Hey, there! Log in / Register
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
I'm not saying this isn't true
But it sounds like it could as easily be poorly contrived dialog for an advertisement.
I'd love to see real numbers.
Maybe
We have 2 (and soon to be 3) rental units in the building - a dental student moved out of the basement last week and a new tenant is moving in next week. The unit on the first floor went vacant when a guy got fired and moved back to Spain and was re-rented within a month. Another basement unit is going on the market soon. Then I have a friend who rents 5 units in the same building and 2 are recently vacant with minimal lookers.
I think
I think the days of making a lot of money off of rental property in Boston is slowing down. But if you have owned property for a long time, you can probably drop your rents 20%-40% and still make good money.
But that also means less to save on improvements on those properties in the future. Thats the main problem for many landlords/owners.
if true, it's good news
Renters have been paying exorbitant amounts for years. It's past time for a fair correction.
Blame the city
One little known fact over the past 10 years is that residential property taxes have doubled and the city took steps a few years ago to make the burden on landlords even heavier by changing the formula for the residential exemption, lowering taxes for owners and raising them for landlords. If your landlord was paying $2000 in taxes 10 years ago, that same property is probably now looking at $5000 in taxes (by comparison the CPI is up 28% over that time).
To make matters worse, the city has done almost nothing to develop new properties, especially for working class families. At the time of the last census the city counted 251,000 units of housing. The bureau's latest estimate is 255,000 or an increase of less than 2% with much of this increase coming from luxury downtown condos. At the same time we added 25,000 residents or about 10,000 households. Flat supply + increased demand + increased cost = higher rents.
And I'm sure none of those
And I'm sure none of those landlords didn't immediately on the expense to their tenants .... lol.
Well-played joke, well-played.
ehl-oh-ehl
"Being a renter, I really want to believe you. However, what I am observing is that apartments for September are not coming down in price. My landlord company already sent me a renewal proposal at the same price of $3,000. Unless you are talking about lower or higher priced tiers, I only wish I was seeing that. Oh, and by the way, if you know of any good $3,000/ month apts, please write me.
Awwwwww, poo baaaaby, your $3k rent is still 3k.
That's what, more than twice the current market rate for a nice 1-2BR in all but the fanciest neighborhoods?
I really do wonder, what with asshole landlords like this. No fridge? You gotta be kidding me. I know the law requires only "space and facility" for one, but jeeeeesus...
"Unit is NOT de-leaded" What
"Unit is NOT de-leaded"
What the? Is that legal?
I think so
As long as nobody with kids wants the place - but if they do I think the landlord is required to de-lead and he can't disqualify them on that alone.
The rules seem complicated
If I'm reading this correctly, it is legal to rent a place that hasn't been deleaded (i.e. probably the majority of houses in West Rox), but you must state your knowledge about the lead in the house when renting (as is done here).
You can't refuse to rent to families with children on the basis that it is not deleaded. And then if a family with children does move in, you are required to get it deleaded.
It looks like the landlord has to kind of cross his fingers and hope children don't move in, and then on the other hand a a family that moves in will have to not live there while it's being deleaded. All in all, a Rube Goldberg of a system.
Yep, that's basically right
If the tenant has Section 8, Section 8 will just refuse to let the tenant have the unit, since it has to be de-leaded to pass the Section 8 inspection.
I *think* that the landlord can still collect rent while deleading though (most landlords seem to), and most tenants aren't going to want to rent somewhere where they're going to be paying rent before they move in.
Also, are you sure most WeRox units aren't deleaded? I've been at a number of homes with families I work with when the lead inspectors were there, and they've explained that the meter deems the lead level to be acceptable when it's covered up with several coats of good properly applied paint. So if the place has been painted every couple of years since 1978, it should be deleaded. The units that don't pass lead inspection usually have been poorly maintained, said lead guy.
http://1smootshort.blogspot.com
Depends on your definition of deleaded
I think for most people, "deleaded" means that the lead paint has been removed or at least encapsulated, rather than that the lead paint is down at the bottom of decades of paint and not actively flaking off. What I mean by my estimate is that most people in West Rox are probably living in houses with lead paint at some level, simply by virtue of old stock and little renovation. Those old plaster and lathe walls mostly still have lead paint down there somewhere.