Woman upgrades house for $12K and gets evicted by landlord
Open link in next tab
$12K in free upgrades 🤑 - Lemmy.world
https://lemmy.world/post/4378731
https://lemmy.world/post/4378731
Why the hell would you spend $12k to update a rental property that you don't own? This is more like /c/midllydumbass
I get it to some degree. It's hard renting for decades and not being able to improve where you live. If the person here thought they had a decent landlord and they'd still live there a decade from now, I think it can make sense.
The way to do it is to work in either a rent decrease for X months for the work and materials or lock in a low rent for X years based on the work being done.
Another alternative is to do the above and get the landlord to supply the materials.
I've done it in the past and it has worked out well though usually for minor things (like replacing generic doorknobs with nicer looking ones, replacing a toilet with a better flushing one, or installing a ceiling fan).
Adding insulation to the attic if it's missing in spots can also make sense to do if you're paying the utilities. Though again I would get the landlord to at a minimum to pay for materials or discount it from the rent.
If the upgrades are things that will help make the unit more marketable when you move out, then they'd be dumb to turn it down.
Indeed. I did something like I mentioned above + we replaced the master bathroom carpet (yuck) with tiles for pretty cheap. In return we locked in a 1 year rent reduction to recoup our costs and 2 years at a low rate.
It worked out for everyone. We didn't have to live with disgusting bathroom carpets, the place looked nicer for the rest of our rental period, it let us save money to put a down payment on a house, and we didn't have the temptation to move to a "nicer looking" place and spend money and time on moving again.
In the end, the landlord got back a place that was more attractive to future renters.
The key is to ensure your landlord is a decent person (they exist). Ours only had the one house they were renting (used to be their house before they bought a new house in a better school district and decided to rent vs sell).
If it's a large holding company that is known to screw over tenants? Yeah fuck them, do the bare minimum and move out.
Turns out, she's "never there" so, I'm assuming it's a second home. Like she goes to the area frequently enough that she doesn't want to deal with hotels. Makes this even dumber
https://twitter.com/eade_bengard/status/1696982908022739091?s=20
My landlord served notice on me after 13 years, I'm moving home next month. He is a greedy little cunt, constantly tried to pressure me to refurbish his property for him despite me being the tenant. Last time I asked for a minor repair, he immediately notified the letting agent that he would be putting my rent up this coming October. Regardless, I agreed the new price, only to still be served notice on (I assume because he knows he can get a slightly higher rent by getting a brand new tenant in, rather than an increase).
Genuinely though I was tempted to do some redecorating. This is (for now) my home. It sucks living in a rundown home; the wallpaper / carpets in this house afaik are at least 25 years old. But when you get 'too demanding' then you suddenly find yourself out of a home.
That's capitalism. If you invest money you want a return. It's the entire system. Maintaining anything if not required goes against the whole ethos.
I get what you're saying, but he hasn't invested jack. He inherited a portfolio of local properties when his dad passed away a few years back, all mortgage-free (I know other members of his family so have more info about him than he realises).
When his dad died, his cousin warned me: "His son is taking over the properties, he is a bastard, be prepared for your rent to go up". Within weeks of gaining control he put my rent up. I dunno, maybe he immediately remortgaged all the properties to buy more. I hope he goes bust.
A landlord was being shitty to someone and it was clear he wouldn't get his deposit back no matter what, so when the renter moved, he took everything. Meaning he unscrewed the plugs from the wall and took those with him, took the toilet seat and so on. Play stupid games, win stupid prices I guess.
Wow, that's some nuclear revenge. I'm about to do something similar (though legal). When I moved into this property, the curtain poles were crappy & had sellotape for pelmets; one 'curtain' was a bedsheet, another was some pathetic gossamer thin material; no shower curtain, crappy showerhead. They're all going back up before I leave, for sure.
One of my neighbors lived in a large 1 bedroom apartment. It was in the family since the 60s. It’s rent stabilized and in a popular area. A decade ago she was paying $850, market value at the time was $2k+. She renovated her kitchen when I lived there…. The downside was that her new upstairs neighbor was a musician and had a full sized piano that he’d practice on daily for hours at a time…
If you know you can't be evicted unless you stop paying rent and the rent is cheap enough, it's not a bad idea to renovate it a bit. I told my friend he should quietly renovate his rental apartment because he hated the kitchen and all the flooring. He was paying $2k under market price, had rent control, and because it's a corporate landlord, they can't evict him unless he misses rent a lot or harasses other tenants.
My friend opted to buy a condo instead, so while his mortgage is more than his rent was, at least he's earning equity and a rising housing market.
It's very uncommon to find available rent controlled apartments. Some of the leases allow you to pass the apartment and its current pricing to a child, so there's a lot of them where the same family has lived there for 20+ years and just passed the lease down the family.
In my area, there's some newer rent controlled ones, but they're only available to low-income families (which makes sense to me). There's also California-wide rent control for most properties which mandates a maximum increase of CPI + 5% per year, capped at 10%. It's not really rent control though, since the rent still rises higher than inflation (eg if inflation is 3%, the rent can still go up as much as 8%).
yeah, you have to do the math to calculate the total expenses since maintenance fees can be very expensive in condos, much higher than paying for a rent control or stabilized apt.
Not to this scale, but my partner's father has spent a fair bit of money doing upgrades and repairs that are technically for the landlord. However, I should note that the contract isn't registered, meaning the landlord cannot index the rent. This also makes it hard to hold the landlord responsible for doing any repairs. On the other hand, renter can't be held responsible for modifications either. So legally there is more freedom on either side. Thing is, the renter can always demand registration. But usually this means no renewal of the contract. It's very likely here the property would get sold and even if he brings up the money, it may be sold to someone else. So the short answer is really that people in poverty often don't know or don't dare to stand up for their rights and loopholes like this keep existing because you can get a cheaper rent on a building not up to standards.
Seriously. The most I'd EVER do is free basic repairs and that's only because my last landlord was my good friend, meaning I was getting a killer deal.
I did that when I had an awesome landlord. I just sent pics about what I was fixing and gave her a price. Then I got my rent reduced by that much.
But that was the only rental property she owned. It was extra money for her, not her primary income. And I paid several hundred less than anyone else in the area according to Zillow.
But that was the only rental property she owned. It was extra money for her, not her primary income.
These are the best types of landlords. One of my previous landlords was retired, but he used to be a CTO at a tech company. He was renting out the property just for something to do during retirement - he didn't actually need the money. He was fantastic. The air conditioner stopped working one summer and he had a new one installed within a week.
I did basic repairs at my old place. The rent was well below market and I'd rather do it than have to deal with the landlord's odd schedule.
She could have used that $12k as part of a down payment on her own place.. what on earth is she thinking.
Might've been financed on credit - but even still, it takes a lot more than $12k for a down payment.
Assuming the median price for a home is $500k, you'd need $100k for a traditional 20% down payment. Sure, $12k is 12% of the way there... but it's nowhere near what is needed for an actual down payment.
Also shop around for mortgage lenders (hint: credit unions) that will give you a break on the mortgage insurance if you put down at least 5% down.
There are also closing costs and other fees. I bought a house in 2020 using the native American home loan program.
I had to put down two and a quarter percent as a minimum and on a $500,000 house that should have been $11,250, but the total to close was actually a touch over 20 grand.
It took me several years to save up that money and it disappeared in a flash.
FHA loans need 3.5% last I checked. So her $12k wasn’t far off for a $500k dollar place. Yes they also require PMI for a bit, but better putting money into something that causes gains for yourself than for a landlord. As this article so clearly proves.
It's not far off but in the current market someone will just offer more than you and you won't get it anyway.
People will often ignore FHA offers or take lesser conventional offers. FHA loans fall through more often and have additional requirements on the property. I've worked in mortgage for years. Took an offer for 5k less when I sold my first home to take a conventional loan offer....
Anyone who's dealt with real estate knows how much more likely the conventional offer is to close. In a seller sided market no one wants to take government loans.
Nah you can put lower you just need mortgage insurance so you’re paying a bit extra on mortgage due to not having to save up for 5 years to afford it (which would mean the price probably rising by enough in those 5 years that you’ll need to save up for another year and now you’re 6 years behind on a payment lol.) if you’re saving up while renting you’re probably paying close to mortgage for rent (or more if you’re in certain areas) plus putting more aside to save for that down payment so you should be able to afford the slightly higher mortgage until you get to that 20%.
Some people don't want to be tied down with a mortgage and find renting to be better. It's similar to leasing a car.
I doubt your pulled out of ass price for a house. And you don't need a 20% down payment. The highest down payment minimum is like 10% and most people don't need that much. All depends on the type of loan though.
The reason why people go for the 20% Mark is because once you clear 20% then you don't have PMI, or private mortgage insurance. That typically runs three quarters of a percent of the purchase price of the house until you have 22% of the house paid off, and you have to pay that on top of your mortgage, the interest, and the taxes and insurance.
For every $100,000 you finance that means that if you pay less than 20% down you will have to pay an extra $750 a year just as a "couldn't afford 20% down" fee.
And typically to get the first quarter of your mortgage paid off takes 10 years, so for many people that will be $7,500 per $100,000 they borrow to buy a house as the poverty cherry fee on top of everything else.
I'm aware, having bought my house about 2 years ago. It doesn't change any of what I said. 20% is nice for that reason but it is not a requirement and most people don't put 20% down because they don't have the money to do so.
Hell, I intentionally didn't put 20% down because my interest rate was under 3%. Was better off taking the extra money and sticking it in investments.
And typically to get the first quarter of your mortgage paid off takes 10 years, so for many people that will be $7,500 per $100,000 they borrow to buy a house as the poverty cherry fee on top of everything else.
You can also work with the lender to perform an appraisal once you have 22% equity due to the property value increasing which may only take a couple of years depending on the market.
Assuming the median price for a home is $500k
Depending on where you live that's way too high. That's like an NYC price or something.
Also depending on where you live that's way too low. Median home price in California is almost $800k.
https://www.redfin.com/state/California/housing-market
Almost like $500k is a good rough number used to make a point.
Hmm. Now I wonder what the average is. Where I live 200k CAD isn't unusual, but then again you don't want to live here. On the other hand, a house in Vancouver might be 2 million CAD, from what I hear.
It would be a fine estimate on it's own, but it was actually used as a comeback to someone else claiming you could use a smaller amount for a downpayment, so I don't think the indignance that I'm questioning it is justified.
@EnglishMobster@kbin.social was making the point that $12k is typically not enough for a down payment on a house. They did some rough math as an example showing that a $500k house would require a $100k deposit if you're putting 20% down. You nitpicked this number. However $500k for a house is a very reasonable number, so I'm nitpicking your nitpick. I guess we're all assholes here.
Anyway, USA median house price is $420k. For a 20% deposit you'd need $84k. Canada is worse than the US with an average house price of almost $670k.
What about a really basic house? I'll admit that was just a guess; USD is larger than CAD, and Canadian prices are already some of the largest in the world.
Think about how stupid the average person is and realize half of them are stupider than that.
verbal consent
That’s a big mistake. He got $12k for free and will find people who will pay a higher rent.
Dealing with a landlord is just like dealing with HR at work - they aren't there for YOU. The tenant here wasn't stupid, just naive. Besides, from a liability standpoint, a tenant should NEVER do any property upgrades or repairs without some kind of written agreement (and hopefuly waiver of liability). If something goes wrong, guess who will be on the hook financially when it goes to court? Hint: The landlord turned plaintiff won't be it....
No remorse.
Not because she spent $12k for the upgrade.
But because she also paid for Twitter, or X or whatever dumb name it's called.
Never, ever, ever do anything like this after verbal consent, especially if it involves this much money. Unless it's on paper, doing this makes you unbelievably fucking stupid
That's more facepalm, right?
Reminds me of this time in high school when we went bowling. Friend of mine spent $5 to shine the rented ball before he returned it.
Horrible. Now that the property is more valuable due to the upgrades the landlord knows they can charges a higher rent for it. The real mildly infuriating part is the fact that we as a society reward this behaviour. Sociopathic behaviour is actively encouraged under capitalism.
Not even close to a sane take. If you look at the text exchange is clear it was done without the owner knowing. As an owner the renter could have cut all sorts of corners... you'd have to tear it all up just to even make sure its water sealed properly just so that your house doesn't rot the through because some rando renter made choices about your property. If your going to drop 12k on a reno of a bathroom... drop it on a down payment instead.
12k is upgrades is both enough to potentially have the landlord owe additional taxes if they are assessed and not enough to be able to increase amenities enough to meaningfully raise rent.
The real issue here though is that you don't go altering someone's property without their consent. I don't know how that isn't the obvious answer here. The amount spent doesn't even really matter (although I'd argue more spent is even worse, considering it implies greater alterations without consent).
Landlords can be and very often are terrible. But on a base level if I own a piece of property for which I am ultimately responsible, I see no justification for being ok with someone else making thousands of dollars of changes to that property without getting my ok first. It seems incredibly basic that I as owner should have a say in it.
Dude just cross post the source link, don't link to another post. That fucks up users from other instances by pulling them into a web browser for another instance. Lemmy will provide cross post links to other threads.
Everyone is so busy insulting the tenant doing the upgrades when it's the landlord who behaved badly. If all we do is collectively blame victims when they get taken advantage of, society will crumble. This woman wasn't stupid, she just didn't have her guard up in preparation for the massive asshole who had power over her. There's a difference.
When you are trusting, you're called stupid. When you trust no one, you're called unreasonably cynical. They're two sides of the same victim blaming coin. Start blaming the actual problem: predators.
Putting money into something you don’t own is stupid. Full stop.
Never put money into a rental.
Your advice isn't helpful for people who don't have the means to own their own home. Being trusting or naive isn't something that should be shamed. There's a way to educate people with kindness and compassion. People aren't born knowing how to best handle the legal end of a renovation. But go on and call her stupid some more, that'll help the onlookers. You and I and everyone in this comments section will be smart and secure with the claws we have dug into the insides of the pretty housing bubble. Perhaps if we bicker even more, the problem will disappear completely.
This tenant obviously is close to having the means to owning their own home. They blew ~50% of a down payment on a house that they don't own.
The smart thing to do, would have been save the money and use that towards a house of their own.
Kindness and compassion doesn't always work. Sometimes the bold truth may hurt but can have more of an effect.
At 400 lbs, you are a bit overweight and that's ok
Or...reality.
You are morbidly obese and at risk of dying, slchange your life now.
I'll take blunt and effective over sugar coated nonsense any day.
Rather than pay that much for renovations on something she doesn't own that would have been a great start for a down payment she could own.
I'm not arguing this point. Even though I disagree with how she chose to spend her money, I can still acknowledge that it's not her fault the landlord took advantage of her and kicked her out to charge higher rent to the next person.
I hate landlords as much as the next guy, but this is the stupidest thing ever. Would you also pay to deck out a rental car? No, you wouldn't because you're not the biggest dumbass on the planet.
Like other commenters have stated, there are technically reasons why and how this could work, but a casual verbal agreement ain't it, chief. Don't reward massive dumbassery with pity.
Well no one is living in a rental car for years. I understand what you're saying but the comparison itself is pretty bad
A proper comparison here would be more like a leased vehicle than a rental car. It's not the "stupidest thing ever" for this tenant to believe she would be living there for 1 or more years and wouldn't suddenly be evicted. Your exaggeration only benefits predators, and your pity is hardly a reward to anyone.
I agree that the landlord is a shitstain, but that tenant is not the best at decision making either. I can understand spending a couple of hundreds if it makes your life better, but she basically handed over a 12k check to that landlord. I can't see any good reason to do this.
Renting isn't the greatest decision, either. You're throwing money at a landlord and gaining zero equity. People often do it because it's that or homelessness. These systems are in place to take advantage of people who aren't the best decision makers. Just because they can be taken advantage of... should they be? Or should we be better than this and revamp how we house people so that it isn't a massive scam with the opportunity for extra side scams like we see here?
If the landlord wasn't a massive dick, they both could have benefited from this situation. She'd have the renovated bathroom she wanted, and the landlord knew his property was being taken care of without even needing to lift a finger. Instead he got greedy, and rather than blame the greedy jerk people want to jump on the "stupid" victim. Except it's not her fault her landlord was a prick.
Renting can sometimes be more advantageous than owning. You don't have to pay for maintenance and you have the ability to pick up and move a lot easier.
I own now, and even though I own a very small condo and was able to put enough money down so that I don't have to pay mortgage insurance...owning has been more expensive per month than renting for me... I get that it's not always this way, but right now everything is shit for everyone.
True. Back when I rented it was a good situation because my rent was dirt cheap and I was able to save money. Seems those days are long gone with rentals sometimes being double or triple what a mortgage payment would be.
Nah I mean for me it's the opposite. Buying something made my monthly cost much higher than renting. I was hoping it would do the opposite but that wasn't the case. :/
Renting is basically the only way to have housing in certain parts of the world. In large cities too. Not everyone that rents is bad at decision making or on the verge of homelessness...
In this specific case, she was able to blow 12k in renos on a rental and has a Roche Bobois couch that's worth at least 10k in the setup she has (she mentions this on her twitter feed). To be fair, she also says she realizes she made a terrible mistake and is taking the criticism in stride, so good for her, lesson learned. All this to say, yes she acted stupidly, regardless of how shitty the landlord seem to be.
I agree with you that the housing system needs to change. That conversation has been going on forever. But the solution is not to have everyone strive to own a house.
As fucked as that is, what fucking eviction notice gives 3 days to vacate? That can't be legal, can it?
Edit: Looking closer, I see that this is in Texas. And evidently 3 days is all they have to give there. Insane.
https://guides.sll.texas.gov/landlord-tenant-law/eviction-process
This isn't an eviction notice. The landlord must give a written demand to vacate, and allow it to expire, before they are allowed to file an eviction lawsuit.
My parents made this mistake twice. They were unable to afford their own place and asked the landlord if they were interested in moving back in.
Both times the landlords said no, so my parents made small improvements to the places (replacing carpets, repainting, general upkeep/improvements), but never 12k worth.
Still, both times the landlords kicked us to the curb (so they could move back in) and we had to move. The 3rd time they were finally able to afford their own place.
Landlords exploit property for profit. They hold all power over the tenant.
We need to create organizations in our communities to take power back into our hands.
Abolish private property!