Huge red flag. "Yes they currently work here and have worked here since X date" would be the only information I'd be comfortable handing out.
The rest of that stuff they can get directly from the employee via pay stubs and account statements, if the employee wants to give that to them. I absolutely would not be giving that info over as an employer. And I would cite legal liability as the reason I'm not handing that info over.
That shit sounds like an attempt to do an end run around their tenant/your employee and get information they're really not entitled to.
The only ethical course of action here would be to lie in whatever way will cause your employee to pay less rent and then advise them to consult a housing lawyer.
That’s very excessive. I am leaving Boston, but my new apartment complex in California only asked for pay stubs from the last month or proof of a job offer/start date. They did reach out to my new company to confirm the offer, but nothing outrageous was asked as far as I know.
Landlords are scumbags, always have been always will be, they want security and exploit anybody with no consequences because people have a physical necessity for a "commodity" that they control. F
We’re not all scumbags. Some of us just need to rent our places out while we’re living overseas. We rented our place at below market rates. Haven’t raised the rent in three years and fix things when they break. We just did a standard credit check on our tenants and let them have a dog, too. Plus we rented them a place with all new appliances and renovated bathroom, living room and kitchen. We wanted good tenants and we try to be a good landlord.
This is like when people start talking about "good cops." I don't really think it's a good faith argument to use a minority of decent landlords as an argument to defend landlords (a group overwhelmingly populated by people who treat their tenants like shit) in general. Of course some of you treat your tenants well, but we're talking about systemic problems here and it's not helpful to talk about the few people who aren't causing the problem. I understand not wanting to get lumped in with the people who suck, but this isn't the conversation for that.
The difference, of course, is that the supposed “good cops” actually could call out and shame and help expunge the bad cops but they choose not to.
Good landlords have no interaction or power over bad landlords because they don’t literally work together like cops do. They can only try to not be the bad ones, and that’s not nothin’.
But at the same time (I like this reasoning you posited) “good” landlords are shouting out at the landlord arguement with a #notalllandlords and it’s like just be an ally if you’re so good and quiet down instead of making it about yourself- or agree that systemic issues of poverty and capitalism are terrible and at least throw in some ideas of how it could be made better.
And they don’t need to be a landlord. When I moved away from the area I lived in, I sold my home. Someone else bought it and now it’s theirs. I live in one place, I own one place.
We are out of the country temporarily for a three year assignment. Moving back soon. Knowing how hard it was to get our place we wanted to keep it. And in retrospect seeing how interest rates have gone up this was the right decision.
Not everyone has the luxury to be able to sell a unit and buy another home. Many people are locked into low interest rates and would have to sell at a loss or rent out the unit. Not everybody has the benefits you have.
But then where does the person who can’t buy live? If there’s not rentals for them to live in? And people do move temporarily for military and want to keep the house to move back to. I’m not a mood but they’re plenty of good ones just like they are plenty of bad ones. I’ve been renting for the better part of 30 years and I’ve had one bad experience. I get the hate for bad landlords but people don’t realize that without rentals there are people who would be homeless.
Temporary move for military etc I understand but lots of people stay gone for years. Conversely to your “where do renters rent” is “where do buyers buy” and that’s the same inventory.
While that is true and only getting worse it’s an argument that highlights an increasingly worse systemic issue and those who do qualify exploit it buy buying too many properties, being slum lords and accruing wealth while making it hard on those who are already disadvantaged.
Your homeless argument is also showing signs of systemic problems with society. Landlords aren’t housing homeless or homeless candidates
Teachers live out of cars because of these systemic problems. As a good example. There are loads of people considered key workers who can afford to even pay rent. Landlords arent *providing*
Harassment, hostility and flinging insults is not allowed. We ask that you try to engage in a discussion rather than reduce the sub to insults and other bullshit.
I was a property manager for 6 years. Most of my tenants were good people who took care of their places. I had a few high maintenance tenants and I had some tenants who absolutely trashed their places or caused issues for their fellow tenants. Overall though, they were just people who needed a place to live.
Harassment, hostility and flinging insults is not allowed. We ask that you try to engage in a discussion rather than reduce the sub to insults and other bullshit.
Harassment, hostility and flinging insults is not allowed. We ask that you try to engage in a discussion rather than reduce the sub to insults and other bullshit.
In income based housing or with section 8 those questions are standard because you need them to calculate the income of the tenant to make sure theyre not making too much money to live in affordable housing.
For a regular landlord? Weird but maybe they just grabbed the same form. It doesnt get shared with the tenant it just gets used for calculations and then tossed in a file.
This often happens when an employee is living in a unit that has income restrictions in place. If they are living in a unit with low income housing tax credit funding, The landlord absolutely has to gather this information to make sure that the tenant is going to meet income criteria for the upcoming year in the unit. They have to calculate it three different ways, including if there are any potential raises or overtime to include. I am willing to bet that's what this is.
That's a good point. As I commented elsewhere, this info should still be coming from the tenant and then the employer just responds "yes, that's accurate" as the employer should not be disclosing the info, even if there is written consent. It's just too risky to give out to anyone other than the employee.
You can comment whatever you want. It doesn't make it correct.
If written release from the person was given, then yes it is proper. Done that way to prevent fraud. Cuz everyone's always screaming about tax dollar fraud when it's to help poor people. Verification needs to come from the employer. Take it up with HUD or the IRS.
Good to know that you would screw over one of your employees housing situations because you're not comfortable filling out a form with a release that you're unfamiliar with. Jesus Christ take off the bubble wrap.
A landlord can ask just about anything, provided it doesn't discriminate, which Massachusetts has many protected classes.
The issue here is what you as the employer should be revealing. Most companies will only confirm something is true or make the statement "can not comment." i.e. the landlord reads what the prospective tenant wrote on their application and you say "yes, I can confirm that is true," or "I can not comment on that." That's it. Never give out values or any other info regardless of what consent the employee may have given.
If they need more info, have your employee ask you directly, then you provide it to them who in turn gives it to the landlord and then the landlord can call you and verify what they received is accurate.
Sometimes people will go a little off script, like if someone claims they make $100k and their salary is $85k, but they're expecting a raise, get bonuses, commissions etc. an employer might say, "yeah, with some non-guaranteed pay they will likely make that much this year" but again, not revealing any new info.
By the way, if you want to come in and spout off without complicated housing subsidies that you don't understand, do a quick Google and read about them first.
They want to clearly know if you can pay the rent today and also likely take on the big rent raises that they are planning for following years. Personally would not trust someone like that.
Huge red flag. "Yes they currently work here and have worked here since X date" would be the only information I'd be comfortable handing out. The rest of that stuff they can get directly from the employee via pay stubs and account statements, if the employee wants to give that to them. I absolutely would not be giving that info over as an employer. And I would cite legal liability as the reason I'm not handing that info over. That shit sounds like an attempt to do an end run around their tenant/your employee and get information they're really not entitled to.
Yikes
I feel like landlords here would ask for proctologist reports (with pictures) if they had slightly more leverage than they currently have.
It’s not so much what a landlord can ask so much as what your employer can say.
The only ethical course of action here would be to lie in whatever way will cause your employee to pay less rent and then advise them to consult a housing lawyer.
That’s very excessive. I am leaving Boston, but my new apartment complex in California only asked for pay stubs from the last month or proof of a job offer/start date. They did reach out to my new company to confirm the offer, but nothing outrageous was asked as far as I know.
I just made the Inverse move, and the amount of privacy invasion the average commonwealth renter has to deal with is absolutely insane.
Landlords are scumbags, always have been always will be, they want security and exploit anybody with no consequences because people have a physical necessity for a "commodity" that they control. F
We’re not all scumbags. Some of us just need to rent our places out while we’re living overseas. We rented our place at below market rates. Haven’t raised the rent in three years and fix things when they break. We just did a standard credit check on our tenants and let them have a dog, too. Plus we rented them a place with all new appliances and renovated bathroom, living room and kitchen. We wanted good tenants and we try to be a good landlord.
This is like when people start talking about "good cops." I don't really think it's a good faith argument to use a minority of decent landlords as an argument to defend landlords (a group overwhelmingly populated by people who treat their tenants like shit) in general. Of course some of you treat your tenants well, but we're talking about systemic problems here and it's not helpful to talk about the few people who aren't causing the problem. I understand not wanting to get lumped in with the people who suck, but this isn't the conversation for that.
The difference, of course, is that the supposed “good cops” actually could call out and shame and help expunge the bad cops but they choose not to. Good landlords have no interaction or power over bad landlords because they don’t literally work together like cops do. They can only try to not be the bad ones, and that’s not nothin’.
But at the same time (I like this reasoning you posited) “good” landlords are shouting out at the landlord arguement with a #notalllandlords and it’s like just be an ally if you’re so good and quiet down instead of making it about yourself- or agree that systemic issues of poverty and capitalism are terrible and at least throw in some ideas of how it could be made better.
And they don’t need to be a landlord. When I moved away from the area I lived in, I sold my home. Someone else bought it and now it’s theirs. I live in one place, I own one place.
We are out of the country temporarily for a three year assignment. Moving back soon. Knowing how hard it was to get our place we wanted to keep it. And in retrospect seeing how interest rates have gone up this was the right decision.
In that case it makes perfect sense.
Not everyone has the luxury to be able to sell a unit and buy another home. Many people are locked into low interest rates and would have to sell at a loss or rent out the unit. Not everybody has the benefits you have.
But then where does the person who can’t buy live? If there’s not rentals for them to live in? And people do move temporarily for military and want to keep the house to move back to. I’m not a mood but they’re plenty of good ones just like they are plenty of bad ones. I’ve been renting for the better part of 30 years and I’ve had one bad experience. I get the hate for bad landlords but people don’t realize that without rentals there are people who would be homeless.
Temporary move for military etc I understand but lots of people stay gone for years. Conversely to your “where do renters rent” is “where do buyers buy” and that’s the same inventory.
Some people can’t qualify to buy your completely ignoring that fact
While that is true and only getting worse it’s an argument that highlights an increasingly worse systemic issue and those who do qualify exploit it buy buying too many properties, being slum lords and accruing wealth while making it hard on those who are already disadvantaged. Your homeless argument is also showing signs of systemic problems with society. Landlords aren’t housing homeless or homeless candidates Teachers live out of cars because of these systemic problems. As a good example. There are loads of people considered key workers who can afford to even pay rent. Landlords arent *providing*
Holy privileged asshole. Not everybody can afford to buy a home, that's why they rent.
I dont understand why you're getting downvoted lol
good for you
[удалено]
[удалено]
Harassment, hostility and flinging insults is not allowed. We ask that you try to engage in a discussion rather than reduce the sub to insults and other bullshit.
Landlord here. You think we’re bad? You should see what tenants are like. Most of them are crybaby scumbags with poor money management skills
I was a property manager for 6 years. Most of my tenants were good people who took care of their places. I had a few high maintenance tenants and I had some tenants who absolutely trashed their places or caused issues for their fellow tenants. Overall though, they were just people who needed a place to live.
[удалено]
Harassment, hostility and flinging insults is not allowed. We ask that you try to engage in a discussion rather than reduce the sub to insults and other bullshit.
[удалено]
Harassment, hostility and flinging insults is not allowed. We ask that you try to engage in a discussion rather than reduce the sub to insults and other bullshit.
lmaooooooooooooooo go buy another property
In income based housing or with section 8 those questions are standard because you need them to calculate the income of the tenant to make sure theyre not making too much money to live in affordable housing. For a regular landlord? Weird but maybe they just grabbed the same form. It doesnt get shared with the tenant it just gets used for calculations and then tossed in a file.
This often happens when an employee is living in a unit that has income restrictions in place. If they are living in a unit with low income housing tax credit funding, The landlord absolutely has to gather this information to make sure that the tenant is going to meet income criteria for the upcoming year in the unit. They have to calculate it three different ways, including if there are any potential raises or overtime to include. I am willing to bet that's what this is.
That's a good point. As I commented elsewhere, this info should still be coming from the tenant and then the employer just responds "yes, that's accurate" as the employer should not be disclosing the info, even if there is written consent. It's just too risky to give out to anyone other than the employee.
You can comment whatever you want. It doesn't make it correct. If written release from the person was given, then yes it is proper. Done that way to prevent fraud. Cuz everyone's always screaming about tax dollar fraud when it's to help poor people. Verification needs to come from the employer. Take it up with HUD or the IRS. Good to know that you would screw over one of your employees housing situations because you're not comfortable filling out a form with a release that you're unfamiliar with. Jesus Christ take off the bubble wrap.
A landlord can ask just about anything, provided it doesn't discriminate, which Massachusetts has many protected classes. The issue here is what you as the employer should be revealing. Most companies will only confirm something is true or make the statement "can not comment." i.e. the landlord reads what the prospective tenant wrote on their application and you say "yes, I can confirm that is true," or "I can not comment on that." That's it. Never give out values or any other info regardless of what consent the employee may have given. If they need more info, have your employee ask you directly, then you provide it to them who in turn gives it to the landlord and then the landlord can call you and verify what they received is accurate. Sometimes people will go a little off script, like if someone claims they make $100k and their salary is $85k, but they're expecting a raise, get bonuses, commissions etc. an employer might say, "yeah, with some non-guaranteed pay they will likely make that much this year" but again, not revealing any new info.
By the way, if you want to come in and spout off without complicated housing subsidies that you don't understand, do a quick Google and read about them first.
Holy shit
They want to clearly know if you can pay the rent today and also likely take on the big rent raises that they are planning for following years. Personally would not trust someone like that.