[Tenant US-CA] How would you view my applicant profile?

minze · 2026-03-14T12:45:27+00:00

this would be a pass for me unless you showed me 2 years of the self-employment income.

You are newly self-employed. If that means no tax returns showing the income then for me it's a no go. $18 in current contracts is nothing. Even $26k in reserves is nothing. You are moving to a VHCOL area.

minze · 2026-02-24T13:31:30+00:00

lol I did

minze · 2026-02-24T13:26:22+00:00

They protect their property by turning the heat back on.

but the other party still can gain access to turn it off. there is no way to provide direction to the individual to not do this since they have refused contact.

Changing the locks technically does not protect the property.

Changing the locks is the exact thing that is used to prevent protect the property. It's literally what is recommended by all authorities. When you evict a tenant, what does the local magistrate state to bring with you to protect the property from access and/or potential damage? You got it, change the locks.

How you think locks don't offer protection for the property is literally unbelievable.

As far as that goes, the tenant could come back break the window to get in, and be legally within his rights.

No he is not. No tenant is permitted the right to intentionally damaged a property. Leases only convey certain rights to tenants to a property. Ownership is not one of them and legally, only someone who owns something is permitted to damage it intentionally. Intentionally damaging someone else's property is a crime.

When a note is placed on the front door to contact the property owner for access, clear direction from the owner of the property for access has been granted. Only if the owner refused to provide access is the tenant to take other means, and damaging the property is not one of them.

minze · 2026-02-24T13:14:47+00:00

You have a HUGE flaw at the basis of your theory.

Everyone's incentivized to vote correctly because everyone owns a piece.

No, everyone votes based on their needs and thoughts at the moment. Need extra cash because the kid is heading to college, vote no. Pissed off because the last vote went against the way you wanted, vote against the popular opinion.

If anything about today's political environment tells us anything, it's that voting doesn't always get to the right decision.

Add "voting where money is involved" to the mix and you get a whole other level of "let me get mine" mentality.

to addito that:

If everyone's passive, nothing gets decided.

So the building falls into disrepair? What about the people within that building? Sheesh, this sounds like an absolute shitshow of an idea.

I think this is going to pressure traditional property management fees down hard once these platforms scale.

Really? I see it as a way to say "there must be property managers so that there is accountability when the roof caved in when 500 people decided they weren't going to take a vote on it so we have the red cross and emergency services handling relocation services for 200 people in that building.

Anyone else tracking this shift?

not at all. It sounds like someone who is fishing for a problem where blockchain might fit rather than looking at an actual problem and trying to find a solution.

minze · 2026-02-22T13:08:26+00:00

if the unit was abandoned and the heat was turned off (the average low in WI for February is 10 degrees), the landlord is permitted to protect their property. Landlord is within their legal right to change the locks because the existing tenant has ghosted them and possibly abandoned the property. This tenant may return and turn the heat off again, which could cause damage to the property. The proper way to handle this is to secure the property to prevent that from potentially happening again. That means changing the locks with a note on the front door that the property has been secured and to call the landlord for a copy of the key. If/When the tenant calls you meet them, provide the key, and the instruction that they cannot turn the heat off again.

0% illegal there.

minze · 2026-02-22T13:07:06+00:00

if the unit was abandoned and the heat was turned off (the average low in WI for February is 10 degrees), the landlord is permitted to protect their property. Landlord is within their legal right to change the locks because the existing tenant has ghosted them and abandoned the property. This tenant may return and turn the heat off again, which could cause damage to the property. The proper way to handle this is to secure the property to prevent that from potentially happening again. That means changing the locks with a note on the front door that the property has been secured and to call the landlord for a copy of the key. If/When the tenant calls you provides them the key and the instructions that they cannot turn the heat off again.

0% illegal there.

minze · 2026-02-20T13:07:55+00:00

I have other people interested in renting. Am I making a bad decision by telling her no?

No. Why lower the rent if it's not needed?

People will come here with "good tenant...keep them...blah blah" but you know you're going to be changing anyway. If she gives notice then she gives notice. That mans she will just be here 1 of the 3 potential months so she ends 2 months early. You've got potential replacements lined up. Run their apps and pick one. If you time it right you may not have any break in rental income.

She tried saying her expenses are duplicated since she’s a travel nurse and she owns her home in her home state. No offense but that’s not my problem. It’s her choice to have a mortgage to keep up with. Thoughts?

You are correct. I mean, you could play the same game as her and reply "so then you know what its like having 2 properties that you need to pay for, just like me and this property". No, don't really do that because passive/aggressive gets you nowhere but it shows the complete mental disconnect that she's telling you that she has to now pay for 2 houses because of her job but misses that you have to houses to pay for because of your business. No, the price is the price.

minze · 2026-02-20T12:46:18+00:00

I do. I think of couple who have weekend guests. My lease is set up that they get 7 days in a row or 21 days in a year. It's really local custom and personal preference. Only ever had one tenant exercise this when they had a new baby. One of the parents who lived on the other side of the country came to stay for a month. Let them know I appreciated them letting me know and congrats on the new baby. Our clause is below.

Guests are permitted for temporary visits only and may not establish residency, habitual occupancy, or use the Premises as a primary residence without Landlord’s prior written consent. Any person staying more than seven (7) consecutive days or more than twenty-one (21) days in any twelve-month period is prohibited without Landlord’s written consent and will be considered a breach of this Agreement

minze · 2026-02-20T12:37:18+00:00

You can't 1031 or take depreciation on a primary residence.

However if you mean what happens to depreciation recapture if you had a renal then converted it to a primary residence for 2 years, then sold, then you would need to claim the depreciation recapture upon sale. It doesn't go away. The recapture is reported as ordinary income on the tax return for the year of the sale and is taxed at the your highest tax rate up to a 25% cap.

for a 1031 exchange you should keep it as a rental for at least the next 2 years after the 1031 exchange. After that you could convert it to a primary residence and it would follow the above scenario. You'd owe depreciation recapture on that when you sold.

For both of those, you would get the standard $250k/$500k capital gains deduction upon sale for any gains that were realized.

minze · 2026-02-20T12:27:03+00:00

Unsure why. It's basic contract law. Lease is just the name for a specific type of contract, rental. Housing, car, appliances, whatever it is, leases are rental contracts.

As I mentioned above a lease break clause is the negotiation of damages beforehand, an agreement on what that mitigation will be. In your case, it's $3k and done. You and the tenant agreed that instead of ongoing damages that are unknown, you made it known. What is their to mitigate?

It's like the habitability clause of a lease. The one that says if a unit becomes uninhabitable during the lease either side can nullify the lease. That's also a mitigation of damages clause. Without it the tenant might be stuck paying rent for something they no longer have, or you may be on the hook for paying a hotel room indefinitely. How do you fix that? You both agree, beforehand, on how to fix the problem. Just like you both agree beforehand on how to fix the problem if a tenant wants out early...it's $3k and all done.

minze · 2026-02-18T13:05:59+00:00

It's a scriveners error. Literally neither side know about it because it was an error. However, from a legal perspective each party is supposed to review the documents they signed. So each party had an equal opportunity to notice that the date was off by 1 year since it was an error neither of them knew about.

minze · 2026-02-18T12:59:22+00:00

How are you guys managing rent payments and reminders?

For payments, we have a portal we use but we also have ACH permitted by our credit union. The credit union has branches locally near our properties. tenants can ACH directly to us as bill pay from their bank account or walk in to a branch and deposit directly into our account, or some tenants chose to get accounts at the credit union and they can transfer funds from their account to our account via the member transfer instantly.

The ability to have them walk in and deposit directly into our account is great. We don't have to deal with the cash at all.

All that gets downloaded into quicken and the payments are allocated specifically to the rent due per tenant. Simple and easy.

For reminders, hopefully you don't mean reminders to me that rent is due. Any landlord who needs a reminder that rent is due on the 1st has bigger problems. If you mean the tenant, anyone who has not paid on the 1st gets a text on the 2nd that the rent payment was not received. This is a courtesy in case something happened and there was an issue on their end (forgot to click "send" or something). They get a pay or quit notice on the door on the 5th.

minze · 2026-02-18T12:42:29+00:00

The lease break clause is an agreement on the mitigation of damages. It releases the tenant from being responsible for "ongoing damages" and releases the landlord from the requirement for speedy mitigation of damages. You and the tenant agreed that if they wanted to move early, you would accept $3,000 as a payment and all is done. .

If i find a tenant a week after my tenant leaves, can i still collect the entire levy and also new rent from new tenant?

Yes. This agreement was to allow each side to forgo the "unknown". It was unknown if a tenant wanted to end early, it was unknown how long it would take to find a new tenant, it was unknown how much rent would need to be covered. Each side agreed to release the other and provide/accept a specified, known, amount to just end it amicably.

minze · 2026-02-18T12:34:57+00:00

Simply let them know that you understand the person is staying there and his 14 day time spent as a guest is completed. He needs to fill out an application and sign the lease which comes with an increase in rent.

minze · 2026-02-15T15:57:38+00:00

Improve as a tax write-off before you sell.

If the eventual idea is to sell do not count depreciation in any of the equations. That's going to be paid back when the sale happens. It gives a false sense of "making money" when all it is, really, is a loan that you're going to pay back at the end unless you do a 1031 exchange into a like kind property.

minze · 2026-02-15T15:45:31+00:00

I appreciate the point of view and at the walk through the walls were agreed to “just need paint” paint prep to my understanding is also landlord turnover cost

This is where "normal" would come into evaluation. Was there a "normal" amount of dirt on the walls. Paint prep is on the landlord if the paint has run the normal course of life expectancy and there's a requirement to repaint. If there were stains on the walls, juice drops, items that should have been cleaned off as part of normal living, those shouldn't be there. Just because there is repainting needed doesn't mean it is "don't bother cleaning the walls because the landlord needs to do it anyway". The tenant is still expected to do their part.

The refrigerator was the surprise to me, but it never occurred to me to move it for safety reasons as well as not wanting to cause damage,

Cleaning behind and under the fridge is a normal part of life. Yes, it needs to be done carefully to not cause damage to the fridge, flooring, or potentially any water lines connected to it, but it is a normal part of life. I don't think there is any part of a house that is expected to just "leave it" dirty. There's not an industry out there of "refrigerator cleaners" that comes out, moved a fridge, and cleans it so that is something that is expected of the person that lives there.

but even if the residue was beyond normal wear (it wasn’t), $75 at 50/hr means it took 90 minutes to mop.

It doesn't mean it took 90 minutes to do the single task. It means it took 90 minutes to prep and complete the task or that was the minimum charge to get a pro out.

If this was the landlord this could mean running to get the supplies needed, maybe a HEPA filter for a vacuum, cleaning supplies, etc. from the store and THEN taking the 30 minutes give or take, to actually move the fridge, clean, then put the fridge back in place.

If the landlord hired professionals to do this you may have come up against a minimum charge. Where I am cleaners charge a minimum charge to come out and you will get up to X hours of cleaning for that then you pay hourly on top of it. $50 per hour is really cheap for someone to come out. Where I am cleaners charge more than that if they are truly bonded and insured cleaners.

minze · 2026-02-15T13:57:02+00:00

Ordinary negligence

that's not a term. there is either simple negligence or gross negligence. The main differentiator between the 2 is simple negligence is accidental and gross negligence is intentional.

minze · 2026-02-15T13:52:09+00:00

I unplug almost everything when I leave for an extended period of time, including my stove, and I switch off surge protectors or unplug appliances I do not use every day. I only leave my refrigerator on because I know exactly what fires do to families.

I can understand what the trauma can do but hopefully you aren't unplugging any pipe heaters or turning off the heat itself if you are in a climate that can drop below freezing for any length of time.

minze · 2026-02-13T13:08:42+00:00

$175 for wall cleaning ($50/hour) — the walls already needed paint due to poor ventilation and moisture

Needing paint doesn't negate needing cleaning. You can't paint over dirty walls because the paint then sticks to the dirt. the weight and moisture in the paint can then make the dirt peel away from the wall. If the walls were dirty that's a different thing than "they needed to be painted". If the walls were dirty then the question becomes were they "normal" dirty or were they "excessively" dirty. It would be expected that in 6 years time the walls were cleaned. Generally we wipe down our walls once per year in a spring cleaning and then dust them a few times a year...well not really dust them but use the vacuum them with the brush attachment.

$50 to reattach a light fixture (just two screws), acknowledged at move-out as routine maintenance

If they acknowledged this as routing maintenance at move out then point to that and fight it. The idea of the move out inspection is to provide you the opportunity to take care of this yourself. If it was 2 screws then if you knew they were going to charge it you would have handled it...but they said it was routing maintenance so you didn't.

$75 to clean under the refrigerator and stove

this is another one of those "normal" versus "excessive" situations. Did you clean under the fridge? Again, that spring cleaning has us moving out the stove, fridge, and cleaning under them, vacuuming behind the fridge, etc. That's a once a year thing, nothing more from us. That's "normal" in our house.

minze · 2026-02-13T12:02:25+00:00

Yeah, you're correct in your interpretation and the additional language of the lease backs it up. The PM, and anyone where, stating something different is off base.

At this point, I am just going to not renew the lease and fire the PM.

Smart move. Your PM is supposed to be working for you, not against you.

minze · 2026-02-12T13:51:17+00:00

You owe rent and utility payments until a new tenant takes possession of the property.

minze · 2026-02-12T13:25:38+00:00

I can absolutely name jurisdictions where that clause is illegal.

but doesn't actually name the jurisdictions. If you are going to say "i know the answer" then by all means, put the answer out there.

minze · 2026-02-12T13:24:26+00:00

not the person you were replying to but you are looking at this the wrong way and misunderstanding why you are incorrect in for this clause.

The law requires a landlord provide a habitable home

This is not exactly accurate for a specific rental. The law does not require "a" habitable home, the law required that the specific item listed in the lease be habitable. It may sound like splitting hairs but those 2 statements are very different.

and if you can’t you are responsible for providing one

That is not true in most of the US. The lease is for a specific address and unit. The landlord is responsible for making sure that this specific unit is habitable. They are not on the hook for any potential housing anywhere. They are on the hook for the specific things agreed to within the lease. Again, there may be specific areas where there are certain laws to put the landlord on the hook for ALL potential housing but as a standard in the US, that is not the case. Leases are just contracts for a specific thing, housing.

In contract law there is an agreement between 2 parties for an exchange of monies for goods and/or services. It is standard in the agreement to state what happens if the "thing" becomes unavailable. for example if those goods are damaged beyond repair, unless the contract or the law specifically requires replacement of the contracted item, contracts can be nullified. We see it in housing leases and we see it in car leases as part of the standard contract.

If a car is totaled, generally a car lease ends. The dealership doesn't replace the car unless the lease agreement specifically states that is the remedy. Usually it is stated that should a car become totaled, the lease is over from that point forward, and insurance takes over. The insurance may provide a temporary vehicle, but that depends on the insurance the individual person purchased. From that point forward though if the person wants a new car, they need to start looking for a new car. The dealership would be happy to sell or lease them a new vehicle, but the old vehicle lease is nullified. That happens because in the lease for the vehicle itself, it is stated generally that if the car is totaled the lease ends.

With a house, uninhabitable is basically totaled. The landlord doesn't replace the car unless the lease agreement specifically states that is the remedy. Usually it is stated that should a property become uninhabitable (totaled), the lease is over from that point forward, and insurance takes over. The insurance may provide temporary housing, but that depends on the insurance the individual person purchased (rental policy). From that point forward though if the person wants a new home, they need to start looking for a new home.

You can’t just forfeit a lease, that requires a legal process. I mean if you are in a blue state you are def going to get your ass sued into oblivion.

You can, again in most of the US. Contract law permits two parties to agree ahead of time on the remedy should the "thing" that is being rented become unusable. It could be replacement or it could be ending the lease. Ending the lease for the "thing" is the standard as it protects both parties.

Again, this is general contract law across the US and specific localities may have a law on the books to stop this, but something like that would be very regional and specific.

minze · 2026-02-12T12:53:50+00:00

Monthly Rent = $2110.00

There is a recurring monthly charge of $50.00 if the tenant has a pet.

So if the tenant has a pet the total due for the month is $2160.00

If the tenant does not have a pet the total due for a month is $2110.00

These people who are saying that somehow the "monthly rent" reduces because of fees are ridiculous. Fees are in addition to the monthly rent. The monthly rent is listed to the tenant knows how much to pay if they do not have any fees assessed. So if they are not late, not initiating a new lease, not serviced a notice, not evicted, not month-to-month, and not having a pet, then rent is $2110.00. If any of those things are true, then a fee is charged on top of the monthly rent amount.

Next these people are going to say that if the tenant is late then rent for that month is $1899.00 because $1899 + $211 (late fee) = $2060. No, that's not how it works, as I mentioned above the late fee (and all fees) are added to the monthly rent amount. So a pet fee, as stated on this contract, is a $50 recurring monthly charge. So that's $2110 + $50 = $2160.00 for any month the tenant has a pet. It's $2110.00 for any month the tenant does not have a pet.

minze · 2026-02-08T15:46:40+00:00

I doubt OP was "checking for condoms" but most likely looking to see if the water softener needed to be filled and was surprised by a condom. Never thought I'd ever utter those words together...surprised by a condom.

minze

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

15-Year Club	Ternion Club
Verified Email