Their rent is quite a bit below market value, but I was going to feel a little guilty about raising it and/or getting them out because they are elderly.

NOTE: Market rents would be about $950-ish.Scenario 1) Increase all the rents to be fair, and risk losing a good tenant, even though the rents are already below market.Scenario 2) Increase all but hers, but risk "playing favorites" and angering the other tenants because why should they pay more...Scenario 3) Increase only the problematic tenant, because he is the one benefiting from the updatesThe tenant is pleading for me not to increase the rent, and I want to be sympathetic but I also want to be fair.

I felt like I was guilty and was on the witness stand when I went through a phone intake.  

So I decided to craft an email to her, and I've included the email below(with names changed to protect the guilty.)"

When I found out about it I sort of felt like I would feel guilty not explaining it to friends and family and stuff, but didn't know how they would take it, so I think that's why I reached out on here to try to help people understand it.

Ulises Ramirez , from newbie to newbie I can relate and tell you that Aaron Mazzrillo is totally right that the only reason you are forcing this to work is because you have nothing else in the pipeline (I'm guilty and still guilty of doing this) .....

4) Don't feel guilty about making them leave.

tenant A loves dogs but the building policy prohibits pets. one day, tenant A notices thru the front window that tenant B moved in with 2 dogs (a pit bull mix and a german sheperd mix) with the PM present and no issue was apparently raised; landlord even pet and played with the dogs. tenant A feels betrayed and goes out and buys a yorkie. landlord finds out and issues notice of breach of contract and to vacate or restore the apt to its pet-free requirements.tenant A contronts landlord and demands explanation as to why tenant B has 2 big dogs but tenant A cant have 1 tiny one. landlord discloses tenant B provided proof that each of the 2 dogs are emotional support animals.tenant A asks tenant B why does she have 2 emotional support animals, and for a referral to a professional that could also recommend 2 or 3 dogs so he can keep his yorkie and get a playmate for his and maybe even the yorkie's 'emotional support' each.tenant B is insulted and files a HUD complaint that landlord shared that she needs emotional support (per Fair Housing Act, landlords may not divulge that a tenant has any disability to any third party).meanwhile, tenant C whose toddler was soon after mauled to death by tenant B's sheperd mix, has just won a case in California Supreme Court finding the landlord to be a statutory owner of the dog since it was accepted onto the premises simply based on a letter written by a 'pet therapist' without regard - and consequentially, with negligence - to the other tenants' safety and thus responsible for $2,000,000 in compensation to tenant C for the loss of precious human life, regardless of whether landlord was negligent or not, and regardless of whether animal was a service/support animal or pet.landlord, having lost his countersuit against tenant B for vicious 'support' animal's lethal actions, files claim for his homeowner's insurance to cover the $250 million he owes tenant C but claim is denied altogether on basis that building had a no pet policy and dogs were not declared and the pit bull mix, though recommended, was never even licensed.last but not least, landlord receives summons, subpoenas, etc from HUD and appears for trial in Federal Civil Court. judge finds landlord guilty of divulging that tenant has a disability and orders landlord to pay the statutory $16,000 for one county of housing discrimination,  plus 300,000 in actual damages for the complainant (and of course, her attorneys fees) for she is emotionally scarred for life!

Decline all begging and pleading for a special earlier showing.Have the open house and take applications.I've done this four times in six months.

It means your husband was not found guilty, and was not convicted of a crime.