What’s the stunt? If they send you an AI markup, sure, that’s obnoxious if they didn’t do research to substantiate the suggested edits. But if they point out a clause that is illegal in your jurisdiction, that strikes me as a win-win.
I think it’s a better deal for everyone. I collect first and last months rent at move in.
I’m selective and do an internet search to see what I find. 3 years in and things are good. My first tenant is still living there I have had only 2 move out in less than a year.
My thinking is that the relationship of providing housing is too intimate to trust to a legal contract.
I would rather speak directly to a tenant regarding issues than both side trying to interpret a document. My thought is that if we can’t work it out face to face no document will save the relationship and it’s best for everyone to move on.
>My thought is that if we can’t work it out face to face no document will save the relationship and it’s best for everyone to move on.
I’m assuming you haven’t yet run into a situation when you decide it’s time everyone moves on but the tenant disagrees?
Down a few posts I posted the document published by Massachusetts attorney general that describes the relationships.
In either role, if it's month-to-month... either of you says to the other that it's not working out, give whatever the statutory notice is? And if the landlord didn't collect the last month's rent at the outset, maybe they end up eating a couple months' rent they would have made otherwise? And the tenant needs to scoot to find a new place, but like, it's fine?
If either party wanted the security of a lease for a longer term, they could have entered into one, but they didn't, so... that's the deal, right? Except for really egregious stuff that the law would have something to say about?
This is called at will tenancy in my Commonwealth.
Here is what our relationship is based on.
https://www.mass.gov/doc/the-attorney-generals-guide-to-land...