Allowing rentals of currently owner-occupied condos

So, I own a condo in a small development (12 total units) where I live. Our by-laws prohibit owners from renting out their units, so the rule is we have to owner-occupy, which I know is not uncommon for condos. I assume the main reason for this rule is to try to protect property values, and nothing against renters, but I’m guessing the reasoning is that a resident who owns the place might be more likely to treat it better and take care of upkeep than someone who is renting and can move out if they get sick of it. Not sure if there are other factors to consider, but I’d be interested to hear them if there are more reasons allowing renters isn’t a great idea.

Eventually we will probably be reviewing our by-laws, and considering the small size of the development, it is actually possible to change some rules. One thing I’ve always had in the back of my mind is someday when I have my unit paid off, moving on and keeping it as a rental property. So I’m considering pushing for a removal of the owner occupy rule when we get around to reviewing the by-laws. I do think if I pushed for this I could at the very least get my neighbors to consider it, if not probably make the change.

But, I’m wondering if making such a change would be shooting myself in the foot. Are there good reasons to require owner’s occupy? Of course if we allow rentals then anyone can rent theirs out, the entire complex could potentially become renters (although based on current owners I think that is very unlikely to happen, in fact I’d probably be the only one to even consider renting mine out). Does anyone have experience in this kind of thing, and know its either a bad idea or doesn’t really matter if units can be rented? If I were to try to get this rule changed would I be messing with a good thing? What factors should I be considering here?

Be sure that it’s long term renters and not AirBnB type rentals.

Good point and thanks for the input. And yeah my goal would be to find a long term renter, ideally many years. Honestly my ideal situation would be to move to a house in the same neighborhood and keep the condo which would be close by, so I could keep an eye on it and help/fix stuff when it comes up, and rent to someone who just didn’t want the hassle of home ownership or whatever.

Understood. Just make it clear when you are making your pitch that there will be verbiage that makes that clear.

It’s too bad you didn’t consider this before you purchased your condo.

In my neighborhood, condos that have unlimited (or nearly unlimited) restrictions on rentals are in great demand, because the owners aren’t required to be there all the time, and can gain extra income by renting them out. Some even have front desks to handle transient checkins, and optional maid and cleaning services if the owner wants to hire them.

This area is heavily second-home and summer tourist territory, so it might not apply to your situation. My point is that allowing rentals doesn’t necessarily mean “there goes the neighborhood.”

Some possible points that might help sway things–if there are HOA regulations or other types of CCRs for the condo complex, making a full disclosure of and agreement to all such regulations part of the tenant lease agreement would be a persuasive argument if someone were putting the question to me. Likewise a lease agreement that is never less than one year’s duration to help ensure stability would be a positive measure. Anything that would work to secure a tenant who is as close a fit to the owner profile of the building is going to fly a lot better than less stringent requirements.

Our condo building introduced this restriction some years back (we were grandfathered in because we were already landlords). They set it up so that only a percentage of the units could be rentals at any one time.

Better care and sense of community are some reasons. A belief that owners are more likely to follow the rules are another. They also said that banks get wary of granting mortgages to units in buildings that have a lot of rentals. Perhaps for the same reasons as the HOA give. I couldn’t find any direct evidence for that but the implication was that some (all?) banks have limits on how much of a complex can be rentals if they’re going to give regular loans on units.

I haven’t looked into this for years but it used to be impossible to get a conventional mortgage or HUD loan on a condo property in a development that was largely rental units. I think the threshold was that if more than 25% of the property wasn’t owner occupied, those loans weren’t available. So, if the association opens up the property to unrestricted rentals, not much changes until you got that threshold. But, once you do, first-time buyers and anyone trading up who needs a mortgage won’t be able to buy in. Alternative cash sources cost more, so the prices will drop. The buyers will be all investors who can pay cash and will bid low. They will have different priorities than long-term owners, such as trading aesthetics for lower maintenance, so expect fewer flower plantings and common area amenities. The tenants who move in may be great but they won’t be as committed to the property because they can move out at any time.

You can reduce this problem with some reasonable limitations, such as a cap on the number of units that can be rented, requiring the leases to be at least one year, allowing rentals only after the unit has been owned by the current owner for at least a few years, and, in some cases, even reducing voting rights for non-owners occupants. Talk with a competent condo lawyer in your state before doing any of this.

I am a landlord. My first thought upon reading the OP is that a lot of people really don’t have a good idea what renting a property is all about. Renting isn’t just letting someone else live in your condo (or house or whatever) while you sit back and collect the rent.

The reality of renting is that it is a business, and you have to treat it like a business. If something breaks, it’s not the tenant’s problem. It’s yours. You own the property. If there is a plumbing issue at 9 pm on a Sunday night, it’s your problem, and you need to take care of it NOW. If the air conditioning or furnace craps out, it’s your problem. It’s something that you need to be actively involved in. It’s not something that you “move on” with and just collect rent with. You have to keep good records. You have to manage the finances. You have to handle any and all problems that come up.

As for your tenants, it’s always a crap shoot. In general, if people really have their life together, they buy a property. They don’t rent. While there are many exceptions, renters in general tend to be living paycheck to paycheck. There’s a reason they are renting and not buying. You can do all of the checking before hand that you want, but you still never know what you are going to get.

Some people may seem nice, but they may think that all landlords are greedy assholes who just prey upon good honest hard working Americans. It’s the landlord’s fault that they don’t have enough money. It’s the landlord’s fault that they are late with the rent this month. They will screw you over any chance they get.

If you are in a big city area, you are much more likely to end up with tenants who don’t care and will trash your property. So where your condo is located makes a HUGE difference. If you are in a nice area where people in general take care of things then renting could work out for you. If you are in a big city and renters tend to trash apartments and skip out on the last few month’s rent, then renting might be a nightmare for you.

I am a reasonably handy person. I single-handedly turned a 3 bedroom house into a 5 bedroom house. Whenever I turn over an apartment, I go in there expecting to hang new drywall and fix other major issues. I have been pretty lucky with my tenants so far, but you never know what they are going to do to your property. I have always had to do some repairs. I have yet to be able to just paint and call it a day. If you have to pay someone to do all of your repairs, that is probably going to get very costly. At the very least, you usually have to paint whenever you turn over an apartment. If you can do it yourself you’re talking a couple hundred bucks for paint and supplies. Pay someone else to do it and you’re talking a couple thousand.

The last apartment I turned over, I had to replace the carpet and patch some holes in the walls (the tenant had screwed something to one of the walls). As soon as the new tenant moved in, the fridge, which had been working fine for years, suddenly crapped out, so I had to buy a new fridge. The fridge was just one of those things, and you need to be ready for any sort of “just one of those things” that comes up. Your tenant can’t wait a month because you don’t have the cash to get a new fridge now. You need to be able to spend $15k to $20k at a moment’s notice, just in case. If I had needed to pay someone else to lay the carpet and patch the walls, then the total cost of turning the apartment over would have easily been half a year’s rent. It’s difficult to make a profit doing things that way.

Here is an example. Let’s say your condo is worth $150k, which is about typical in my area (they go from about $50k up to about $250k typically). Apartment rentals in my area are about $1k on the top end, so you charge more than $1k in rent then you won’t get any tenants. Let’s say your total taxes on the property are $4k per year. If you have to pay someone to get the condo ready to rent, that’s another $3k, and let’s say you have $1k in miscellaneous expenses. The condo sits vacant for 2 months before someone rents it. You collect $10k in rent. You pay out $8k in taxes and other expenses. Your $150k investment is earning you $2k per year, and that’s only as long as no major expenses (like a new fridge) come up. You are almost better off selling the place and investing your money elsewhere.

This isn’t to say that you can’t make money off of a rental unit. I happen to make enough money that it’s worth my time and financial investment. But you need to run the numbers like this before you even consider renting out your property. If you haven’t run the numbers, then you are very likely to fail as a landlord. If the numbers end up being as miserable as my example, then you won’t be very happy being a landlord. If the numbers are much more in your favor, then maybe it’s worth considering.

The higher rent that you charge, the more difficulty you will have finding tenants and keeping them. Charge lower rent and treat your tenants well, and you’ll attract longer term and more stable tenants. You won’t make as much rent, but at the same time you’ll have fewer months where the apartment isn’t rented and isn’t making money. Charge too low of a rent though and you’re basically losing out on money every month that you could be making. No one will tell you how much to charge for rent. You need to figure out these things on your own.

You need to know what the rental market is like in your area, and not just the typical rental cost. In some areas, there is enough of a demand that apartments rarely sit for more than a couple of weeks before being rented. In other areas, it’s not uncommon for a property to be vacant for a few months. You need to factor in turnover time in your financial calculations.

As a landlord, you will be required to learn all of the applicable laws in your area. There are forms that need to be filled out. There are forms and pamphlets that I am required by law to give to my tenants when they move in, and there are forms that I am required to submit to the local government. A friend of mine also happens to be a landlord, and in his area, all landlords have to be certified in lead paint issues. There is a class that he has to take, and the training is good for some number of years.

You will need a different insurance policy, typically a special landlord policy. This policy will probably have a bunch of requirements that aren’t necessarily a part of your current condo or homeowner’s insurance. For example, while having a fire extinguisher is a good thing, most homeowner’s policies don’t actually require one. My landlord policy requires fire extinguishers in all units, and has specific requirements about where those extinguishers are located. Your existing smoke detector might not be adequate. Some areas (not mine) require smoke/carbon monoxide detectors that are AC powered and have a battery backup.

No one is going to give you a nice handy checklist for everything you need to know. You need to research it on your own. If you are lucky, your local government will have some sort of resource (web page or brochure) that spells out at least most of the local requirements, but you still need to be familiar with federal and state laws. If you miss something or just don’t understand something, you can be fined, and failing to know about a particular law or requirement is not an excuse.

Being a landlord is a lot to get into, and it’s not for everyone. I have a friend who was a landlord and got out of the business as it was more hassle than it was worth to her. On the other hand, I’m very happy being a landlord and I don’t regret getting into it. YMMV.

As for actual condo rules, if I owned a condo, I wouldn’t want my neighbors renting out their units. It’s too big of a risk, with the likely result that your $150k investment will soon only be worth about $75k.

You also need to check out the local zoning laws and requirements. Some areas actually limit the number of rental properties in a particular area so that they can spread things out and keep things reasonable for infrastructure purposes.

You need to check out other local laws and regulations as well. There could easily be a lot more involved in this than just changing the condo rules. There could also be some significant tax considerations.

I own a condo in a “no rentals” development. They changed the master deed after I started renting mine out (I lived there until that point) so I was grandfathered in. The last that I knew, there were about 10 such units left out of a total of 200. Its a pretty desirable place to live and the association is very enthusiastic about enforcing the rules. This is a good thing overall although I’ve had a couple of battles with them and managed to win both. Anyway, even though it may limit potential buyers when I finally sell, I’d vote against changing the by laws back. People do tend to take care of the place more when they have a vested interest in doing so. At least, in my opinion. Having a bunch of transient residents does nothing positive for property values.

engineer_comp_geek’s post was very good. It looks like their experience was a little harder than mine but that’s absolutely the way you need to be thinking about it.

We didn’t necessarily want to be landlords but we moved out of Atlanta in a year where the market was very depressed and hanging onto the property made some sense. But we take a hit by outsourcing the property management to a local company. We were lucky to find someone 12 years ago who has been very diligent about maintenance, bookkeeping, finding reliable and sane tenants, etc. That last is key, we’ve priced slightly lower than we could have in order to be able to pick more stable tenants and I think that’s helped a lot. The condo has never been empty and it’s largely been young professionals as renters. I think that’s a factor of location too, so you’ll know better the sort of demographics that are likely for you.

If you’re not living in the same city anymore I think you’ll probably be forced to outsource to a property manager and that’ll be a significant expense if you’re hoping to make a profit. Going it alone is something I can only imagine is feasible if you’re able to travel to the premises easily. And then you have to be managing all the things mentioned above.

The limit now is 50%. So if over 50% are not owner-occupied, no conventional mortgage. I would think that might be a major issue. However, we have some Indian owners in our building (not US citizens) who had to get a non-conventional mortgage (I think because they weren’t citizens), and they said they had no problem.

Loans.

It’s easier to get a loan for a condo when a certain percentage (I believe it is 50%) of the units are owner occupied and harder when the condo is mostly rentals. And if it’s harder to get a loan for a condo, the prices are lower. So, by making sure the units are owner occupied, you’re helping keep the values up.
If you do remove that restriction, you have to figure out a way to keep above the threshold which is a lot harder to do than a blanket restriction. “Yes, we know that a month ago the Jones were allowed to rent their unit, but you can’t.” is the type of conversation that a condo board member doesn’t want to have.

Also, even if your board does open the place up to rentals, they may want to have a minimum length of stay (1 month is fine, 2 days are not) or a maximum number of days/month or year allowed or some other limit so people aren’t moving in and out of the unit every other day. (Unless that’s what the majority of people want. There are condos that are basically a collection of individually run, one unit hotels. If that’s what people want - good for them.)