As those of you who follow the scintillating drama that is my life know, we’re moving. As part of this process, we filled out an application for an apartment.
Today, I get a call from the complex. “Our income looks a little low.”
“Huh?” says I. “Our income looks a little low? How do you figure?”
Well, apparently, the way they figure out whether we can pay for the apartment is…they take the market rate (which is like $200 over what we’re paying a month) and multiply it by 3. What the fuck?
And, since both of us are going to be on the lease, of course they count both our incomes…right? Wrong! They want one of us to be able to pay for it on our own (but you bet your ass that if we had someone off-lease, they’d throw a hissyfit). So we’re both responsible, yet one of us has to be able to pay on our own. I say again…What the fuck?
“So, you’re telling me the way you figure out if I can afford the apartment is to conjure up this mythical scenario that has nothing whatsoever to do with the reality of the situation? Are you honestly telling me that?”
“That’s our policy.”
“I know all about stupid policies, I worked retail. You guys seriously base my ability to pay rent on something that has nothing whatsoever to do with my actually paying rent? You determine whether I can pay $620 a month by basing it on whether I could pay $850 a month?”
Good lord, what a bunch of stupid shit. God fucking save me from the Policy people that run the world.
I went throught that with one apartment company. I just don’t get it, either. I decided to live somewhere else, where they actually based it on what I’m paying.
Policies are what people create so save themselves from the burden of actually thinking. Every situation is different, but realizing it requires using the 2 pounds of jelly in your skull. Blanket policies keep the jelly from being overtaxed in those for whom intelligent thought is painfull, such as apartment managers.
Perhaps they’re hoping that you’ll renew your lease, and at that point, they’ll perhaps charge you market rate. That would make me want to look into that issue. (Just practicing let the buyer beware here; I know nothing about apartments and leasing.)
Perhaps if one skips out, they don’t want to have to go through the hassle of evicting the other one for non-payment. (Not that you would, but they don’t want to bother with the what if scenarios.)
Go somewhere else, and before you fill out an application, ask them if they’re basing income calculations on market rate or special rate, and ask if they will base it on combined incomes, or if one person needs to make a certain income alone. Good luck!
Well, I think part of the reason they do the calculation is because it is considered best to not spend more than 1/4 to 1/3 of your monthly income on rent. It’s good financial sense, so I can understand why they want to cover their butts. I think every apartment I’ve moved into had the same qualification.
But I do not understand the only calculating with one income thing - maybe it’s a recent addition, due to higher unemployment? It doesn’t make sense in another way - what if I am going to move in with a friend - someone not tied down to me. Whose income do they use to calculate? I’m guessing whoever’s name is down as primary on the lease.
Well - I hope you weren’t too attached to the apartment. Good luck finding the right place for you!
I’m paying $645, and this is what my bill looks like:
Rent $880
Discount (235)
Due 645
I understand this is because when the market situation (from a landlord’s point of view) improves here, they want to be able to take away the “discount” and not have it be a rent increase. It’s just playing games with words. At least they didn’t play games with calculations. It’s just dumb not to include both incomes when both are on the lease.
Could it have anything to do with y’all’s unmarried state?
Not knocking unmarried states, ya know, just wondering. If they’re treating y’all as roommates, that might be why they want to know if just one of you could handle the rent alone.
Good luck with this – if that’s the apt that you were hoping for that’s giving you grief, that’s a major bummer.
It could be the unmarried state. Not that that makes any more sense, because we’re both living there and paying rent. I just offered a larger deposit and they were falling all over themselves to get us in. Amazing how throwing money at people clears so many problems.
I wouldn’t have bothered, but this place is like a 10 minute walk from my job, so I get in shape, both from not carrying a heavy wallet in my back pocket and from working.
Market rent’s a big scam so they can screw you if you break the lease or something.
FWIW, it’s fairly standard policy to reject tenants who would be paying more than 1/3 of their income in rent. Not counting the income of the other person is a little weird, though.
I ran into this situation once, but fortunatey I was able to get them to make an exception by showing them some savings/investment statements that showed I had a good chunk of change in the bank.
Yea, I know it’s standard, that’s why I was initially baffled. We’re actually a couple bucks over if you don’t eliminate a third of our income (and I’d wager you eliminate a third of most people’s income and they couldn’t pay for housing either :eek: ) and presume we’d be paying $230 more a month than we would be paying. Our current complex just figured out what we made (combined), divided by three, and said, “Ok.”
Shirley-It’s a nice idea, but I’d have no idea where to even begin and I doubt we’d be home much to do all that work.
Ah yes, the old 1/3 of monthly net income calculation. I know it well.
It makes sense, really. If someone is spending more than 1/3 of their monthly income on rent, the liklihood of being short on occasion rises significantly.
However, expecting someone to make three times double the amount they’re expected to pay (in a marriage/s.o/roommate situation) is just silly. How many people honestly make 6 times their monthly rent? And if so, why aren’t they spending that money on a house payment instead of a monthly rent which yields exactly jack shit in the future?
The only explanation I can think of is the fear of one of the tenants running off, which in a roommate situation has a much higher liklihood of happening. Although every apartment I’ve rented with a roommate (and there were a lot) calculated combined incomes, not seperate incomes. It’s just a lot more realistic.
I can see reason for the other method, but it’s still lame as hell.
Whenever I hear “We have a policy,” I immediately start looking for heavy blunt objects within easy reach. I’ve never understood the 1/3 income rule for rent anyways, I’ve almost always had to pay more than 1/3 of my income in rent and it’s never been a major problem. A fucking annoyance that has made me want to set fire to many a property manager certainly, but not a problem.
If you really need to get that apartment, put a couple months down up front. That should shut them up.
Well, the adherence to the policy could be the result, not of apartment managers not wanting to think, but apartment managers not wanting to get in trouble for bad things that happen as a result of not following the policy laid out by the apartment owners.
If the official policy is as stated, and they let you in anyway, and you or your SO runs off and they have a lengthy and costly eviction case on their hands, they will get into more trouble than if they merely have unfilled apartments due to lack of qualified applicants. Because in the latter case, they were following policy…