2077
Fucking leeches (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] DrFistington@lemmy.world 74 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I used to have my own place before my wife and I got married, and she had her own house too. When I moved in with her I decided to rent out my place to a friend, otherwise I'd have to still pay like $650 a month for my mortgage. I set my friends rent at $900 a month for him and a friend, with cats. I paid my mortgage and had some extra to save up in case a repair was needed. Average rent for an apartment (not a house) was 1200-1500 in the same area. My renters ended up taking better care of the house than I ever did. It was beautiful when they lived there. I ended up making about 5k to 10k extra bucks over the course of a few years and my mortgage was paid for me. Eventually they had to move out due to some issues between the two at which point I sold the house and made over six figures(net profit, not gross), off a house that cost less than $80,000 when I bought it.

See what I did there? I charged a reasonable rent and still made a totally stupid amount of money off of just one property. I wasn't a goddamn parasite who tried to bleed my tenants for everything they were worth.

People like these total shitbags. They're the reason why America's youth have no future

[-] underisk@lemmy.ml 51 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Using my “friends” to pay off a personal debt while making $250/mo in profit off them. See, it’s possible to be a good landlord, everyone!

Did you share any of what you made from the sale with your “friends” who helped you pay for it and kept it in good condition for you?

[-] blandfordforever@lemm.ee 18 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

It seems like it was a situation where everyone felt like they got a good deal and nobody felt taken advantage of. He gave them a better deal than they were going to find anywhere else.

To me, it doesn't sound like he was exploiting his friends.

[-] Nastybutler@lemmy.world 18 points 4 months ago

Did those friends run the risk of having to pay for a new roof or anything else that can go wrong with a house? Tell me you've never owned a house without telling me you've never owned a house

[-] czardestructo@lemmy.world 12 points 4 months ago

Don't try to talk sense into the senseless.

[-] underisk@lemmy.ml 7 points 4 months ago

Did the landlord have to risk losing his own home when the person who owns it decides they are done being a decent human and kicks them out for a higher paying tenant, or sells the property to another landlord who will do the same? Do they have to beg someone to come fix their shit in a timely manner or do they just call a repair man who doesn't charge them $250/mo for the privilege of paying off someone else's mortgage so they can call the repair man for you?

[-] czardestructo@lemmy.world 9 points 4 months ago

I rent two apartments in a state where all of that is not possible. Evictions take months and if repairs are not made quickly the tenant is legally entitled to withhold rent. But while on the topic I am most certainly on the hook for inflationary swings in:

  • any and all repairs
  • gas and electric
  • insurance
  • property taxes
  • landscaping and snow removal

There is no free lunch, no one side is correct. Stop pretending this topic is black and white. There are some good landlords, many bad. Same goes for tenants.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] tankfox@midwest.social 7 points 4 months ago

One reason it's obvious you don't have experience with home ownership is that you're acting like the repair man is free and not easily an aggregate of 250/month when expensive repairs are needed. That is $3000 my dude, which is easily a single plumbing problem that the landlord, not the tenant, has to pay for out of pocket.

[-] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 3 points 4 months ago

He received over a million dollars for the house in the end, plus the 5-10K in profit.

[-] underisk@lemmy.ml 3 points 4 months ago

It's clear you've never had to rent a property from a shitty landlord before or you'd know they would just evict you, condemn the property and sell the land to recoup their "investment" rather than pay $3000 of their hard earned money fixing the damage some ungrateful shit did to THEIR property. You keep coming up with convoluted hypotheticals that assume the landlord will always act in the best faith to justify a practice that fundamentally should not exist. One or two "good" landlords don't redeem all of them.

[-] prole 2 points 4 months ago

The people here arguing against this live in states that have literally legislated protections for tenants against predatory landlords. The only reason they even think they have an argument, is because people fought very hard in their state, for minimal tenant protections.

Most of the same people would be doing every single one of those predatory things if they were legally allowed to.

[-] underisk@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 months ago

The funny thing is they’re arguing with someone who has been illegally evicted several times. What exactly do they expect poor people to do about it, hire a lawyer and sue? For the chance of what, getting back into a rental run by a now (more) hostile landlord? Get monetary damages? How much? Enough to buy a house? No? Then the problem just repeats.

[-] prole 2 points 4 months ago

And how do they even pay the lawyer?

[-] thisfro@slrpnk.net 28 points 4 months ago

You still take someone elses money, just less of it.

[-] singletona@lemmy.world 33 points 4 months ago

See, when the Landlord charges reasonable rates, and actually provides services in exchange for that rent (helping update appliances to newer, having paperwork on hand for any code/inspections needed for property changes (that the landlord would ultimately benefit from,) and in general treating it as a matter of 'I have obligations' instead of 'I will do nothing but I will absolutely blame the tennants for the inevetable crumbling of the property.'

I dislike the concept at base level, but that is a someone who is trying to not be a scumbag.

[-] thisfro@slrpnk.net 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

The renting part isn't even that bad, the owning part and selling for profit is the problem.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Devanismyname@lemmy.ca 33 points 4 months ago

Can we not shit all over normal people for doing normal stuff? This dude doesn't run Blackrock, he had a single rental property.

[-] GoodEye8@lemm.ee 11 points 4 months ago

Hundred years ago it was normal to beat women of they were out of line. Millenia ago it was normal to own slaves. It's also "normal" for the US Healthcare to screw over people who need Healthcare. Just because something is "normal" doesn't mean it's somehow right. Slavery was normal but then different societies over time understood that slavery is not right and it stopped being normal. Beating women used to be normal but over time we learned that's also not right and it stopped being normal. I don't know about you but I don't think ripping people off is right. However ripping people off has been normalized for capital owners (including land lords).

Nobody should be wishing for his demise (compared to Blackrock and its kin, who I do think should cease to exist), but at the same time he shouldn't be padded on the back for not ripping off his friend as much as he could've. What he did shouldn't be normal.

[-] Devanismyname@lemmy.ca 9 points 4 months ago

He didn't rip off his friend at all. He took just enough to pay the mortgage and save something up in case of repairs. That isn't ripping him off. That's doing him a favor since he charged him so little.

[-] GoodEye8@lemm.ee 7 points 4 months ago

He could've given the rest money back to his friend after all the repairs were done. He chose to keep that money.

[-] Devanismyname@lemmy.ca 4 points 4 months ago

So given the equity to his friends?

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] phindex@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

Yea, and if he had just sold the property in the first place there wouldn’t have been a house to rent at all.

[-] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago

Not everyone is in a situation where they can or even want to own a house. Renting is much safer in terms of sudden emergencies. Water heater blows out in a house? Fuck you, 3k to replace at least. In an apartment? That's a landlord problem.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] greenashura@sh.itjust.works 9 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Someone who needs a place to live in and doesn't have the money or doesn't want to buy their own place. IMO, it is a fair trade as long as the landlord isn't a cunt. The reasons to why they don't have enough to buy their own place have nothing to do with a single landlord, some people don't want to take roots in a single place. If you wanna go to war with someone, go to war with companies, ban companies on owning and renting places, not people.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] SkyNTP@lemmy.ml 7 points 4 months ago

There's a line to draw between exploiting tenants, and compensation for providing dwelling.

You might even argue the OP creates this ambiguity based on interpretation of the wording, or poor communication.

For a productive conversation, let's be crystal clear where that line is drawn.

[-] lakemalcom10@lemm.ee 8 points 4 months ago

This is something I think gets left out, but understandably so when there are so many issues with landlords.

But, as a property owner, you've got all the liability and are responsible for repairs and ensuring that the property is livable and usable. I think there's a level of compensation you can be earning from your time, but I think that having extremely high rent PLUS the ROI of your property increasing in value over time is double dipping. When you consider that your money is invested in property and you're getting value that way, it IS leeching IMO if someone else is doing all the upkeep and paying a premium for that.

Looking at the OP that way shows that those people are just exploiting others. But I do think there is such a thing as ethical landlording. But I think generally we're not there.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] the_q@lemm.ee 13 points 4 months ago

Your "friend" still paid a substantial portion of your mortgage and gained nothing from it beyond being out of the rain. You used him and paint it as mutually beneficial.

[-] tankfox@midwest.social 15 points 4 months ago

How is a stable comfortable place to live 'nothing'? If being out of the rain was all it took we'd all live in tents and this conversation would not occur. Owning a house and keeping it repaired/functional is hard and expensive. You don't do your side favors by acting like our boy kept his friend in a locked closet when we all know that isn't true.

[-] the_q@lemm.ee 12 points 4 months ago

I'm not going to argue with you. Shelter is not a commodity.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] objject_not_found@lemm.ee 6 points 4 months ago

I live in the UK and many neighbours of mine are "professional landlords" and it is so annoying seeing them so relaxed and doing nothing while I am stressed and anxious at my job.

[-] prole 3 points 4 months ago

You made a profit from people who thought they were your friends. Classy.

[-] DrFistington@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

Yes, it's called mutually beneficial. They saved hundreds of dollars every month since I was charging them way under market for rent. They were actually able to save up a substantial amount. I mean they were planning on having to pay at least 1200 a month for a shitty place, instead they got an actual fucking house for 900.

When his mom was dying of cancer, he had room for her to stay with them after chemo sessions. Since the house was in a great location near the hospital

this post was submitted on 08 Mar 2025
2077 points (100.0% liked)

A Boring Dystopia

13191 readers
58 users here now

Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.

Rules (Subject to Change)

--Be a Decent Human Being

--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title

--If a picture is just a screenshot of an article, link the article

--If a video's content isn't clear from title, write a short summary so people know what it's about.

--Posts must have something to do with the topic

--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.

--No NSFW content

--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS