705
Don't forget to tip
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 Oct 2023
705 points (100.0% liked)
Lemmy Shitpost
26926 readers
2768 users here now
Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.
Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!
Rules:
1. Be Respectful
Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.
Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.
...
2. No Illegal Content
Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.
That means:
-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals
-No CSA content or Revenge Porn
-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)
...
3. No Spam
Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.
-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.
-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.
-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers
-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.
...
4. No Porn/Explicit
Content
-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.
-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.
...
5. No Enciting Harassment,
Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts
-Do not Brigade other Communities
-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.
-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.
-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.
...
6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.
...
If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.
Also check out:
Partnered Communities:
1.Memes
10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)
Reach out to
All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
It's the ones left with an extra property as a result of inheritance or moving in with a partner that are probably OK to rent from.
Although letting agencies are always there to bring the big landlord misery experience to smalltime landlords.
Anyone buying a third property or more should be charged 100% stamp duty.
Make it illegal for any corporation to own residential property.
all properties beyond your first property, you pay an additional 10% sales and property taxes per property above 1. This means you pay 110% for your second, 120% for your third, 200% for your 11th, and so on.
Housing crisis solved.
That cost would just be passed on to the renter.
For the first few, but there is a point at which it stops being feasible. "Hi, I'm interested in your one bedroom in Bumfuck, ID, how much is rent?" "Well, I own 17 properties so it's $93,000 a month."
Still think the big corpos would just pass on the costs, and get away with it, by using financial shenanigans.
Not with rent controls passed as well.
You'd have to have those too, true, but they seem almost impossible to pass, for tax collection reasons.
I think there's a few more parts.
Lack of housing means that you have to bid more than anyone else in your area was offering, including greedy wannabe landlords who watched an episode of Homes Under the Hammer and think it's easy money. When I bought my house, I tried haggling down. Now they're haggling up. Even if the landlords weren't an issue, you'd still be competing with all the 30-something couples in your area desperate to get their feet on the housing ladder.
Insanely low interest rates has lulled people into the idea that the crazy prices "aren't that much" when paid back over 30-40 years. Rising interest rates would fuck a lot of people over who suddenly find their wages going up by 10%, but their mortgage payments going up by 100%. Plus who wants to still be paying off their house when they're pushing 70? Fuck that noise.
Governments and local government need to step in and provide housing at reasonable rents. The glorious free markets have had housing for too long and fucked it right up.
This is why you get a fixed rate mortgage
Is that standard in some countries?
Most of the ones I see in the UK are like 5 years, max.
It is standard in the US. Adjustable rate mortgages are available as well, but they have not been popular since the 2008 crisis.
Yeah, that's understandable.
The US got the brunt of that particular crisis. The UK didn't seem quite as bad, although I did notice you needed a much larger deposit after that. Pre subprime-crisis they were cheerfully handing out 110% mortgages, which in retrospect was fucking mental.
Except that rising interest has also fucked up the market for builders who are now producing even less houses
I have a small house I purchased in a neighborhood full of renters. I bought during the low interest pandemic times, too, so my mortgage is less than most people's rent. If I won the lottery tomorrow I would definitely sell my house for a better one (I make about 30% more now than when I bought, and the only reason I won't move now is because of the interest rate). So many people have told me that I need to rent this place out rather than sell it. But I don't have the ability to be the kind of landlord you described and therefore I know I shouldn't be a landlord at all.
You don't need to be a "unicorn", just be a "good horse".
Treat your renters decently, and take care of issues as they come up.
Don't be your own worse enemy.
Just be a good horse. I need this on mug or something.
Dunno, not all agencies are shit either. I rented an apartment for 2 years through an agency and their fee was stupid high where I live, sure, but they took care of all the issues we had, they called the technicians for reparations and if the technicians said that stuff broke because it was old or it was faulty, the landlord had to pay it. 100% of our issues were like that. When we left, the landlord returned us all the deposit the day before the agency came to check how the house was (it was clean ofc).
Iirc the landlord bought the house as a future investment for his kids, so we had the best renting experience for me at least. I live in a small european city with high prices so the experience will differ wildly from other places, even in other neighbourhoods of my city lmao
I get what you're saying. I rented from a large organization in my former city (they own something like 60 or 70% of the highrise rental buildings in the city), and we had an excellent experience with few exceptions; but our esperience was largely due to our superintendents. They were always prompt, punctual, and attentive to anything that needed attention. That was their job, and bluntly, they did it well.
I've heard stories from other people who have rented from the same company but for different properties who have had dramatically different experiences. The difference came down to who was managing the property, not who owned it. The corporation that owned it just pushed all the responsibility onto the super, and collected their money every month, not giving a shit about anything. We were good tenants and paid promptly every month without fail, so we never had an issue. The super also did me some really big favors while we were in the process of vacating the premise. We got out on time, but barely. I called in a handful of favors to get it done, but it got done. The super was being pressured by the corp who owned the building to get us out before a specific date/time (IIRC, 5PM on the friday before the last day of the month) - however, legally, we technically had posession of the unit until 11:59 PM (23:59) on the last day of the month, because that's what we paid for.
There was some discussion on this and the super got involved, and examined the situation (we were on good terms due to our history and repoire), and knew that the companies expectations of us being out by friday at 5 wasn't going to happen. They basically ran interference to ensure we had whatever time we needed, within the confines of the law, to get the job done, and wrap up as expected. At the end of the day, we were all happy with the outcome (both the landlord and myself and SO).... though, I believe they're no longer the superintendents there, and I'm not sure if that's related or not.
Simply put, they're little more than employees. The company wants what they want, and the corporation that owns the building is a cold unfeeling bastard who can only be diciplined by major legal action (which bluntly, most people who need to rent, can't afford to go against the legal firm that the corporation literally owns).
to give some context, I work I.T. and had occasion to work for their corporate HQ (my employer got some contract work), when the moved to a new building. Through that, I got some serious insight into the company, and they have entire floors set up for legal, property management, and even a fucking bank. This corporation is their own bank, legal team, and everything. it's staggering to think how large they need to be before simply buying a bank and a law firm is cheaper than hiring an independent company to handle that. It's mind boggling.
If they were to go out of business tomorrow, I wouldn't mind though. I attribute 100% of the positives of that experience to the superintendents we had. I would have liked for them to own the building far more than that heartless corporation.