have been paid a month ago) or THE last months rent, which is the July rent. And not overdue.

The point remains that he may not have grounds for eviction, and there are many good practical reasons to come up with another solution. Including (most importantly) time, potential damage, and the ability to show the place without a hostile current tenant there.

I don't know how things work where you are, or where he is, but here I can insist on a showing or inspection, with proper notice. I CANNOT insist that the tenant vacate for that showing or inspection.

And now you have started a whole other discussion. Which should he do, get pre-approved or pre-qualified? Not the same thing, as you know.

A hard pull is any pull of your reports that you authorize, for the purpose of getting credit.

How much additional inquiries hurt your credit depend on how many you already have, among other things. It is not a huge number of points, but if you were near an important threshhold (if you have a 742 FICO, of example) it can cost you big.

App-ing with three lenders is fine, because if the applications are within the same month, they will be considered part of the same search for credit by FICO.

But once you have a pre-approval, move fast. You don't want to have to get another one.

And always keep in mind that any agent can show you any property. You're the boss, they have zero leverage.

I agree with Joe. I actually would have gone further. I have never gotten a pre-approval until I was near the point of making an offer (obviously after looking at many properties.) When you do get a pre-approval, there will be a hit on your credit from the hard-pulls on your reports. If you have to get another one a couple of months later, there will be another hit.

Any realtor who told me I needed a pre-approval in order to look at properties would be a realtor who did not get my business. Period, full stop. There are many who would be happy to show you around on the basis of nothing more than a request, and many more who will do so with some sort of evidence that you have some money (like a bank statement.)

People on this board like to talk about "control" as it relates to tenants. Well here is a "control" situation. You are the customer, you have the money, they have competitors who will be happy to take your business. You have the control.

Start looking at houses.