This is the first time that we've rented since our early 20s, now in our late 30s with two kids. Moved to the area and wanted to get to know it since we are buying in the 1.3-1.5 M range and the Bethesda/Chevy Chase neighborhoods are so different.

We're paying over 4K in rent for a small 3 bedroom that is in horrible shape. We went through 10 apts/rental homes in a day trying to pick one and I guess we weren't paying close enough attention. When we moved in we were shocked at what a mess it is.

I think it's a vicious circle. Landlords don't keep up properties because they think renters won't, renters don't treat it like their own bc it is frustrating to feel like you care and the owner doesn't, and on and on.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a landlord. I have yet to have a renter who has treated my house like I did and would.

Then don't rent it out, then.

That's not the point. The point is that landlords charge rent based on their cost, which includes repairing and maintaining units.

One more thing - you're not that bright. Don't you realize that if there are fewer rentals on the market, then the higher the prices for the rentals? (basic supply and demand)

You stated that renters don't treat your property the way you would treat it. The PP offered a solution. Done.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a landlord. I have yet to have a renter who has treated my house like I did and would.

Then don't rent it out, then.

That's not the point. The point is that landlords charge rent based on their cost, which includes repairing and maintaining units.

One more thing - you're not that bright. Don't you realize that if there are fewer rentals on the market, then the higher the prices for the rentals? (basic supply and demand)

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.

It's COULDN'T care less!!! Crazy how many higher income folk don't get it!

Anonymous wrote:Given that this is an "urban" website and OP pointed out that far more people rent than buy in the District of Columbia, there are a lot of strange responses here. A lot of provincial, suburban, stuck in the 1950s thinking seems prevalent.

Thank you.

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've owned a home for the last 20 years, and was a renter between houses for 6 mos last year. No way did I take care of the rental property like I do my own home. I didn't treat it like shit, but the things you do as an owner you just don't do as a renter. For example, for the 10 years I've had full yard service - mowing, chemicals, weeding, mulching, etc. Between kids and spouse working, there just was no time to do it. In the rental, I did the bare minimum - cut once a week. That's a $150/mo bill versus a $300/mo bill. And it sure as hell is eveident to anyone who walks by.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a landlord. I have yet to have a renter who has treated my house like I did and would.

Then don't rent it out, then.

Sorry mang, cash money talks.

Anonymous wrote:I'm a landlord. I have yet to have a renter who has treated my house like I did and would.

Then don't rent it out, then.

I'm a landlord. I have yet to have a renter who has treated my house like I did and would.

Given that this is an "urban" website and OP pointed out that far more people rent than buy in the District of Columbia, there are a lot of strange responses here. A lot of provincial, suburban, stuck in the 1950s thinking seems prevalent.

People, have some sense here.

Just because you lived next to a renter who didn't take the trash out doesn't mean ALL renters are like the ones you've lived next to. Anecdote or anecdotes do not equal data. Frankly, the most neglected home in my block is an owner, and no one cares and it doesn't mean anything to me because it's just one block. Also, I don't live in a cookie cutter neighborhood with patterns on the lawn, so we don't sweat these things.

As for gardening, I think this is really personal. Plenty of renters garden, plenty do not. Same goes for homeowners. I am a renter and garden and rake a lot - that's just me. You know why I keep up and make effort, because I like it and have time to do this, not because I rent.

As for not maintaining things like sealing granite and painting and dealing with more extensive landscaping issues such as erosion and cracked driveways, THIS IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE LANDLORD to keep up with. You're barking up the wrong tree here and have just as much of a gripe with less attentive landlords as you do with lazy tenants.

Somehow, I expect that if we really delved into statistics on this, we'd find that renters and owners don't take their trash out or mow the grass in a timely way at the same rates. But I'd be willing to bet that the majority of the "glaring" things that you're noticing about rental homes are things that the owners or property managers didn't take care of or don't take care of often enough, such as exterior painting and maintenance, interior paint and carpet and surface replacement, and tree care.

Also, notice how I phrased that in a way that suggests it's my opinion and I am not pinning blame or absolute certainty based on speculation or limited personal experience on any one party? Try it some time.

Renters don't own the place so they are not on the hook for repairs- far more likely to crap up the granite, stain the marble, scratch the hardwood floors moving furniture, wreck the paint job, shower without fully closing the curtain-tile and drywall issues.

Even clean lint out of dryer. Utilities included-there goes the meter whirring. Gas fireplaces don't run for free-watch the meter turn.

Pet damage security deposits and the unit deposit sometimes don't begin to cover cost of repair.

I've had good renters and bad renters. I've lived near good renters and bad renters. The one thing that does stress me out a bit is that our neighborhood is in general a very family-friendly neighborhood - people buy there for the schools. But there are a few rental houses on the block that are full of 20-somethings. They have about 4 cars per house, which causes parking issues on the street. They party more frequently and more loudly than the families. And they tend to drive a lot faster down our non-through street (that doesn't have sidewalks), putting our residents at risk. One house thought it was hilarious to put a couch on their lawn for a couple of weeks. That irritated all the owners who hadn't spent $700K to live on fraternity row.

For those reasons, I kind of wish renters would stick to less family-heavy areas if they want to live like college students.

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.

You are completely wrong. The reason you give is just one reason. Banks also think about the maintenance. I.e. - if something goes south and they have to foreclose, it would be easier (and more profitable) for them to sell a well maintained owner occupied property than one that was rented.

As an owner who's lived next to renters- renters don't maintain the property the same way as owners. They move more often, don't bother doing more than the bare minimal of gardening and don't care about long term neighborhood issues. Landlords don't fight for these issues either as much as owner occupied people do.

It was a big reason we moved out of our condo. We loved it, but too many renters. They moved often, wanted more amenities and complained a lot about how the condo was ran. They took no pride of ownership. Left trash next to cars and didn't care if their cars leaked oil. And when the recession hit, the owners foreclosed on their rental condos first. It was very, very bad for our condo and we never got those HOA fees back.