• Polisheocket@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 days ago

    I’m a landlord and I don’t care, the house is meant to be used. I’m not using it and your paying me to use it so have at it, it’s my job to save enough of your rent to fix stuff as it fails

    • NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      Yeah, my tenants have got a dog and we keep the white goods in working order for them. I don’t need them to pay off my mortgage, just want to treat them with the respect I’d want my landlord to treat me with.

      • Polisheocket@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        Exactly, I got a 3% rate, no hurry in paying off mortgage plus it will probably be my retirement home some day

      • gh0stcassette@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        7 days ago

        There are no “bad tenants”, because that would imply inconveniencing landlords and costing them money is morally wrong. It’s not, it’s funny as hell😭

        • Polisheocket@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          7 days ago

          100% they’re bad tenants. They’re also people who never want to own, they’re people that will never be able to afford to own. There will always be a need for land lords

              • Gabadabs@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                7 days ago

                Sure, under our current system. But you said there will always be a need for landlords, which I take issue with. But housing doesn’t have to operate the way it does now. There’s a variety of ways to pay for people to have housing under a money-based system, like through taxes. The soviet union had housing cooperatives. Hell, you don’t even need to go that far, housing prices are currently so high because we allow massive real estate corporations to buy up property to artificially inflate price. Government regulation on real estate as an industry would serve to lower housing prices. At the very least, make it so they can’t just sit on vacant homes.

                • Polisheocket@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  6 days ago

                  But that’s IF the government would build said housing. Or it takes it away from owners which is fucked. I’m all for government owned housing if they will build it and maintain it. It could lower housing prices and rents, your right if they build enough of them where needed

              • Seb the goblin@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                7 days ago

                Only within a relatively recent stretch of history, before that you only needed to pay for fancy stuff (think pyramids or castles or whatnot)

                • Polisheocket@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  7 days ago

                  You can say that about a lot of things, matter of fact now, you have to pay for housing, there is no fantasy land where you don’t and won’t in our life time

          • gh0stcassette@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 days ago

            Nah that’s stupid. Why do you presume to know that there will “always” be a need for landlords? People thought there would always be kings until democracy developed, people thought there would always be nobility until capitalism emerged and rendered the land-based social relationships that defined feudal nobility meaningless. You lack imagination.

            • Polisheocket@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 days ago

              Ok, in our life times we will always need landlords. I know future generations could have a different setup. We can’t product the future. Maybe AI will lead to government built housing and UBI. We don’t know.

                • Polisheocket@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 days ago

                  I think you don’t realize how slow it will be to get to that point. I am a land lord, what’s the government going to do, take my land and property?

  • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    7 days ago

    Well maybe if the entire property wasn’t done up with the landlord special of tippex on walls and the world’s cheapest laminate floors they’d be able to hold up to the rigours of minor usage.

  • SnerkRabbledauber@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    7 days ago

    Come on people. Don’t be so hard on the landlord. If you don’t leave for work, when is he supposed to go through your underwear drawer?

  • BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    6 days ago

    The new customer service protocols seem to be “Gimme your money, here’s your thing, now get out. What? You want the thing to work, too? We got your money, you got your thing, now get the fuck out of here, until you need another one, then come back and see me.”

    This landlord took the guy’s money and gave him a lease, now the guy expects to actually LIVE there, too?

    • P. Montegomery Hat (he)@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 days ago

      I’m currently going through this with Apple, whom I thought would care more about their reputation and repeat custom. I guess they don’t. Fuck you, Apple. Fix the faulty overpriced shit I paid for.

      • BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 days ago

        Ask anyone around me, and they will tell you that lately, my favorite phrase is to mutter under my breath (and sometime loudly) is “NOTHING WORKS ANY MORE!”

  • architectonas@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    7 days ago

    Yes because rent is supposed to cover my investment costs as well as provide passive income. What do you mean my investment is bound to the property? This is only true when I sell it and cash out once again.

    Landlord 101

  • GhostFace@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    6 days ago

    What do they want at this point? Is it blood? Is it my soul? Are we just expected to start paying these people just for existing?

    You have the cushiest arrangement ever. You own the house forever and all you have to do is take care of it while someone else pays you to live in it. How could you want more than that?

  • Th4tGuyII@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    143
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    Gotta be ragebait.

    I sympathise with having “nightmare tenants” who trash the place, but fuck any Landlord who says you can’t work from home because god forbid you use your home that you pay them for because you’d cause a bit more wear and tear than they would like.

    • FundMECFS@piefed.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      6 days ago

      fuck any Landlord who says you can’t work from home because god forbid you use your home that you pay them for because you’d cause a bit more wear and tear than they would like.

      Landlordism is in itself unethical. If you’re not using a home it belongs to the person who is making use of it. You shouldn’t have rights to leech wealth from them in perpetuity.

  • T00l_shed@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    91
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    They cannot enforce no working from home. God damn those parasites are so fucking out of touch

    • tmyakal@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      7 days ago

      “Where you work” is not a protected characteristic in the US. Plenty of places where a landlord could throw this clause into the lease, and if they can prove you violated it, they can start eviction proceedings.

      It would be very difficult to prove, and the ensuing legal battle may cost more than the “additional maintenance” that may be required, but in theory these bastards can do pretty much whatever they want.

      • T00l_shed@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        34
        ·
        7 days ago

        I know, the where you work isn’t protected, but bring a rental has the implicit use of being a domicile, with all the freedoms associated with it

        • tmyakal@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          7 days ago

          I guess it depends on what freedoms you associate with being a domicile. Plenty of leases have specific restrictions in the agreement that are enforceable as long as they don’t explicitly conflict with local laws. No smoking, no pets, etc are all valid and enforceable clauses to put in a lease. I’ve signed leases saying “guests can’t stay longer than 24 hours” without batting an eye.

          Requiring a tenant to be out of the house 8 hours per day is odd and difficult to prove, but if you sign a lease that says it, I don’t see how you wouldn’t be accountable to it.

          • Riskable@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            45
            ·
            7 days ago

            Ooh, I actually know a little bit about this!

            A property owner can put whatever TF restrictions they want in the lease—and they often do! But just because it’s in a contract doesn’t mean it’s legal (e.g. contract to kill).

            Let’s say a property owner finds out their tenant is working from home. They claim a violation of the lease and start eviction proceedings. That’s dumb AF.

            • This would only ever be used as an excuse for a tenant they don’t like.
            • If it came before a judge, even they would be like, “WTF?” And would probably not demand an explanation, but instead would point to mountains of case law that say a property owner can’t dictate what people can and can’t do within a rental property as long as those activities don’t impact the property (e.g. the value).
            • That’s when the property owner would have to explain how Joe Schmoe working from home is somehow worse than retiree Judy Anywoman who stays at home all day every day.
            • tmyakal@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              7 days ago

              Oh yeah, as I said, it’s a very difficult thing to prove and absolutely not worth the money wasted trying to enforce it. But there’s no rule saying dogs can’t play basketball. If a landlord wants to put it in, and a tenant knowingly signs it, the tenant needs to be prepared for the possibility of this turning into a huge pain in the ass.

          • T00l_shed@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            7 days ago

            Where i live, you can say no pets, but that is not enforceable, they can deny you on the application, but you can get a pet the minute you move in and the landlords cant evict you for it

          • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            7 days ago

            This does depend on where you live. I have had pets in every “no pets” lease I’ve ever had because in my area its unenforceable and not an envictable offence unless under very specific circumstances, usually the landlord would have to be living in the same building and have an allergy to pets to be able to enforce a no pets rule.

            Theres lots of bullshit landlords will put in a lease because they think whatever they write is law but there are often certain standards that apply regardless of what the lease says.

            • tmyakal@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              7 days ago

              Agreed, I said exactly as much:

              enforceable as long as they don’t explicitly conflict with local laws.

    • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 days ago

      Depending on the jurisdiction.

      No businesses from home is a relatively common condition in a lease and co-op ownership contract, especially if the business involves people constantly visiting the home or turns the mailroom into a warehouse.

      It is the equivalent of a lease banning a person from setting up an Airbnb in the unit they rented.

        • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 days ago

          It depends. If you’re an independent contractor working for a company, you could be considered to be operating a business from your home.

          The line has gotten blurry, especially after COVID.