Hacker News Reader

FWIW, if you or someone else found yourself in that situation again (just short of being able to pay rent but with solid expectations of having the cash soon) then in most cities there would be one or more organizations you could get a loan or small grant from to avoid triggering an eviction - for instance in Seattle here's a list http://www.needhelppayingbills.com/html/seattle_rental_assis...

(This kind of assistance is one of the most efficient ways they can intervene, because the costs of accessing stable housing for someone increase massively at each step).

That sounds like a harrowing experience.

Leaving aside the particulars of your own situation, I do want to comment on your assertion about the price of rent. $1,200 is maybe higher than we'd like, but it's still pretty low. It's manageable as long as you're making $30k per year or more. It doesn't seem crazy to me.

There's also the more option of getting roommates. In all of NYC there are just three units on Streeteasy going for less than $1,250. However, there are more than seven hundred two-bedroom units going for less than $2,500.

$1200/mo on a $30k salary is >60% of post-tax take-home pay. That's... more than a little crazy.

Maybe this suggests that it would be good for local regulations to say there should be a grace period of say 15 days. But then again, this probably would mean that the landlord would demand an extra half month of deposit at the start, which would have been the same as the savings.

In this case the savings is mandated, but then there are no intense situations where a notice to evict is on the door the day after being late.

I don't know how to feel about the above one way or the other. Do you propose a solution?

Some states do, indeed, have grace period laws. Indiana, for instance, requires a 10 day grace period. It might have changed the last 5 years, but it was customary to charge late fees during this time, some of them quite extraordinary.

I honestly think it should be written to state 10 days or until the next paycheck. Most employers won't correct a paycheck immediately and instead, correct with the following paycheck. Minimally, this would allow folks to survive until that sort of thing is fixed. I'd also require a cap on late fees. Additionally, I'd also require a letter listing aid agencies the tenant can try to get some help (easily a form letter provided by the city/county government on the internet), provided earlier than the eviction notice.

If it helps, it would take weeks minimum to go from paying late to being on the street and likely 1-2 months or more. It takes time to get a court date, time to get Sheriff’s deputy to schedule the eviction, etc.

And honestly, the route you’re taking now where you have a small cushion to cover you in case you need it is what you should have been doing. I don’t mean to be an asshole, but just pointing out that it’s not fair for you to just assume that if you’re late, your landlord can just cover you for a few days. That’s not the agreement you made, right?

I asked for no lectures. There was nothing in my description that would lead one to believe I thought it was wise not to have savings. You are being an ... and I said a few weeks..

It’s highly unlikely it’d be that short. Possible, but very unlikely.

And yeah, you said no lectures. But I chose to ignore that because I genuinely want to know: why is it fair for you to break your agreement and just assume that the other party will cover you?

And more to the point: this is actually part of why you serve demand notices (what you received) immediately. One reason is to kick off the process so that eviction can move forward if needed. But more importantly, it’s to send the clear message that you intend to hold the other party to the terms of the agreement. After all, you’re making changes to avoid paying late in the future, so it seems like they made the right call, doesn’t it?

I genuinely want to know why the ... you think that I said that it was fair to break any agreement. I was just being honest about a real experience, even though I knew that someone like you would take the opportunity to use me as a punching bag. I hope that you will stop harassing me with these rhetorical "questions" and never have any further communication or interaction with me in the future.

If you don’t want people to comment on your story, don’t share it.

If people don't share stories like that, we will never hear them and will never learn from them.

The expectation to appear perfect and not share what happen when we are not perfect pushes us all into sort of shared delusion.

Certainly not trying to harass you but you’ve posted this on a public message board, so I think it fair that others respond? You’re welcome to ignore it, of course.

You bring up a fair point that I’m assuming you’re laying some amount of blame or culpability for the situation at your landlord’s feet, and that isn’t exactly what you said. I may have read that unfairly, and you only meant that this was a situation you found yourself in, with no criticism aimed at the property management. I apologize for assuming otherwise.

Of course it's fine to respond, but people need to remain respectful. In a case like this, responding with an obvious moral judgment ("what you should have been doing") can't help, and is close to kicking someone when they're down.

I do appreciate that you've responded respectfully to some replies to your comments (elsewhere in the thread) which haven't been particularly respectful either.