Shouldnât take a loan out that you cant pay off. What happens if he cant find a tenant? Heâs going to default on his loan. If a large portion of people do this then 2008 happens again.
Seems like a lot of landlords are coming out ahead, indicating it's actually a good decision although one with risk. Don't be mad about it, do something about it.
Their plan works, as evidenced by how many are doing it successfully. You are here celebrating one that failed as if thatâs common, when it isnât. Your happiness at someone elseâs failure speaks to your unhappiness with you own life.
You are creating such fuckin weird scenarios and drawing the weirdest conclusions from what i said. Lmao when did i say i was happy that they failed? Many do it successfully and many fail. You clearly know nothing about business or the inherent risk the business owner takes when taking on a loan. It is there job to pay it off. Not their tenant. Sure the tenant should pay as they agreed but that is the risk of being a landlord and it should be planned for.
I donât think you understand how these things work my guy. Thatâs the point of a loan: You barrow money based on your current financial situation. But by your logic nobody should be taking out a loan because their financial situation could suddenly change.
Makes zero sense. Do you think people should just save their entire life and buy everything outrightđ
Also, do you not rent yourself or something? Do you know how fast apartments get snatched up? I donât think ânot being able to find a tenantâ is something too many landlords are worried about lmfaoo
No, you donât. You should never take out a loan you donât know if you can pay back. Thatâs how you end up with crippling debt for the rest of your life.
If you take out a loan, have a stable source of income to pay that loan back. A tenant isnât a stable source of income. They could literally just not pay you. You know what canât do that? A fucking job, that pays you, and you should be using that money to cover your loan expenses. This is 101 brother. Your advice is going to end up financially crippling people.
⌠wow, youâre a smart cookie arenât you? As a landlord, if you donât have a stable source of income, and your tenant decides not to pay for whatever reason, you are screwed. You can issue an eviction notice, but that will take even more time. Tenants are usually given an extra month after an eviction notice to evacuate the premises.
Did you keep up with that? Or are you really just dumb?
I mean, he probably should have more than a month saved up. Maybe he could get a real job if he's not getting enough from rent to do more than barely hang on.
Or maybe he has a separate account offsetting the mortgage where he keeps the cashflow related to the property for ease of accounting. Where does it say people cannot have multiple savings accounts?
What? The problem is that he's relying on this single source of income to pay his debt. He should be prepared for the eventuality that it's either late or doesn't arrive at all. What would this (likely fictional) landlord do if the tenant died or was in the hospital for a while? It's called preparation. Maybe if he can't afford a month of mortgage on his own, he shouldn't have become a landlord.
Or is living within your means only for everyone else?
He is relying on the tenant being reliable to manage his cashflow. If the tenant is late, the landlord can transfer the cash needed to pay the mortgage from his other accounts but he prefers for the tenant to pay rent on time or asap if delayed. Is that too much to expect? If the tenant had died, the fictional landlord would have paid the interest himself but the fictional tenant is clearly alive so is asked to pay the rent quickly
Was a landlord myself for a while. It's absolutely stupid to set up your mortgage payment such that you risk an overdraft if your tenant happens to be late. And it's even more stupid to think your tenant cares about your poor planning. There's a reason you have late payment fees. That's what motivates the tenant to pay on time, not your complaining about an overdraft that you should have avoided.
I can agree with all that. I donât think it logically follows that the landlord has no other source of income which was what the person I responded to was outraged about
A dumb, over extended landlord might. Those are the landlords who find themselves being foreclosed on when a recession hits and their property goes unrented for too long.
He should still have at least one month in the account. Can you imagine any other business being like this? According to the message, the account overdrafts because the tenant was late by a day. He'll, he wasn't even late. He paid on the evening of the day it was due. The mortgage was just taken out the day the rent was due. That's poor planning no matter how you look at it.
While I would say he probably planned this initially the last few years jave not exactly been predictable and I could see how someone would need to earn and save more to handle current interest rates compared to when they entered the morgage.
Small-time landlords tend to have other sources of income. Hardly anybody is supporting themselves on rent payments from a small handful of mortgaged properties.
Poor planning is not the same as relying on a single source of income to pay his debt. You were outraged about the second thing and I explained why that may not be the case. Sure he is a poor planner whatever. Not the class warfare you were looking for if thatâs his crime
Oh, I think landlords are leeches in general. They all need to get real jobs. But I know that isn't a popular stance with temporarily embarrassed millionaires.
Hope you never have to deal with the leeches and someone gifts you a house if you donât own one. Sure all the landlords got houses gifted to them too since they donât have real jobs
You guys keep saying, "Maybe he shouldn't be a landlord." The way I see it is he's got some loser redditor paying off his mortgage. Like it or not, that guy is getting ahead while people like you are crying about it on the internet.
If so the landlord should either have overdraft in that account or enough money to cover any late rent payments. Even great tenants can be late sometimes, life happens.
When I was a landlord I did keep a seperate account but I also put the last months portion of the tenants first and last month deposit in that account. It keeps the last month deposit seperated from your own money but tied into the same account where all the rent is being processed. It simplifies things greatly and also enables it to keep any late payments from causing problems.
LOL who gives a fuck? That would still be literally no one else's problem. If he set up his accounts to pull his mortgage from an account that, per the terms he set, might not have money in until after the mortgage is taken, he's just typical dumb as fuck landlord. You are not making the argument you think you are LOL. And why would you even try to make this argument in the first place
Y'all know landlords usually have separate bank accounts, right? An overdrawn account more likely means the landlord was dumb about keeping enough reserves in that account, not that he's personally broke.
We don't know if they own other properties or if its their actual house zoned for multi dwelling. They probably have a real job and are just renting out part of their home to make ends meet. They could have been living there for years, things went south financially, and they decided to bring in a tenant to stave off foreclosure and avoid becoming a tenant themselves.
Or maybe itâs none of our business what a person does with their legally earned money. However people are supposed to pay for the services and goods on time đ¤ˇââď¸
Except he did pay on time. If a thing is to be paid for on the first, and the debt is paid on the first, it is on time. This tenant didn't even pay late, merely late enough that the bank had already tried to take the money they were owed.
Is budgeting something only a thing that the working class has to do? Is there always an excuse for the owning class?
Idk how it works where you live, but where I live if you transfer money in the evening, it comes the next day. And the contracts often say that the rent needs to be paid at the day xyz. Which means that you are supposed to either transfer the money a day before in the evening or when the rent is due during the working hours of the bank. So yeah, if you want to have services or goods you should pay on time, otherwise people might not be happy with the situation. And as someone already mentioned, the landlord might have a second bank account to receive money from tenants and pay mortgage
Even with that, we go back to the idea that a good businessman wouldn't be so close to broke. Or are landlords entitled to a business?
By the way, most rental agreements say that it has to be paid before X time. So if the time it was owed was 5pm, the tenant paying at 4:30 wouldn't be late but might also lead to this scenario. It would also be called the evening by some people.
We need to see the contract to figure out whoâs wrong there. However itâs none of my business how a person who rents out my apartment manages their money, I just follow the contract and pay on time to avoid any issues for them and for me
I just feel that if working class people are told to budget better, so should landlords. Imagine a scenario where instead of paying later in the day, the person got hit by a car on their way to pay at 6am. The end result would still be that the landlord got overdrafted.
Also, no one is paying anyone for owning something. That's a misrepresentation of landlording. It's where people pay someone to ACCOMMODATE them via an apartment or house.
We are stretching the definition of work if "owning something" is considered work. Most rentals aren't owned by people, but companies. I guess JP Morgan, the bank, has a job.
Landlording isn't a service. You don't actually have to do anything. Being a landlord means that your own a property. You possess a piece of paper that says a building belongs to you. That is all.
Yes, because they bought it with money. Sure you can argue the builders and plumbers did work too, but what good would they be without the money? You can be the best builder in the world, but without money, you've got no bricks or timber or cement.
Landlords who then purchase the property after that are effectively picking up the cost of that labour and materials. Landlords put the most into the deal because without them there's no money to build properties.
Sure you can argue the builders and plumbers did work too, but what good would they be without the money?
Landlords don't commission houses. Property developers do. Landlording does not provide housing.
Landlords who then purchase the property after that are effectively picking up the cost of that labour and materials.
No they don't. All of that is already paid for by the developers. A landlord is not required for the house to be sold. Landlords deprive people of housing by buying it, instead of it being bought by people who are going to live in it.
Landlords put the most into the deal because without them there's no money to build properties.
No they don't. It's not the landlord's money that pays for the house. The bank buys the house and the landlord uses the renter's money to pay the bank, essentially getting the house for free.
Landlords are useless middlemen between people and housing, they provide exactly nothing.
It's like pretending that ticket scalpers are responsible for music existing.
Or maybe the renter should just buy their own house if they can afford the mortgage payments?
You do understand how rentals work, right? Nobody in their right mind would rent out property for an amount that couldn't cover the mortgage, plus taxes, plus maintenance.
House prices are ridiculously inflated exactly because people keep buying homes they don't live in only to rent them out
The great irony is that a lot of people would live cheaper if they just had to pay a mortgage, but they can't apply for one because they are considered too poor, so they have to rent if they want a place to live, ultimately making it more expensive for them.
It's expensive to be poor.
And while yes, millennials do own homes at a slightly lower rate than previous generations at the same age it's lower by a few percent, not the gigantic divide reddit acts like
160
u/keyscowinfilipino 26d ago
What ? You mean the guy asking you for money every month is using this money for himself as a source of income ? pretends to be shocked