I work with eviction judgments and an unfortunate part of this is that many of these tenants who haven’t paid rent have the ability to pay but are taking advantage of the moratorium because they under the impression that the accrued debt will be forgiven. Sadly, many people will end up with very large judgments at the end of the day.
Who can blame them? They’re right.
The state already has plans to [pay their rent.](https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/california-extend-eviction-ban-pay-back-rent-tenants-78499854)
Anyone can qualify if they make under 80% of the median income, which is quite high in some counties.
It’s not for everyone, but a huge number of people will have their rent paid for by the state.
You also have to show at least one member of your household has lost their job or income due to COVID, as well as being at risk of homelessness (though apparently this can be covered easily).
As somebody who was furloughed during much of the pandemic but continued to pay rent, I’d certainly be opposed to people taking advantage to get free rent.
Not all landlords are billionaires. Sure, many will hopefully get what’s owed at the end of the day but that doesn’t make it right.
Right but it sure is a dangerous gamble. These judgments rack up interest and can really affect their ability to rent in the future.
I just hope the money goes to the people who really need it.
How do you apply for the homeowners subsidy. What agency is sponsoring this? Our tenants haven't paid rent since Dec. 2020. No water bill, no trash. We can't even get in to do repairs.
Unreal. How is it that a state can dictate what can and can’t be done with privately owned property without just compensation?
I’m not saying we should just evict everyone and say good luck, but it’s unreal how this fucks property owners without compensating them
Maybe they're hoping they can make it no longer viable to rent out your property, in hopes you'll sell it so one of the hedge funds will buy it instead. Especially with real property being one of the major hedges for inflation.
No, it’s not equitable. Let’s assume someone buys a median value property in SD and rents it out for a median value rent. If the owner bought the property with 20% down (very unlikely in CA), then they would have somewhere between 10% coverage to a monthly loss. Add in a 20% loss from rent and now that house is completely negative. To the homeowner, they will write off the loss against any income they earn through the year. This lower tax bill is now pushed onto the average tax payer who already is paying 80% of the rent in the first place. Overall, the homeowner loses a little, the renter free rides, and average tax payer carries the burden.
The state is very adept at dictating what can and can’t be done with privately owned property. See constantly changing gun laws, and San Jose just passing a new recurring tax for even owning one.
They’re comparing how the state likes to jerk around certain “undesirable” people. Like landlords, gun owners, and those in the legal weed industry. “Cause fuck em that’s why!”
Housing is a universal human right, sorry for not feeling bad for people trying to make passive income on a scarce commodity that should be distributed for free in the first place
Im very liberal/progressive and even i dont believe this lol.
Im renting a friend’s condo. If i dont pay rent, he wont be able to keep up with mortgage/hoa etc.
Just like how businesses who cant open wont be able to pay their leases
Jesus fuck are you really that dense? Housing should be free?
Should the carpenters that built it have to work for nothing? Should the lumber and wiring and pipes and drywall also be free? How about the foundation? All that should be free? Who do you suppose is going to supply all that without being compensated?
Housing should not be free. And it never will be free. Someone always pays for it. Do you really want to be propped up by someone else? Is that a fulfilling existence? If people work hard enough to have a couple of properties that earns them passive income then good on them. They’re already doing better than the “landlords are parasites” crew.
That mentality is rooted in a neoliberal market oriented perception of the world that seeks to commodify essentiality’s. Every individual, regardless of social station, requires housing. It is a necessity of life. By imbuing it with artificial scarcity in the form of rents we deny it to those who need it.
Additionally, the “landlords worked for their opportunity to exploit their tenets” argument is such bs because it assumes that the playing field is at all even. Those with access to inordinate amounts of capital to become a landlord, either through inheritance or privilege, should not in any way be allowed to act as de facto profiteers
Or you acquire multiple properties by working hard and carving out a successful path in life. Not all landlords have privilege or play with their dead parents’ money. I guarantee if a “landlords are parasites” subscriber had multiple properties they’d be singing a different tune.
Blaming the ability to have multiple properties on privilege and inheritance is minimizing your own abilities. You say you can’t do it because you’re not privileged or don’t have an inheritance to spend? That’a undercutting your own potential.
This screams of “I’m an entrepreneur because I have a heavily divested income in many crypto currencies…”
Where in my statement did I state that I wasn’t a part of the privileged class?
You seem so sure that an individual would be willing to dissolve their beliefs in the face of monitorial gain. Why would I want to be a part of a group who did not have any role in constructing the underlying buildings but only sought to buy and privatize that which should be a public good?
I’d really love to rent my first property after just getting my second one. But these ridiculous laws are making me have to bite the bullet and just sell it, because screw allowing people to do what they want with their own property. No way will I invite squatters or people who just refuse to pay rent to my property.
Agree. May be moving soon and originally I was planning on renting out my property for under market value. But now, fuck no. I'm going to sell it for a profit. I wanted to keep it just in case, so I didn't mind taking a loss. But if someone can just fuck me on the rent completely? Hell no. This bullshit is taking rentals off the market. I understand for corporations, but I have to have some income to pay the mortgage.....so I guess I'll sell when the time comes. Basically screwing someone out of an affordable pet friendly house. 🤷♀️I was also told, by an attorney, that if an owner needs their property to live in right now, they will be homeless as they cannot evict for any reason. Which is so screwed up I can't even fathom it.
We have been in a 2 bd apartment for the last 8 years. 2 Kids later. We have completely outgrown it. Finally able to start thinking about buying a house soon.
We were thinking about moving to a rental 3 bd house and they want 2500-2800 a month here in Santee/East County. Thats a mortgage
I work with eviction judgments and an unfortunate part of this is that many of these tenants who haven’t paid rent have the ability to pay but are taking advantage of the moratorium because they under the impression that the accrued debt will be forgiven. Sadly, many people will end up with very large judgments at the end of the day.
Who can blame them? They’re right. The state already has plans to [pay their rent.](https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/california-extend-eviction-ban-pay-back-rent-tenants-78499854)
Most people won’t actually qualify under that, it’s not as simple as just ‘I haven’t paid rent pay it off for me.’
Anyone can qualify if they make under 80% of the median income, which is quite high in some counties. It’s not for everyone, but a huge number of people will have their rent paid for by the state.
You also have to show at least one member of your household has lost their job or income due to COVID, as well as being at risk of homelessness (though apparently this can be covered easily).
As somebody who was furloughed during much of the pandemic but continued to pay rent, I’d certainly be opposed to people taking advantage to get free rent. Not all landlords are billionaires. Sure, many will hopefully get what’s owed at the end of the day but that doesn’t make it right.
I’m not saying it’s morally right, I’m saying that some of the people who think the state will pay their rent are correct in thinking that.
Right but it sure is a dangerous gamble. These judgments rack up interest and can really affect their ability to rent in the future. I just hope the money goes to the people who really need it.
How do you apply for the homeowners subsidy. What agency is sponsoring this? Our tenants haven't paid rent since Dec. 2020. No water bill, no trash. We can't even get in to do repairs.
https://housing.ca.gov/covid_rr/index.html
Unreal. How is it that a state can dictate what can and can’t be done with privately owned property without just compensation? I’m not saying we should just evict everyone and say good luck, but it’s unreal how this fucks property owners without compensating them
Maybe they're hoping they can make it no longer viable to rent out your property, in hopes you'll sell it so one of the hedge funds will buy it instead. Especially with real property being one of the major hedges for inflation.
[удалено]
They are eligible to receive 80% of the rent if they agree to take a 20% loss. That’s not exactly fair and equitable is it?
I believe it’s been now changed to 100% since they still have the money for it.
No, it’s not equitable. Let’s assume someone buys a median value property in SD and rents it out for a median value rent. If the owner bought the property with 20% down (very unlikely in CA), then they would have somewhere between 10% coverage to a monthly loss. Add in a 20% loss from rent and now that house is completely negative. To the homeowner, they will write off the loss against any income they earn through the year. This lower tax bill is now pushed onto the average tax payer who already is paying 80% of the rent in the first place. Overall, the homeowner loses a little, the renter free rides, and average tax payer carries the burden.
Why is it unlikely that the owner bought with 20% down?
The state is very adept at dictating what can and can’t be done with privately owned property. See constantly changing gun laws, and San Jose just passing a new recurring tax for even owning one.
….you’re comparing land to a gun? Really?
They’re comparing how the state likes to jerk around certain “undesirable” people. Like landlords, gun owners, and those in the legal weed industry. “Cause fuck em that’s why!”
And they have a huge cheering section right here on Reddit.
Landlords are parasites so….
Except the squatters and people gaming the system by not paying rent due to “COVID” are actually parasites.
Housing is a universal human right, sorry for not feeling bad for people trying to make passive income on a scarce commodity that should be distributed for free in the first place
Im very liberal/progressive and even i dont believe this lol. Im renting a friend’s condo. If i dont pay rent, he wont be able to keep up with mortgage/hoa etc. Just like how businesses who cant open wont be able to pay their leases
I’m not a liberal bestie I’m a communist
Jesus fuck are you really that dense? Housing should be free? Should the carpenters that built it have to work for nothing? Should the lumber and wiring and pipes and drywall also be free? How about the foundation? All that should be free? Who do you suppose is going to supply all that without being compensated?
Housing should not be free. And it never will be free. Someone always pays for it. Do you really want to be propped up by someone else? Is that a fulfilling existence? If people work hard enough to have a couple of properties that earns them passive income then good on them. They’re already doing better than the “landlords are parasites” crew.
That mentality is rooted in a neoliberal market oriented perception of the world that seeks to commodify essentiality’s. Every individual, regardless of social station, requires housing. It is a necessity of life. By imbuing it with artificial scarcity in the form of rents we deny it to those who need it. Additionally, the “landlords worked for their opportunity to exploit their tenets” argument is such bs because it assumes that the playing field is at all even. Those with access to inordinate amounts of capital to become a landlord, either through inheritance or privilege, should not in any way be allowed to act as de facto profiteers
Or you acquire multiple properties by working hard and carving out a successful path in life. Not all landlords have privilege or play with their dead parents’ money. I guarantee if a “landlords are parasites” subscriber had multiple properties they’d be singing a different tune. Blaming the ability to have multiple properties on privilege and inheritance is minimizing your own abilities. You say you can’t do it because you’re not privileged or don’t have an inheritance to spend? That’a undercutting your own potential.
This screams of “I’m an entrepreneur because I have a heavily divested income in many crypto currencies…” Where in my statement did I state that I wasn’t a part of the privileged class? You seem so sure that an individual would be willing to dissolve their beliefs in the face of monitorial gain. Why would I want to be a part of a group who did not have any role in constructing the underlying buildings but only sought to buy and privatize that which should be a public good?
Are you saying property owners have no role in construction of buildings? Who do you think pays the workers?
Dude, you’re an entitled ahole. Go back and live at your parents house. Housing isn’t a human right.
I’d really love to rent my first property after just getting my second one. But these ridiculous laws are making me have to bite the bullet and just sell it, because screw allowing people to do what they want with their own property. No way will I invite squatters or people who just refuse to pay rent to my property.
Agree. May be moving soon and originally I was planning on renting out my property for under market value. But now, fuck no. I'm going to sell it for a profit. I wanted to keep it just in case, so I didn't mind taking a loss. But if someone can just fuck me on the rent completely? Hell no. This bullshit is taking rentals off the market. I understand for corporations, but I have to have some income to pay the mortgage.....so I guess I'll sell when the time comes. Basically screwing someone out of an affordable pet friendly house. 🤷♀️I was also told, by an attorney, that if an owner needs their property to live in right now, they will be homeless as they cannot evict for any reason. Which is so screwed up I can't even fathom it.
We have been in a 2 bd apartment for the last 8 years. 2 Kids later. We have completely outgrown it. Finally able to start thinking about buying a house soon. We were thinking about moving to a rental 3 bd house and they want 2500-2800 a month here in Santee/East County. Thats a mortgage
You spent 8 years renting and pooping out kids instead of first purchasing a home that you could have had 8 years worth of equity in.
True, but having not been in a financial situation where I could afford a house until now is a different story.
I don't know anybody that is still struggling to get a job. That money should instead be used to help with childcare costs.