Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Hill)   The government shouldn't forget those poor, innocent landlords   (thehill.com) divider line
    More: Facepalm, Landlord, Property, Real estate, Renting, Eviction, property owner, Leasehold estate, local governments  
•       •       •

1435 clicks; posted to Politics » on 12 May 2020 at 8:36 PM (7 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



154 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2020-05-12 11:36:03 AM  
Ok, I'll bite. What happens when the bank forecloses on the landlord?  The bank will allow tenants to live in the property rent free?  Have you ever met a banker?  Landlords are an easy target, but the inability of working class people to pay rent is emblematic of much deeper systemic problems.
 
2020-05-12 11:43:41 AM  
Maybe they should demand politicians insulate them from banks during that time. And the banks can demand Uncle Sam make up the difference.

Is this really any different than any other industry that's been bailed out?
 
2020-05-12 2:13:42 PM  
I mean it's not like we can't say that all mortgages are put into suspension as well.  No rents paid, no mortgages paid (with interest froze at 0).  like.. it's not hard
 
2020-05-12 4:36:22 PM  
I know subby is being snarky, but the people that own the building have bills to pay too.  It's no different than business owners that rely on sales to pay their own associated costs, whether they're open or closed.  If you're going to suspend rent payments (which is a good idea in a time like this), it only works if you get the banks to suspend mortgage payments for the same length of time.
 
2020-05-12 5:55:54 PM  
According to HUD, about half of all rental units are help by individual investors, and those are usually single family homes or duplexes. If they can't collect rent, they are going to lose what may be a primary source of income to foreclosure.
 
2020-05-12 6:59:41 PM  
I'm not sure I agree with your tone, subby.

Our primary residence was listed as an AirBnb while we were renting temporarily down the hill (easier commute to school for me) when the shiat went down. Our AirBnb reservations all cancelled, and we moved back up to our primary residence, leaving the rental empty for the past 2 months.

Has it sucked paying a mortgage and rent for a place we're not living in? You betcha! But it wasn't our landlord's fault. She has to pay her mortgage on that property, too. We were extremely fortunate to have some extra income from the last few AirBnb stays, along with some savings to carry us til now. (And I absolutely appreciate this is not everyone's experience.)

Our landlord has been very cool about letting us out of our lease and re-listing it. We paid for May, and hopefully she can get it rented beginning in June (a couple of months shy of the end of our lease). She's not a slumlord or some faceless property management company. She's a regular person, who has bills to pay too.
 
2020-05-12 8:10:45 PM  
They pinky swear not to take the money and evict people anyway
 
2020-05-12 8:22:29 PM  

GoodCopBadCop: Ok, I'll bite. What happens when the bank forecloses on the landlord?  The bank will allow tenants to live in the property rent free?  Have you ever met a banker?  Landlords are an easy target, but the inability of working class people to pay rent is emblematic of much deeper systemic problems.


Agree.

But this has become a financial issue. With mortgage payments drying up, you will start to see the damage to banks, shortly here. They are already screwed with corporate buildings losing tenants now that it is becoming clear many can work from home. So once the REITs go down, the loans go sour.

Several big banks have already created shell oil companies on paper. They are preparing to seize assets of oil companies when they go bankrupt.

Auto loans are already at pre 2009 levels in terms of defaults. And that was before this virus. So that will hit banks.

Given all of the corporate debt amassed at cheap rates over the last decade, and now with heavily reduced cash flows, those notes are going south.

It takes time to unfold, but we are about to see a great deleveraging. This amount of debt is not sustainable, on the personal or corporate side. My biggest fear tho, is instead of allowing that to happen, the Fed prints and keeps rates forever at 0, just creating a larger bubble for next time.

And of course this will hit savers and the taxpayer, it always does.
 
2020-05-12 8:38:14 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-05-12 8:38:55 PM  
Dead Kennedys - Let's Lynch The Landlord
Youtube aCiYmCVikjo
 
2020-05-12 8:39:40 PM  

edmo: Maybe they should demand politicians insulate them from banks during that time. And the banks can demand Uncle Sam make up the difference.

Is this really any different than any other industry that's been bailed out?


Isn't that how the government ended up owning Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac or one of those?
 
2020-05-12 8:40:19 PM  
Many, many, landlords are good people like you and I. Perhaps even a majority of them.

But it's still a human activity that is overwhelmingly malicious and sociopathic, so my sympathy has limits.
 
2020-05-12 8:41:17 PM  
Against that backdrop of economic anxiety, Sen. Barnie Sanders (I-Vt.) tweeted, "It is time to #CancelRent and #CancelMortgages until this crisis is over."

Cool. Let's not forget #CancelTaxes and #CancelGovernmentFees as long as we're canceling things.
 
2020-05-12 8:41:29 PM  

emtwo: Many, many, landlords are good people like you and I. Perhaps even a majority of them.

But it's still a human activity that is overwhelmingly malicious and sociopathic, so my sympathy has limits.


Not gonna lie, you almost had me with the first part.
 
2020-05-12 8:42:19 PM  

NeoCortex42: It's no different than business owners that rely on sales to pay their own associated costs, whether they're open or closed.


It's a lot different, actually.
 
2020-05-12 8:44:52 PM  

Kazan: I mean it's not like we can't say that all mortgages are put into suspension as well.  No rents paid, no mortgages paid (with interest froze at 0).  like.. it's not hard


But but but the investors!
 
2020-05-12 8:46:14 PM  
Have the landlords considered getting a part time job to pay their mortgages?
 
2020-05-12 8:47:07 PM  

bthom37: emtwo: Many, many, landlords are good people like you and I. Perhaps even a majority of them.

But it's still a human activity that is overwhelmingly malicious and sociopathic, so my sympathy has limits.

Not gonna lie, you almost had me with the first part.


"Had" you? Had you with what? This isn't a trick or a deception.

All I said basically boils down to don't hate the player; hate the game.
 
2020-05-12 8:47:22 PM  

jjorsett: Against that backdrop of economic anxiety, Sen. Barnie Sanders (I-Vt.) tweeted, "It is time to #CancelRent and #CancelMortgages until this crisis is over."

Cool. Let's not forget #CancelTaxes and #CancelGovernmentFees as long as we're canceling things.


Fine with me.  For the next year, no taxes or government fees.  But it only applies to the 97%.  The other 3 percent can go ahead and continue to pay for the next year.
 
2020-05-12 8:47:26 PM  

Jaws_Victim: Have the landlords considered getting a part time job to pay their mortgages?


They should just tap into their 6 months of savings.  Or ask their family for help.
 
2020-05-12 8:47:41 PM  
I remember writing here about needing rent relief weeks ago and being told I was selfish and entitled for even daring to ask, so it seems only fair that the landlords get attacked for asking for the same relief.

I think part of the problem is that "landlord" encompasses a broad array of entities, ranging from the sweet old lady who takes on a tenant in her home to help with the bills and some housework, to (comparatively) well-to-do people who bought a small property or two and rent them out, to multi-national property conglomerates that definitely do not give one single f*ck about you or your inability to pay rent.  Most of the people I see defending landlords assume something closer to the first or second, and that's not an entirely unfair defense, but what about the massive amounts of properties owned by these huge companies?  I'm not about to feel sorry for them.

That said, I know a lot of people involved in rent strikes and whatnot, and their responses to "What about landlords?" has been essentially either 1) rent is immoral to begin with (the socialist response; see also: healthcare) or 2) they can petition the government for assistance just like everyone else.
 
2020-05-12 8:47:50 PM  
I'm a landlord. One unit in the basement of the house I live in. But I don't think they are really talking about me here.
 
2020-05-12 8:47:53 PM  

emtwo: bthom37: emtwo: Many, many, landlords are good people like you and I. Perhaps even a majority of them.

But it's still a human activity that is overwhelmingly malicious and sociopathic, so my sympathy has limits.

Not gonna lie, you almost had me with the first part.

"Had" you? Had you with what? This isn't a trick or a deception.

All I said basically boils down to don't hate the player; hate the game.


Porque no los dos?
 
2020-05-12 8:49:42 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-05-12 8:53:24 PM  

austerity101: I remember writing here about needing rent relief weeks ago and being told I was selfish and entitled for even daring to ask, so it seems only fair that the landlords get attacked for asking for the same relief.

I think part of the problem is that "landlord" encompasses a broad array of entities, ranging from the sweet old lady who takes on a tenant in her home to help with the bills and some housework, to (comparatively) well-to-do people who bought a small property or two and rent them out, to multi-national property conglomerates that definitely do not give one single f*ck about you or your inability to pay rent.  Most of the people I see defending landlords assume something closer to the first or second, and that's not an entirely unfair defense, but what about the massive amounts of properties owned by these huge companies?  I'm not about to feel sorry for them.

That said, I know a lot of people involved in rent strikes and whatnot, and their responses to "What about landlords?" has been essentially either 1) rent is immoral to begin with (the socialist response; see also: healthcare) or 2) they can petition the government for assistance just like everyone else.


Landlords can't pay the mortgage, the building goes into foreclosure. Building goes into foreclosure, you have a better than good chance of getting kicked out anyway when the bank takes it.

I know it's your MO to "but the corporations" just about everything, but renters don't have the power they think they have.
 
2020-05-12 8:55:10 PM  

ArkAngel: According to HUD, about half of all rental units are help by individual investors, and those are usually single family homes or duplexes. If they can't collect rent, they are going to lose what may be a primary source of income to foreclosure.


You can't paint 'landlord' with a broad stroke. It covers a lot if ground. The sisters that own my building are billionaires, some are people who depend on the rent income of an extra property to pay their own bills.

My old man has two properties. He has enough saved up where it is not an issue if he doesn't get his rent for a few months. He phoned one tenant, a doctor who closed his practice temporarily, and offered to reduce the rent for the next few months. The other tenant works for some multinational and the company was paying. So fark those guys. No discount for them.
 
2020-05-12 8:57:33 PM  
Had a landlord who, while being a trumper wasn't enough, his favorite mantra was, "Milk the poor, you'll never want for more."

Yeah, he was/is a sociopathic scumbag with dollar signs in his eyes. His face was always quite punchable to me.
Heh, all his investments were in oil, so I'm really getting a kick.
People who think money equates happiness/success are usually the most miserable.
 
2020-05-12 8:58:36 PM  

GoodCopBadCop: Ok, I'll bite. What happens when the bank forecloses on the landlord?


Acquiring a business passes all current contractual obligations of said business to the new owner.

So if a bank acquires an rental property as part of a default or whatever and takes full possession, they are now bound by the terms of the prior contracts; in essence, they're your new landlord now and the terms remain the same until the lease runs out or one or the other party invokes a termination clause, same as with your original landlord.

Note that this is kind of a pain in the ass (the bank has to hire a property manager if it come to this) so banks usually won't go full foreclosure immediately: they'll stick liens on things and bind the current owner not to take on new tenants until they've negotiated a repayment deal, that kind of thing.

The bank could only kick residents out for nonpayment if it falls within the terms of the lease, meaning it's the same risk as with the original landlord, but in practical terms... they're likely not going to bother making a big deal of it for a couple of months, since the default already makes the whole loan a loss and they're unlikely to want to throw good money after bad.  Rule of thumb a change of ownership gives you an extra month ish before you're evicted if you're severely behind on rent, and if the new owner is the bank you'll end up with an extra two, maybe three.  Banks really don't want to get bogged down in eviction proceedings, generally speaking.
Another upside for renters is that whoever the Bank hires to manage a rental property gained by default will have been instructed to just keep things barely running, not manage the thing at the best possible profit margin (again, the bank doesn't want to be a landlord, they want to sell it to a new landlord as soon as possible).  The chances of just going to the temporary guy and being like "I can't afford this rent, but I can give you half of it" and them going along with it during the transition are waaaaaay higher than getting that deal out of your original landlord who has set margins and target prices based on market norms.TL;DR: actually there are a lot of benefits to a renter when the bank forecloses on their landlord, to the point that it's likely to help the renters at the expense of the bank... which is why banks try not to do it.
 
2020-05-12 8:58:47 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-05-12 8:59:07 PM  
Can't we all agree that the banks are really the ones who should be carrying this load?

I mean they have scammed us for decades.  Let's them take some losses for a few months.

They will still turn a profit by the end of the year.
 
2020-05-12 8:59:15 PM  
The math is pretty clear on this one.

If I have to choose between landlords getting shafted vs. literally most other American adults getting shafted, then I'll gladly sell landlords up the river.

If that's so offensive to people, the landlords can go find another job.
 
2020-05-12 8:59:55 PM  
I feel that the needs of both renters and landlords have to be fairly considered. Both have bills to pay, so there has to be some sort of balance when you are don't have/aren't getting the money to pay those bills.

On the other hand, it's hard for me to extend that feeling towards the AirBnBs. Living spaces shouldn't be converted into piggy banks, with the expectation that when the shiat hits the fan, then there will be a bail out waiting.
 
2020-05-12 9:00:30 PM  

stoli n coke: austerity101: I remember writing here about needing rent relief weeks ago and being told I was selfish and entitled for even daring to ask, so it seems only fair that the landlords get attacked for asking for the same relief.

I think part of the problem is that "landlord" encompasses a broad array of entities, ranging from the sweet old lady who takes on a tenant in her home to help with the bills and some housework, to (comparatively) well-to-do people who bought a small property or two and rent them out, to multi-national property conglomerates that definitely do not give one single f*ck about you or your inability to pay rent.  Most of the people I see defending landlords assume something closer to the first or second, and that's not an entirely unfair defense, but what about the massive amounts of properties owned by these huge companies?  I'm not about to feel sorry for them.

That said, I know a lot of people involved in rent strikes and whatnot, and their responses to "What about landlords?" has been essentially either 1) rent is immoral to begin with (the socialist response; see also: healthcare) or 2) they can petition the government for assistance just like everyone else.

Landlords can't pay the mortgage, the building goes into foreclosure. Building goes into foreclosure, you have a better than good chance of getting kicked out anyway when the bank takes it.

I know it's your MO to "but the corporations" just about everything, but renters don't have the power they think they have.


God, wouldn't it just be awful if the banks were sitting on an excess inventory of housing and were forced to sell it at rates that actually made home ownership affordable for the working class?
 
2020-05-12 9:00:44 PM  

bluejeansonfire: The math is pretty clear on this one.

If I have to choose between landlords getting shafted vs. literally most other American adults getting shafted, then I'll gladly sell landlords up the river.

If that's so offensive to people, the landlords can go find another job.


Let them eat bootstraps.
 
2020-05-12 9:01:27 PM  
A lot of landlords are just Jane and Joe Smith renting out a home after moving somewhere else.  They're not slumlords or complex owners with more tenants than they can properly care for.   They're the ones who are getting hurt most by this because they're still legally liable for the expenses of any property set out for rent (i.e. the A/C breaks they still need to repair the unit even if the tenant isn't paying rent), and their own living expenses too.

Lumping them in with slumlords or property management companies out to squeeze what they can out of people is really undeserved.
 
2020-05-12 9:01:32 PM  

stoli n coke: austerity101: I remember writing here about needing rent relief weeks ago and being told I was selfish and entitled for even daring to ask, so it seems only fair that the landlords get attacked for asking for the same relief.

I think part of the problem is that "landlord" encompasses a broad array of entities, ranging from the sweet old lady who takes on a tenant in her home to help with the bills and some housework, to (comparatively) well-to-do people who bought a small property or two and rent them out, to multi-national property conglomerates that definitely do not give one single f*ck about you or your inability to pay rent.  Most of the people I see defending landlords assume something closer to the first or second, and that's not an entirely unfair defense, but what about the massive amounts of properties owned by these huge companies?  I'm not about to feel sorry for them.

That said, I know a lot of people involved in rent strikes and whatnot, and their responses to "What about landlords?" has been essentially either 1) rent is immoral to begin with (the socialist response; see also: healthcare) or 2) they can petition the government for assistance just like everyone else.

Landlords can't pay the mortgage, the building goes into foreclosure. Building goes into foreclosure, you have a better than good chance of getting kicked out anyway when the bank takes it.

I know it's your MO to "but the corporations" just about everything, but renters don't have the power they think they have.


Don't tell me what my MO is.  That's condescending and gross.

My point is that the landlords shouldn't be fighting against us--they should be fighting with us for relief.  Collective appeals are more powerful than individual ones.  Plus, while some tenants' associations exist, renter's associations and organizations are much more powerful and politically connected, for various reasons.  Instead of them using that clout to help all of us, they're trying to help themselves while specifically nothelping the people who rent from them.  At least that's been the case here.
 
2020-05-12 9:03:04 PM  

JohnBigBootay: I'm a landlord. One unit in the basement of the house I live in. But I don't think they are really talking about me here.


That would be the Pacific Legal Foundation, the Reagan-era "non-profit" that somehow always seems to align with big business even as they claim otherwise.

Y'know, the assholes who made history by hitting the Diablo Canyon reactor protestors in '81 with one of this country's first SLAPP lawsuits - they wanted the names of all the protestors, so that they could somehow force the protestors to pay the costs of the blockade. They got repeatedly laughed out of court.

Anything that comes out of the Pacific Legal Foundation should be taken with a grain of salt.
 
2020-05-12 9:03:12 PM  

Murkanen: A lot of landlords are just Jane and Joe Smith renting out a home after moving somewhere else.  They're not slumlords or complex owners with more tenants than they can properly care for.   They're the ones who are getting hurt most by this because they're still legally liable for the expenses of any property set out for rent (i.e. the A/C breaks they still need to repair the unit even if the tenant isn't paying rent), and their own living expenses too.

Lumping them in with slumlords or property management companies out to squeeze what they can out of people is really undeserved.


If they don't like it, they're free to sell their investment property.
 
2020-05-12 9:05:12 PM  
So you're telling me that the "millionaire" landlords who are leveraged up to their eyeballs that CNBC holds up to say "see they did it, so you can do it too" are screwed when their tenants can't or won't pay their rent?

Fark user imageView Full Size


/Hopefully this will put a stop to their bullshiat "journalism"
 
2020-05-12 9:06:43 PM  

emtwo: Murkanen: A lot of landlords are just Jane and Joe Smith renting out a home after moving somewhere else.  They're not slumlords or complex owners with more tenants than they can properly care for.   They're the ones who are getting hurt most by this because they're still legally liable for the expenses of any property set out for rent (i.e. the A/C breaks they still need to repair the unit even if the tenant isn't paying rent), and their own living expenses too.

Lumping them in with slumlords or property management companies out to squeeze what they can out of people is really undeserved.

If they don't like it, they're free to sell their investment property.


They are, after all, rent seeking.
 
2020-05-12 9:07:26 PM  

dustman81: So you're telling me that the "millionaire" landlords who are leveraged up to their eyeballs that CNBC holds up to say "see they did it, so you can do it too" are screwed when their tenants can't or won't pay their rent?

[Fark user image image 360x360]

/Hopefully this will put a stop to their bullshiat "journalism"


You sound like you bought what Jim Cramer was recommending.
 
2020-05-12 9:07:54 PM  
Government Cuts a check to the renter.

Renter pays the landlord.

Landlord pays the bank.

Bank grinds up the cash and uses it like a lonely teenage nerd uses astroglide.

Everyone is happy except a few shiatty Republicans.
 
2020-05-12 9:08:26 PM  
emtwo:

But it's still a human activity that is overwhelmingly malicious and sociopathic, so my sympathy has limits.

How does offering a someone a place to live for a fixed rate per month count as malicious and sociopathic?  Do you share the same sort of animosity towards people who flat share?
 
2020-05-12 9:10:06 PM  

Murkanen: A lot of landlords are just Jane and Joe Smith renting out a home after moving somewhere else.  They're not slumlords or complex owners with more tenants than they can properly care for.   They're the ones who are getting hurt most by this because they're still legally liable for the expenses of any property set out for rent (i.e. the A/C breaks they still need to repair the unit even if the tenant isn't paying rent), and their own living expenses too.

Lumping them in with slumlords or property management companies out to squeeze what they can out of people is really undeserved.


I'd say owners (not necessarily landlords) - for the most part - who know their tenants shouldn't be lumped in with the owners of the units that refer to them as 'inventory'.
 
2020-05-12 9:11:15 PM  
emtwo:

If they don't like it, they're free to sell their investment property.

So they lose income that was allowing them to live, and the renter loses a place to stay.  Both sides lose, with both potentially losing their residence, and the benefit to this for society is what?
 
2020-05-12 9:12:11 PM  

NeoCortex42: I know subby is being snarky, but the people that own the building have bills to pay too.  It's no different than business owners that rely on sales to pay their own associated costs, whether they're open or closed.  If you're going to suspend rent payments (which is a good idea in a time like this), it only works if you get the banks to suspend mortgage payments for the same length of time.


In addition, not all owners are the typical Kushner slum lords. My previous boss owns two duplexes. After repairs, he just started making money June of last year. He still grinds cash as a restraunt GM, but he planned to leave that and move in to real estate.

Currently, he is completely forked.  No data, but I'm guessing that there are lots of people like him.
 
2020-05-12 9:12:22 PM  
Did Fark go down for a second?  Anyway, I was trying to correct the last thing I said--I meant landlords' associations, not renter's, have more political clout.
 
2020-05-12 9:13:24 PM  

Surrender your boo-tah: Government Cuts a check to the renter.

Renter pays the landlord.

Landlord pays the bank.

Bank grinds up the cash and uses it like a lonely teenage nerd uses astroglide.

Everyone is happy except a few shiatty Republicans.


If that money is meant for rent/mortgage, why not just give it directly to the banks?  If you're giving the money to us just to give it to our landlords just so they can give it to the bank, what's the point of it changing so many hands?
 
2020-05-12 9:13:52 PM  
JohnBigBootay:

I'd say owners (not necessarily landlords) - for the most part - who know their tenants shouldn't be lumped in with the owners of the units that refer to them as 'inventory'.

I agree, and I make the distinction myself because I personally don't see anything morally wrong with offering people a place to stay.  Others apparently see this as the greatest crime one human being can commit against another, which is, well, it's crazy if I'm blunt about it.
 
2020-05-12 9:17:29 PM  

ArkAngel: According to HUD, about half of all rental units are help by individual investors, and those are usually single family homes or duplexes. If they can't collect rent, they are going to lose what may be a primary source of income to foreclosure.


I have a rental property (my first home, didn't sell it when we bought a new one). Luckily our tenant can pay the rent but if he couldn't I would lose the house. I would be fine with a rent and mortgage suspension. Hell, let him live free in the house and throw the missed payments on the back of my loan even. Subby should feel bad, not all landlords are evil. I bet most aren't.
 
Displayed 50 of 154 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter




In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.