s/o Why do some people think renters are trash and have no rights?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's a landlord on the "why don't you buy a house" thread who thinks renters are "greedy" and have no rights. I'm so sick of this argument; I see it all the time on DCUM. I'm a renter, always pay my rent on time, and take care of the property I live in. I suspect the vast majority of renters do the same. In DC, there are more renters than homeowners. And yet this nonsensical attitude persists. I would say there are more greedy landlords than greedy renters. Thank god for rent control, that's all I can say.

You have the concept of rights wrong - particularly property rights.

As a renter, you don't own the property. The landlord does. As a tenant, your rights are spelled out explicitly in your lease.

If you're so sick of the concept, then buy.

NP. It's not that black and white. Landlords must tread very carefully in terms of their legal obligations. Tenants rights also exist in the law--not just a contract.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There's a landlord on the "why don't you buy a house" thread who thinks renters are "greedy" and have no rights. I'm so sick of this argument; I see it all the time on DCUM. I'm a renter, always pay my rent on time, and take care of the property I live in. I suspect the vast majority of renters do the same. In DC, there are more renters than homeowners. And yet this nonsensical attitude persists. I would say there are more greedy landlords than greedy renters. Thank god for rent control, that's all I can say.

You have rights as a renter, but a fixed rent for the rest of your life isn't one of them. Since you think it is, it makes you the greedy one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's a landlord on the "why don't you buy a house" thread who thinks renters are "greedy" and have no rights. I'm so sick of this argument; I see it all the time on DCUM. I'm a renter, always pay my rent on time, and take care of the property I live in. I suspect the vast majority of renters do the same. In DC, there are more renters than homeowners. And yet this nonsensical attitude persists. I would say there are more greedy landlords than greedy renters. Thank god for rent control, that's all I can say.

You have the concept of rights wrong - particularly property rights.

As a renter, you don't own the property. The landlord does. As a tenant, your rights are spelled out explicitly in your lease.

If you're so sick of the concept, then buy.

Where did PP say s/he was under the impression s/he owned the property? I read the post as claiming rights, which renters do have. Rightfully so!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's a landlord on the "why don't you buy a house" thread who thinks renters are "greedy" and have no rights. I'm so sick of this argument; I see it all the time on DCUM. I'm a renter, always pay my rent on time, and take care of the property I live in. I suspect the vast majority of renters do the same. In DC, there are more renters than homeowners. And yet this nonsensical attitude persists. I would say there are more greedy landlords than greedy renters. Thank god for rent control, that's all I can say.

You have the concept of rights wrong - particularly property rights.

As a renter, you don't own the property. The landlord does. As a tenant, your rights are spelled out explicitly in your lease.

If you're so sick of the concept, then buy.

Where did PP say s/he was under the impression s/he owned the property? I read the post as claiming rights, which renters do have. Rightfully so!

I saw the OP's post in a different thread. He called a landlord greedy for increasing the rent (on a yearly basis), and implies that this violates his right as a tenant. It doesn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most renters are renters because they can't buy homes. They are a tiny step above squatters

You seem to be a little simple, honey. Try reading a book (if it wouldn't be too painful).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most renters are renters because they can't buy homes. They are a tiny step above squatters

What? You can not be serious. What is with the disdain for people who rent? I have to assume it's the same angry and oddly bitter person. Renters = Squatters? Really? REALLY? Renters do a service to landlords, who presumably want rental income while sitting on a property as it gains value as they have their mortgage covered by someone else. Are all landlords greedmongers? No. People are just people living their lives as best they can. All this vitriol makes me worried about our country and people like this poster, who are making statements that I find quite scary and angrily judgmental.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately most renters aren't as thoughtful as you, most could care less about the property and they simply make the area look bad. I live in a nice area with higher price homes and you can easily tell which homes are rentals. Sorry but it's true.

Renters, at least older ones, are typically either poor or have other troubles. The renters relying on government aid are the worse. Sorry but White Trash is alive and well in most communities.

I'd love to send you a picture of my street, where the two renters of six homes either blend in seamlessly or have a nicer garden than half the other houses. Your gross generalization about a particular group, your vehement insistence on knowing the truth via said generalization, and your use of the phrase "White Trash" all really combine to make you look like Captain Asshat.

The generalization that renters don't take care of property isn't wrong. It's true, which is why and how banks can discriminate on loans and charge more interest to investors rather than owner occupants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Its particular to this area.

We lived in Southern California in an area where 75-80 % of the local housing market was rented out.

Its a provincial, small-town mentality which is one of those weird but true attributes of the DC / MD / VA area.

It's because in SoCal housing has been crazy expensive for a generation. So many middle and even upper middle class families rent bc it is so expensive. It most parts of US and DC until 2000, it was cheaper and easier to buy; only irresponsible people with bad credit or students rented. Even single people working for just 5 years would buy bc in long run it would save money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well if OP is in a rent controlled apartment she is poor and getting a government mandated benefit from her landlord.

Only a tiny percentage of rent controlled units have income criteria. Many people living under rent control are poor but many are affluent. The NY Times has done a number of stories about lawyers in manhattan paying $900/month for a prime 2 BR. I lived in rent control before buying. All multi-unit buildings built before the 80s are rent controlled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately most renters aren't as thoughtful as you, most could care less about the property and they simply make the area look bad. I live in a nice area with higher price homes and you can easily tell which homes are rentals. Sorry but it's true.

Renters, at least older ones, are typically either poor or have other troubles. The renters relying on government aid are the worse. Sorry but White Trash is alive and well in most communities.

I'd love to send you a picture of my street, where the two renters of six homes either blend in seamlessly or have a nicer garden than half the other houses. Your gross generalization about a particular group, your vehement insistence on knowing the truth via said generalization, and your use of the phrase "White Trash" all really combine to make you look like Captain Asshat.

The generalization that renters don't take care of property isn't wrong. It's true, which is why and how banks can discriminate on loans and charge more interest to investors rather than owner occupants.

Nonesense. Investor loans are higher risk because investors can walk away from an underwater property with no personal/social damage, only financial, and that makes a big difference. And because stats show that investors do in fact default at higher rates than owner occupied. It has nothing to do with how well or poorly renters look after their homes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately most renters aren't as thoughtful as you, most could care less about the property and they simply make the area look bad. I live in a nice area with higher price homes and you can easily tell which homes are rentals. Sorry but it's true.

Renters, at least older ones, are typically either poor or have other troubles. The renters relying on government aid are the worse. Sorry but White Trash is alive and well in most communities.

I'd love to send you a picture of my street, where the two renters of six homes either blend in seamlessly or have a nicer garden than half the other houses. Your gross generalization about a particular group, your vehement insistence on knowing the truth via said generalization, and your use of the phrase "White Trash" all really combine to make you look like Captain Asshat.

The generalization that renters don't take care of property isn't wrong. It's true, which is why and how banks can discriminate on loans and charge more interest to investors rather than owner occupants.

Nonesense. Investor loans are higher risk because investors can walk away from an underwater property with no personal/social damage, only financial, and that makes a big difference. And because stats show that investors do in fact default at higher rates than owner occupied. It has nothing to do with how well or poorly renters look after their homes.

+1 Let's stop feeding the PP. I can't even.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most renters are renters because they can't buy homes. They are a tiny step above squatters

What? You can not be serious. What is with the disdain for people who rent? I have to assume it's the same angry and oddly bitter person. Renters = Squatters? Really? REALLY? Renters do a service to landlords, who presumably want rental income while sitting on a property as it gains value as they have their mortgage covered by someone else. Are all landlords greedmongers? No. People are just people living their lives as best they can. All this vitriol makes me worried about our country and people like this poster, who are making statements that I find quite scary and angrily judgmental.

+1000.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately most renters aren't as thoughtful as you, most could care less about the property and they simply make the area look bad. I live in a nice area with higher price homes and you can easily tell which homes are rentals. Sorry but it's true.

Renters, at least older ones, are typically either poor or have other troubles. The renters relying on government aid are the worse. Sorry but White Trash is alive and well in most communities.

I'd love to send you a picture of my street, where the two renters of six homes either blend in seamlessly or have a nicer garden than half the other houses. Your gross generalization about a particular group, your vehement insistence on knowing the truth via said generalization, and your use of the phrase "White Trash" all really combine to make you look like Captain Asshat.

The generalization that renters don't take care of property isn't wrong. It's true, which is why and how banks can discriminate on loans and charge more interest to investors rather than owner occupants.

Nonesense. Investor loans are higher risk because investors can walk away from an underwater property with no personal/social damage, only financial, and that makes a big difference. And because stats show that investors do in fact default at higher rates than owner occupied. It has nothing to do with how well or poorly renters look after their homes.

+1 Let's stop feeding the PP. I can't even.

+1 Banks don't operate under the assumption that a property will not be taken care of.

Anyways, I am a landlord for a townhome rental in Ballston. I finally have decided to not renew the lease with my WASP young professionals. I let the behavior continue since rent was paid on time and the majority of the house is dated. I am going to gut/renovate all the bathrooms/kitchen and put in hardwood flooring upstairs bedrooms.

I am just appalled how they choose to live like college kids.

Obviously, I am going to hammer them on the checkout and security deposit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately most renters aren't as thoughtful as you, most could care less about the property and they simply make the area look bad. I live in a nice area with higher price homes and you can easily tell which homes are rentals. Sorry but it's true.

Renters, at least older ones, are typically either poor or have other troubles. The renters relying on government aid are the worse. Sorry but White Trash is alive and well in most communities.

Nice tough. Bet the white trash renters can out-grammar you any day of the week.

[Anonymous]

Landlords should just hire a lawn service and split the cost of it with the tenant (add it into the monthly rent).