Landlords who try to sneak a home sale past tenants…

[CDMA ENG]

[quote=Ricechex][quote=CA renter][quote=8bitnintendo]I am there right now. No sign, the pics must be old. Oh well, they’ll know once they check their mail.[/quote]

Thanks very much for doing this, 8bit. Good karma coming your way.[/quote]

I agree. Thanks 8bit. I feel sorry for the tenants.[/quote]

You guys are vigilantes now…

You need a costume… Something with a big “P” on the chest!

😛

Good Karma to you indeed!

CE

[UCGal]

[quote=urbanrealtor]And the other problem is that those remarks are in the public section.
Generally they are in the confidential section with the lockbox combo and the fact that the dog has no teeth.

WOW.
Somebody needs to improve their MLS entry skills.[/quote]

Not just that – because of the way they entered the address – it can’t be mapped… Typically I see the address of a muli-unit looking like 3776-80 Centre They did it as 3780/76 Centre… The slash, the listing of the high address first… Sites like Redfin get confused. (It’s why I listed both links in the OP.)

The person who entered this made some mistakes, no question about that.

I’d be curious to know why the seller thinks it’s gone up $240k… New electrical is nice, but it’s still listed as needing TLC.

[UCGal]

[quote=urbanrealtor]And the other problem is that those remarks are in the public section.
Generally they are in the confidential section with the lockbox combo and the fact that the dog has no teeth.

WOW.
Somebody needs to improve their MLS entry skills.[/quote]

Not just that – because of the way they entered the address – it can’t be mapped… Typically I see the address of a muli-unit looking like 3776-80 Centre They did it as 3780/76 Centre… The slash, the listing of the high address first… Sites like Redfin get confused. (It’s why I listed both links in the OP.)

The person who entered this made some mistakes, no question about that.

I’d be curious to know why the seller thinks it’s gone up $240k… New electrical is nice, but it’s still listed as needing TLC.

[UCGal]

[quote=urbanrealtor]And the other problem is that those remarks are in the public section.
Generally they are in the confidential section with the lockbox combo and the fact that the dog has no teeth.

WOW.
Somebody needs to improve their MLS entry skills.[/quote]

Not just that – because of the way they entered the address – it can’t be mapped… Typically I see the address of a muli-unit looking like 3776-80 Centre They did it as 3780/76 Centre… The slash, the listing of the high address first… Sites like Redfin get confused. (It’s why I listed both links in the OP.)

The person who entered this made some mistakes, no question about that.

I’d be curious to know why the seller thinks it’s gone up $240k… New electrical is nice, but it’s still listed as needing TLC.

[UCGal]

[quote=urbanrealtor]And the other problem is that those remarks are in the public section.
Generally they are in the confidential section with the lockbox combo and the fact that the dog has no teeth.

WOW.
Somebody needs to improve their MLS entry skills.[/quote]

Not just that – because of the way they entered the address – it can’t be mapped… Typically I see the address of a muli-unit looking like 3776-80 Centre They did it as 3780/76 Centre… The slash, the listing of the high address first… Sites like Redfin get confused. (It’s why I listed both links in the OP.)

The person who entered this made some mistakes, no question about that.

I’d be curious to know why the seller thinks it’s gone up $240k… New electrical is nice, but it’s still listed as needing TLC.

[UCGal]

[quote=urbanrealtor]And the other problem is that those remarks are in the public section.
Generally they are in the confidential section with the lockbox combo and the fact that the dog has no teeth.

WOW.
Somebody needs to improve their MLS entry skills.[/quote]

Not just that – because of the way they entered the address – it can’t be mapped… Typically I see the address of a muli-unit looking like 3776-80 Centre They did it as 3780/76 Centre… The slash, the listing of the high address first… Sites like Redfin get confused. (It’s why I listed both links in the OP.)

The person who entered this made some mistakes, no question about that.

I’d be curious to know why the seller thinks it’s gone up $240k… New electrical is nice, but it’s still listed as needing TLC.

[uneven]

Once again we need to bash the evil landlord and protect the innocent tenants. None of us know the situation the landlord is in. Maybe things got desperate. Maybe it won’t sell for months or more and there’s no need to spook the tenants. I would inform my tenants, but there’s no law requiring me to. If it’s a month to month lease, it can be broken by “either” party for any reason. So if the landlord changes plans and gives them 30 days to move out, he’s evil and if the tenant changes plans and moves out in 30 days he’s a hero? Business is business. Otherwise, let’s turn it all over to the heavenly state to manage it all for us and we can lives on Candycane lane. If anyone intentionally notified my tenants maliciously like you did, I’d sue them for interfering with my right to conduct business. You don’t know all the facts and pretending you do and acting on that makes you more self righteous than the evil landlord.

[uneven]

Once again we need to bash the evil landlord and protect the innocent tenants. None of us know the situation the landlord is in. Maybe things got desperate. Maybe it won’t sell for months or more and there’s no need to spook the tenants. I would inform my tenants, but there’s no law requiring me to. If it’s a month to month lease, it can be broken by “either” party for any reason. So if the landlord changes plans and gives them 30 days to move out, he’s evil and if the tenant changes plans and moves out in 30 days he’s a hero? Business is business. Otherwise, let’s turn it all over to the heavenly state to manage it all for us and we can lives on Candycane lane. If anyone intentionally notified my tenants maliciously like you did, I’d sue them for interfering with my right to conduct business. You don’t know all the facts and pretending you do and acting on that makes you more self righteous than the evil landlord.

[uneven]

Once again we need to bash the evil landlord and protect the innocent tenants. None of us know the situation the landlord is in. Maybe things got desperate. Maybe it won’t sell for months or more and there’s no need to spook the tenants. I would inform my tenants, but there’s no law requiring me to. If it’s a month to month lease, it can be broken by “either” party for any reason. So if the landlord changes plans and gives them 30 days to move out, he’s evil and if the tenant changes plans and moves out in 30 days he’s a hero? Business is business. Otherwise, let’s turn it all over to the heavenly state to manage it all for us and we can lives on Candycane lane. If anyone intentionally notified my tenants maliciously like you did, I’d sue them for interfering with my right to conduct business. You don’t know all the facts and pretending you do and acting on that makes you more self righteous than the evil landlord.

[uneven]

Once again we need to bash the evil landlord and protect the innocent tenants. None of us know the situation the landlord is in. Maybe things got desperate. Maybe it won’t sell for months or more and there’s no need to spook the tenants. I would inform my tenants, but there’s no law requiring me to. If it’s a month to month lease, it can be broken by “either” party for any reason. So if the landlord changes plans and gives them 30 days to move out, he’s evil and if the tenant changes plans and moves out in 30 days he’s a hero? Business is business. Otherwise, let’s turn it all over to the heavenly state to manage it all for us and we can lives on Candycane lane. If anyone intentionally notified my tenants maliciously like you did, I’d sue them for interfering with my right to conduct business. You don’t know all the facts and pretending you do and acting on that makes you more self righteous than the evil landlord.

[uneven]

Once again we need to bash the evil landlord and protect the innocent tenants. None of us know the situation the landlord is in. Maybe things got desperate. Maybe it won’t sell for months or more and there’s no need to spook the tenants. I would inform my tenants, but there’s no law requiring me to. If it’s a month to month lease, it can be broken by “either” party for any reason. So if the landlord changes plans and gives them 30 days to move out, he’s evil and if the tenant changes plans and moves out in 30 days he’s a hero? Business is business. Otherwise, let’s turn it all over to the heavenly state to manage it all for us and we can lives on Candycane lane. If anyone intentionally notified my tenants maliciously like you did, I’d sue them for interfering with my right to conduct business. You don’t know all the facts and pretending you do and acting on that makes you more self righteous than the evil landlord.

[CDMA ENG]

Uneven,

The concern here is that the LL will give any notice at all. No one wants the sheriff to show up at thier door and tell them that they have one hour to move.

There is mountians of antedotal evidence that this a real possibility. In fact, there is an active forum post on it right now (ok the situation is a little different from the above).

But like I said everything is hinged on that. There is obvious deception on the part of the LL. So it easy to say this may happen.

Also you stated a 30 day agreement. That is a one-sided contract. Most renters rent feeling that as long as they maintian thier side of the lease that the property will be available to live in. No renter rents base of the prospect of having to move on the LL terms (if this was common then the contracted would have renter protections as well). Also if the renter breaks the contract there are protectionist provision for the LL. Usually early lease termination results in a 1 to 1.5 monthly rent penalty. How is this fair if the LL decides to pull out of his side of the agreement early? I know the renter signed a contract without a protection clause for them but most of us have never had the rug pulled out from underneath them. So how is that fair? Both parties made agreements and one side is not honoring that comittment.

Lastly, you threaten litagation. How? Why? Someone gave your tenent information based in the public domain. The tenent know has that information and will make a decision from that. If they break their agreement then you have an actionable item against the tenent but to go after the person that informed the tenent? They had no gag order against them and did not act in any offendable or profitable way (if there is a lawyer here I would love to hear case study).

As you said business is business.

I don’t care how desperate the LL is. That is his business and he chose his path. The renter simple want a house over his head.

No one here is bashing LLs for the sake of bashing LLs as you accuse. Many of the ppl here are LLs or property managers but if you are acting in a way that dispicable… well… Someone just evened the odds.

Besides you don’t know what the hardship will be to the tenent either.

So why so touchy on the matter (and I don’t mean that to be offensive).

CE

[CDMA ENG]

Uneven,

The concern here is that the LL will give any notice at all. No one wants the sheriff to show up at thier door and tell them that they have one hour to move.

There is mountians of antedotal evidence that this a real possibility. In fact, there is an active forum post on it right now (ok the situation is a little different from the above).

But like I said everything is hinged on that. There is obvious deception on the part of the LL. So it easy to say this may happen.

Also you stated a 30 day agreement. That is a one-sided contract. Most renters rent feeling that as long as they maintian thier side of the lease that the property will be available to live in. No renter rents base of the prospect of having to move on the LL terms (if this was common then the contracted would have renter protections as well). Also if the renter breaks the contract there are protectionist provision for the LL. Usually early lease termination results in a 1 to 1.5 monthly rent penalty. How is this fair if the LL decides to pull out of his side of the agreement early? I know the renter signed a contract without a protection clause for them but most of us have never had the rug pulled out from underneath them. So how is that fair? Both parties made agreements and one side is not honoring that comittment.

Lastly, you threaten litagation. How? Why? Someone gave your tenent information based in the public domain. The tenent know has that information and will make a decision from that. If they break their agreement then you have an actionable item against the tenent but to go after the person that informed the tenent? They had no gag order against them and did not act in any offendable or profitable way (if there is a lawyer here I would love to hear case study).

As you said business is business.

I don’t care how desperate the LL is. That is his business and he chose his path. The renter simple want a house over his head.

No one here is bashing LLs for the sake of bashing LLs as you accuse. Many of the ppl here are LLs or property managers but if you are acting in a way that dispicable… well… Someone just evened the odds.

Besides you don’t know what the hardship will be to the tenent either.

So why so touchy on the matter (and I don’t mean that to be offensive).

CE

[CDMA ENG]

Uneven,

The concern here is that the LL will give any notice at all. No one wants the sheriff to show up at thier door and tell them that they have one hour to move.

There is mountians of antedotal evidence that this a real possibility. In fact, there is an active forum post on it right now (ok the situation is a little different from the above).

But like I said everything is hinged on that. There is obvious deception on the part of the LL. So it easy to say this may happen.

Also you stated a 30 day agreement. That is a one-sided contract. Most renters rent feeling that as long as they maintian thier side of the lease that the property will be available to live in. No renter rents base of the prospect of having to move on the LL terms (if this was common then the contracted would have renter protections as well). Also if the renter breaks the contract there are protectionist provision for the LL. Usually early lease termination results in a 1 to 1.5 monthly rent penalty. How is this fair if the LL decides to pull out of his side of the agreement early? I know the renter signed a contract without a protection clause for them but most of us have never had the rug pulled out from underneath them. So how is that fair? Both parties made agreements and one side is not honoring that comittment.

Lastly, you threaten litagation. How? Why? Someone gave your tenent information based in the public domain. The tenent know has that information and will make a decision from that. If they break their agreement then you have an actionable item against the tenent but to go after the person that informed the tenent? They had no gag order against them and did not act in any offendable or profitable way (if there is a lawyer here I would love to hear case study).

As you said business is business.

I don’t care how desperate the LL is. That is his business and he chose his path. The renter simple want a house over his head.

No one here is bashing LLs for the sake of bashing LLs as you accuse. Many of the ppl here are LLs or property managers but if you are acting in a way that dispicable… well… Someone just evened the odds.

Besides you don’t know what the hardship will be to the tenent either.

So why so touchy on the matter (and I don’t mean that to be offensive).

CE

[CDMA ENG]

Uneven,

The concern here is that the LL will give any notice at all. No one wants the sheriff to show up at thier door and tell them that they have one hour to move.

There is mountians of antedotal evidence that this a real possibility. In fact, there is an active forum post on it right now (ok the situation is a little different from the above).

But like I said everything is hinged on that. There is obvious deception on the part of the LL. So it easy to say this may happen.

Also you stated a 30 day agreement. That is a one-sided contract. Most renters rent feeling that as long as they maintian thier side of the lease that the property will be available to live in. No renter rents base of the prospect of having to move on the LL terms (if this was common then the contracted would have renter protections as well). Also if the renter breaks the contract there are protectionist provision for the LL. Usually early lease termination results in a 1 to 1.5 monthly rent penalty. How is this fair if the LL decides to pull out of his side of the agreement early? I know the renter signed a contract without a protection clause for them but most of us have never had the rug pulled out from underneath them. So how is that fair? Both parties made agreements and one side is not honoring that comittment.

Lastly, you threaten litagation. How? Why? Someone gave your tenent information based in the public domain. The tenent know has that information and will make a decision from that. If they break their agreement then you have an actionable item against the tenent but to go after the person that informed the tenent? They had no gag order against them and did not act in any offendable or profitable way (if there is a lawyer here I would love to hear case study).

As you said business is business.

I don’t care how desperate the LL is. That is his business and he chose his path. The renter simple want a house over his head.

No one here is bashing LLs for the sake of bashing LLs as you accuse. Many of the ppl here are LLs or property managers but if you are acting in a way that dispicable… well… Someone just evened the odds.

Besides you don’t know what the hardship will be to the tenent either.

So why so touchy on the matter (and I don’t mean that to be offensive).

CE

[Author]

Posts