Landlords worry that the security deposits allowed under the bill will not be sufficient to cover these damages.The presence of pets can lead to higher maintenance costs due to wear and tear, noise complaints, and the need for more frequent and thorough cleaning.Financial Implications: The bill prohibits landlords from charging additional rent or security deposits specifically for pets, which landlords argue is necessary to offset the increased risk and maintenance costs associated with allowing pets.Landlords may need to increase their liability insurance coverage to protect against potential issues arising from having pets on the property, which could lead to higher insurance premiums.Key Provisions of AB 2216No Blanket Pet Bans: Landlords can’t have blanket bans on common household pets without valid reasons.No Extra Charges: Landlords can’t charge extra rent or security deposits for pets.Documentation Requirement: Landlords must provide written documentation if they restrict pets for health or safety reasons.Pet Liability Insurance: The bill might require tenants with pets to have pet liability insurance.As always, I’m here to discuss how this might impact us as property managers and landlords.

To give everyone just a little background since 2018 I have built a portfolio of 194 rental units.

If you know what you need, but just need it in your town - whether it's a plumber, property manager, title company, lender, etc. - go local. 

Hi Sam, Like my colleague mentioned, we have assisted many W-2 high wage earners that have purchased STR’s to add to their portfolio.  

I could never get our property management company to do a lease extension addendum because we are constantly improving our lease every 1-2 years.

As a professional property manager myself, I understand the essential tasks that investors are looking for from their property manager, like rent collection, maintenance, and tenant screening.

Review your money, talk to local agents, and learn from investors and managers.

@Keith Boley @Salim BhuiyanYes, I would use them again, and recommend the DST.I think it is the best method of asset protection for someone who holds a self owned portfolio, especially as a California resident.Royal legal has had growing pains like I mentioned, but they are fair and the best at the DST used in this fashion.Like I mentioned, once you form a relationship with one of their attorneys, you have a point of contact and not messing with their outsourced answering system.For example, the Attorney I am in direct contact with at Royal Legal is extremely personable, knowledge, and timely.

Wanted to get into STR's and have since started a STR management company.

My #1 property management customer are folks just like you - built a spec house, can't sell it, and want to make it an annual rental to stop the bleeding.