Hacker News Reader

Comment by q1w2 | Hacker News Reader

As a landlord, I can tell you that the government does NOT replace ANY of the missed rent.

Moreover, while many tenants have continued to pay their rent - MANY have gradually started realizing that I am unable to evict them, and have completely stopped paying rent. Moreover, they have started collaborating under the assumption that there is more protection if they do it together.

Like other landlords, I have lost a tremendous amount of money in this pandemic. My 12 unit complex represents my retirement, so this hit me very personally.

It's incredibly unfair that the most honest tenants continue to pay. The ones not paying are not paying because they know they can get away with it - not because they cannot pay - they are all still working.

View on HN

Even though you can’t evict them, I would have assumed the missing payment would catch up with them eventually - e.g. by tanking their credit rating, or selling their debt to a collections agency… Is this not the case? You just swallow the loss and go on?

This.

See another comment I made discussing my sister's experience.

The childish, dorm-roomy attitude of landlords being "big faceless corporations" is wholly inaccurate and distorted. The same group also has this view that most people using this program were honest, good citizens experiencing true hardship. This is absolutely not the case according to every audit my sister's company did, as well as the research the industry organization she was elected to did.

It's a bunch of dirtbags capitalizing on a poorly constructed policy.

There have absolutely been rental relief options available to landlords, I don’t know if your situation qualifies.

You are also entitled to sue your tenants in arrears for every penny of unpaid rent plus the costs of collecting. Even with a judgement you may not be able to collect if they have become destitute, that’s the nature of the business you are in.

I sincerely hope you get a chance to retire, society would be a lot better if everyone is able to. Hopefully we don’t all need a 12 unit building to do so!

The friction to stop paying rent was essentially zero. A 1 page form with no verification. The friction to get reimbursed, depending on where you are, was very high, and in the case of my sister's situation, required cooperation of the tenant, who had zero incentive to provide it.

I know you WANT to believe this program didn't screw over landlords, and that most of the people utilizing the program were honest, good human beings. That's simply not the case when you talk to any landlord.

Feel free to ask the person you are replying to what their experience has been. I have yet to meet a landlord that doesn't have a hugely negative view of the entire suite of pandemic programs.

It seems we are hearing exact opposite stories from people on opposite sides of the landlord / tenant relationship.

Does a tenant's lack of payment effect them negatively in other ways? Like credit report, or ability to get an apartment later (if you evict them after this memorandum)?

As a paying tenant, I don't think it's unfair to me if others don't pay up.

Financial advice always says, don't put your eggs into one basket. If a single multi unit apartment represented your retirement, that seems to have just been bad investment?

Anyway, rental assistance programs are available out there. Just need to put the work in and apply and wait.

Just because they can't be evicted doesn't mean that get free rent, especially if they're employed. You can still file a lien on them or garnish their wages.

It's a garbage situation. I hope things get back on track for you, and I hope karma gets those people what they deserve.

Your property value likely doubled in the past year, I think you’ll survive

>As a landlord, I can tell you that the government does NOT replace ANY of the missed rent.

I can see why people get so frustrated with landlords. It’s the same kind of frustration when Wall Street asks for government intervention after making a series of bad trades

This isn't a fair analogy at all. Landlords didn't cause the cause the pandemic. If anything, the government did. However, they are the ones who are forced to pay for provide a service that the government desires, housing, at their own expense. This might make sense if it were a tax, but it disproportionately effects certain people. Imagine if they 1% of people were randomly selected to forfeit 10% of their 401k for housing during the pandemic.

Even worse, a long term eviction moratorium is incentivizes landlords to filter out poorer tenants with income and credit requirements, making housing more expensive for them.

>This isn't a fair analogy at all. Landlords didn't cause the cause the pandemic. If anything, the government did.

If the government bans cigarettes, should the government then reimburse every shareholder in Philip Morris?

>However, they are the ones who are forced to pay for provide a service that the government desires, housing, at their own expense

Someone had to brunt the cost of the pandemic. It would have been bad public policy if the government had let people go homeless.

Regardless, my point isn't that the government acted piously here, it's that real estate is a capital asset class and should be treated as such. If you get in the game of capital speculation you shouldn't get to go crying to the government when things don't go your way. I have the same amount of sympathy for people who all-in on urban real estate and the people who go all in near to expiration SPY calls. The government's primary concern shouldn't be protecting people's capital investments.

> If the government bans cigarettes, should the government then reimburse every shareholder in Philip Morris?

No, but that's because Phillip Morris isn't actively offering anything to the government. A landlord that isn't allowed to evict is. If the government forces them for provide cigarettes to soldiers during a war, they have to pay them to do so.

> Someone had to brunt the cost of the pandemic.

That's what taxes are for. Even money printing is better. It doesn't make sense for them to target landlords who serve low-income tenants in particular. That would be like forcing grocery stores to offer free food to poor locals. In the short term, it may help some people, but in the long term, grocery stores in poor neighborhoods would simply shut down and everyone would be worse off. That's why we have food stamps instead.

> If you get in the game of capital speculation you shouldn't get to go crying to the government when things don't go your way.

I agree that land speculation is particularly useless and the government should try to get rid of it, but that's not happening. Property speculation is higher than ever.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com