Lease provision requires renter to pay a $100 "copay" for repair costs -- is this a thing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is genius if legal. I'm just upset I had never thought of this. If you've never been a small landlord that's not local than you have no idea the frustration with getting a call from a renter about a plug going out just to fork over hundreds of dollars to an electrician to find out that the gfci tripped because of... If the landlord is a decent person than this is 100% to get the buy in from the renter to not abuse the situation and to use some common sense not a money grab.

This is not genius. It's shitty. If you don't want to be a landlord, then don't be one.

Yes. And the landlords complaining about tenants being home more thanks to WFH: You're not renting a room in a hostel. People are allowed to be in their homes, even if they do shocking things like open the refrigerator and turn on lights while they're there.

This. A large percent of landlords have no business being landlords.

Look in Covid in my home my family started breaking everything. I went from my wife and me at work all day and two kids away at college and one at HS to 5 of us home 24/7 overnight. Faucets, dishwasher, toilets, fridge all at huge wear and tear.

Same thing happened to landlords. I did a new washer/dryer, fridge, oven and HVAC service between spring 2020 and 2022 in my rental unit. My tenant even texted when oven broke how she is now cooking for 4 3x a day 7 days a week. Vs. basically making dinner only 6x a week when all working.

So I of course things wear out quicker. Yes I replaced. But at same time it is a business and between all those repairs and freezing rent increase 20/21 landlords are jacking up rents big in 2022.

This is such over the top crap. You keep complaining about having to maintain a rental property. That's what you're supposed to do as a landlord.

Is that a law? It's a custom, renters should have more responsibility in life, it would also make them more contributing to society instead of being lazy bums

WTF is wrong with you? Renters aren't lazy bums, they're paying you to rent your property. And maintaining the property is absolutely the legal responsibility of the landlord.

Either you're a troll or a terrible human being.

This guy complains about everything - his tenants, people who buy properties from him, women he works with. He’s just grumpy.

[Anonymous]

When I was single my brother and I rented top floor two family house. Owner below us. He wanted he told me later us as we were brothers with office jobs with a long commute.

We were gone 7-7 five days a week. We were low maint anf good incomes could sue us. We also mentioned we go away in vacation as single people and do holidays our parents house.

He mention a married couple with kids above him would be 24/7 a day noise, things breaking. Every holiday them hosting, multiple cars.

As an owner/landlord renting direct he is exempt fair housing rules. BTW we only paid $50
A month off full market.

Small landlords are not evil it is risk reward.

In DC I once rented a place before I relocated for one year for Monday through Thursday. I slept in unit 4 nights a week. I got five weeks vacation so only for 47 weeks. I went home every weekend.

Let’s say me or a couple six kids who work from home. Would you charge me less? It’s a business not a charity.

In large buildings following housing laws single people subsidize the families and bad tenants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When I was single my brother and I rented top floor two family house. Owner below us. He wanted he told me later us as we were brothers with office jobs with a long commute.

We were gone 7-7 five days a week. We were low maint anf good incomes could sue us. We also mentioned we go away in vacation as single people and do holidays our parents house.

He mention a married couple with kids above him would be 24/7 a day noise, things breaking. Every holiday them hosting, multiple cars.

As an owner/landlord renting direct he is exempt fair housing rules. BTW we only paid $50
A month off full market.

Small landlords are not evil it is risk reward.

In DC I once rented a place before I relocated for one year for Monday through Thursday. I slept in unit 4 nights a week. I got five weeks vacation so only for 47 weeks. I went home every weekend.

Let’s say me or a couple six kids who work from home. Would you charge me less? It’s a business not a charity.

In large buildings following housing laws single people subsidize the families and bad tenants.

Learn basic grammar before offering shitty legal advice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is genius if legal. I'm just upset I had never thought of this. If you've never been a small landlord that's not local than you have no idea the frustration with getting a call from a renter about a plug going out just to fork over hundreds of dollars to an electrician to find out that the gfci tripped because of... If the landlord is a decent person than this is 100% to get the buy in from the renter to not abuse the situation and to use some common sense not a money grab.

This is not genius. It's shitty. If you don't want to be a landlord, then don't be one.

Yes. And the landlords complaining about tenants being home more thanks to WFH: You're not renting a room in a hostel. People are allowed to be in their homes, even if they do shocking things like open the refrigerator and turn on lights while they're there.

This. A large percent of landlords have no business being landlords.

Look in Covid in my home my family started breaking everything. I went from my wife and me at work all day and two kids away at college and one at HS to 5 of us home 24/7 overnight. Faucets, dishwasher, toilets, fridge all at huge wear and tear.

Same thing happened to landlords. I did a new washer/dryer, fridge, oven and HVAC service between spring 2020 and 2022 in my rental unit. My tenant even texted when oven broke how she is now cooking for 4 3x a day 7 days a week. Vs. basically making dinner only 6x a week when all working.

So I of course things wear out quicker. Yes I replaced. But at same time it is a business and between all those repairs and freezing rent increase 20/21 landlords are jacking up rents big in 2022.

This is such over the top crap. You keep complaining about having to maintain a rental property. That's what you're supposed to do as a landlord.

I'm not a landlord but I don't understand the hostility. The landlord in the above post is explaining facts. It's not emotional or nasty.
S/he CAN afford to maintain their rental property - if they charge the tenants appropriately. "Appropriate" would be covering all the costs of the property, such as mortgage and repairs. And perhaps even a profit to the landlord. I don't think that's evil. It's the reason people get into real estate rentals.

Do you divest your portfolio of any REITS? It sounds like you have a moral objection to landlords renting property. Or is it only small, individual landlords who are evil? And big corporate landlords are allowed to be profitable?

The emotion around this is just totally illogical.

Because PP is complaining about the basic costs of running a business. He makes moral claims about renters being 'lazy bums" because they rent rather than own. He can certainly make a profit, but he must do so by pricing his property appropriately without engaging in discrimination.

I'm as capitalist as they come, but this guy is a d-bag who complains about people teleworking. Maybe don't get on your high horse to defend a troll?

Ps didn't need you to mansplain how a reit works.

[Anonymous]

OP here. Just wanted to report back that my family member ended up renting a different apartment without any provision like that in the lease.

[Anonymous]

I think this ONLY benefits the Landlord.

When if something were to just wear out & need replaced?

Normal wear + tear should be exempt.

Such as a replacement battery for a smoke detector or a bathtub drain that needs to be snaked every few years.

I would never sign a lease that would require a $100 payment from me if a repair is not my fault.
That is highway robbery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think this ONLY benefits the Landlord.

When if something were to just wear out & need replaced?

Normal wear + tear should be exempt.

Such as a replacement battery for a smoke detector or a bathtub drain that needs to be snaked every few years.

I would never sign a lease that would require a $100 payment from me if a repair is not my fault.
That is highway robbery.

And how would that battery work? Curious. My rental has a battery in one single smoke detector. The rest hardwired. If it wears out I am not going over there or hiring someone. I live 200 miles away.

I am cool you buy a battery pop it in and charge me for battery.

[Anonymous]

My first landlord when I graduated from college had this provision (Emilia Beltran). We had to pay $100 because the old dishwasher broke. I think landlords just do this to take advantage of people who "don't know better". She tried to snake every bit of money out of us she could, and prayed on the fact that we were young and didn't have experience renting.