$800 for a two bedroom, wow! I pay $1750 for a 520 sq ft studio in Chicago. It is a nice building, and the bedroom area is slightly separate. I think parking is abou $200 a month, but I don’t drive.
Yeah, in Chicago. The post I was responding to was talking about College Station. That sounded high for a college town. Granted, I’ve never lived in College Station, or anywhere in Texas.
Right.
But enough pet owners are irresponsible enough to sufficiently taint the entire group. Landlords thus know they are better off preferring to rent to people without pets. And, accordingly, that it’s sensible to apply a surcharge to pet owners.
Ask your landlord friends which they would rather rent to, tenants with pets or tenants with kids. In my state, you cannot turn down a prospective tenant just because they have children. Better to grab the tenants with pets while they can.
This is exactly why. Cat pee has ammonia in it and can get into the carpet and floor, and the scent can really linger. I cannot BELIEVE how irresponsible this is, not to mention not spaying your poor cat. YOU may not smell it, but I’ll be blunt: pet owners like you ruin it for everyone else.
I’ve got no idea about adding pet charges in renting an apartment. I only know some hotels that we’ve been charged a minimal amount for a dog we are brought in. But some are refundable if there no damages upon checking out. Precisely, they are charging for those reasons.
None, but I’ve also seen none which had those from children in an area bigger than about half a square meter. And many parents who make a point of specifically teaching the kid “this one is the painting wall” (nowadays you can even use drawable, washable paint).
And the marks aren’t structural; a layer of paint (which in many locations is even required by law in between tenants, although the incoming may choose to forego it) will solve it. The sliced-up, curling-up wood not so much.
And I don’t feel the slightest amount of guilt. I’ve been charged $800 for the privilege, and I’d feel ripped off if my pets didn’t do some damage. I clean their litter box consistently and have tried to train the one that pees not to do it, but what can I do.
True … but remember the context: we have five years solid rental history, five years solid employment history and most states allow a screening fee to cover the cost of running a credit report … rare for a perspective tenant to shoe-horn a felony conviction in all this … anything from before, the individual will have successfully completed probation or they won’t be “out-of-state” …
I’ve only had one tenant arrested out from underneath me … I chased him down the day after his release, handed him the keys to an empty unit and told him to come by the rental office in a few days to sign contracts … the man was God’s gift to landlords, it was just Child Support Enforcement who hated on him …
=====
It’s much easier and safer for a landlord to spread the costs of bad pet owners across all the tenants … it doesn’t take long for a dog to chew his way through a bedroom door or scratch his way through the sub-floor … charging the individual these costs is subject to judicial review … pffffft … better to charge everybody because more often than not the landlord won’t have bad pet owners … [ka’ching] …
Cost of wear and tear beyond normal wear and tear generally gets put into the deposit. So what would make more sense would be to require a larger deposit for pet owners. One of the biggest problems with pets is not the physical damage, but that pet owners will often leave their pet home alone during the day while they are out. This is less of a problem with unattached apartments (which we have in some more expensive communities around here). The last thing a landlord wants is for the neighbors calling the cops with noise complaints all the time because your pet misses their owner.
There is one situation where a landlord can deny people with children, because of the children, and that’s because many places have limits on how many people can live in a place with A number of bedrooms or B square footage.
There’s a higher-end apartment building in the city where I went to college, within walking distance of campus, that has units up to 5 bedrooms. To prevent situations like, for instance, 15 people or multiple families sharing the rent, they have an occupancy limit of number of bedrooms plus one; AFAIK this applies to everyone, not just unrelated people. The 5BR units rent for about $3,000 a month, and have 3 or 4 bathrooms.
I own my own home and don’t let those dirty bastards in the “house” part. They have their own room off the laundry room. My house is filthy enough without Weiner Dog hair everywhere.
Landlord checking in - I let out my old house. Pets are a particular problem due to allergies. I am allergic to cats, for instance. So if a tenant were to have a pet, the place would need a much more thorough cleaning than normal before the next tenant moves in. Perhaps even new carpets. That has to be funded somehow.
That’s partly true, but there are other effects that aren’t so good.
Because landlords can’t legally require a deposit large enough to cover their risk, they go to great lengths to screen prospective tenants. Ever been evicted? That’ll make it a lot harder to get future rentals. References give unscrupulous landlords
And instead of requiring larger deposits, landlords will find out where you work, what your income is, run a credit check and even look at your bank accounts to figure out if you’re poor and they don’t want to rent to you.
Obviously, this is going to depend on jurisdiction, but I don’t think landlords are required to tell you the reason they denied you. The closest thing I’ve ever gotten is a call saying the property was rented to someone else. Most of the time you just never hear anything (which probably means that they haven’t really denied you yet, they’re just working their way down from most desirable tenant to wherever you are).
Even if they did, are you saying that if a tenant who had sued his landlord in the past went to rent a new place, and the new potential landlord said “No thanks, we’re not interested in tenants who sue their landlords”, that the potential tenant would have cause to sue the new one? Pretty sure that’s not true. Do you have any cite that that’s true?
“People who have sued their landlords” is not a protected class.
Sure they can. They can run a credit score and the person with a higher score is “more qualified”. They can legitimately preferentially rent to someone who’s been at their job longer, who makes more money, who has fewer people living at the place, who doesn’t drive a motorcycle, who is a member of their Rotary Club, who got a personal recommendation from a friend… (or, if they are planning to illegally discriminate, they can claim one of the above reasons).
None of that is prohibited by the Fair Housing Act.
It’s actually pretty common in rural areas for rents for even two bedroom apartments to be under $1000 a month. Of course in rural areas your own car is necessity because there is no public transportation. The cost of maintaining a vehicle could easily make up the difference in housing cost. In my town a 4 bedroom house rents for $1500 a month.(You would still have to pay heat and electricity yourself.) It boggles my mind how much live in a city costs.
In my part of Chicago, which is not a “bad” part of town, right off the highway, 20-25 minutes by El into the Loop, we rent out our 2 bedroom, two-story house with garage for $1200/mo. Most properties in the area go for around the same price. It’s just not a “happening” part of town to live in. It doesn’t have to be ungodly expensive. You can definitely and easily find 2 bedroom apartments for under $1K here. We also have a one-bedroom in the heart of Hyde Park (where the University of Chicago is located) that’s around 800 sq ft that we rent out for $950/mo. But, yes, if you want to live in the more active North Side neighborhoods, you’re paying a good bit more.
In Oregon, if a landlord requires a screening fee with the application, first the landlord has to do the screening or return the money, then the landlord is required to notify the tenant of why they were refused tenancy … the tenant paid for a service, they’re entitled to know the results of that service … I avoided all this by simply not charging a screening fee … [ORS 90.295] …
I may have mistyped above … it appears ORS 90.303 only explicitly prohibits considering eviction actions against the tenant where the tenant prevails, and criminal complaints where the tenant was found not guilty … civil actions against a former landlord isn’t covered in this sub-section …
Again my warning … suing your landlord may have repercussions down the road … people who have the balls to sue their landlord is not a protected class under Fair Housing Laws …
You’re still screwed if you take it to a judge if they sued and won. In the eyes of a judge, taking action against someone who won in court is saying “screw you” to the entire judicial system.
And as for this “protected class” nonsense : if there are 8 open units in a complex, and I get refused entry for any reason that isn’t a justifiable, documented reason that is reasonable in the eyes of that judge, it’s still de facto discrimination. You’re still going to lose.
If a clean cut individual walks into a restraunt and you refuse them service because you know they sued another restauraunt across town and won, that’s not gonna fly.
(All bolding mine)
2 rooms carpet = $800 plus tax, so probably** $860-$880**
$30/mo x 12 mos = $360 pet rent per year
So already your landlord is out $500 on your cats (more if you leave in under a year)
Plus replacement blinds.
Is the carpet pad extra?
No, you’ll have been charged* $360* for the privilege, since you’ve already stated that you’ll leave as soon as a year after you moved in
Hmm…
Maybe not spend so much time online justifying your procrastination/laziness on message boards and get your cat spayed?
I’m still astonished at the idea of YOU feeling ripped off if your cats don’t cause at least $400-$800 in damage per year.
Why would I volunteer that information? Is it a crime to lie to a landlord? If they want to hire a private detective to sniff out the public records in all jurisdictions, that is up to them.
As a sidebar, I once got a restraining order against a landlord, preventing her from entering my house unless it was for an emergency repair. It was served on her by a uniformed officer in a marked law enforcement vehicle in front of her house. It didn’t affect my next rental in the least.