Menu

Home › Forums › Housing › Piggs, should this be compared to renting to your friends/relatives with a “Section 8” voucher??

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 41 total)
1 2 3
  • Author
    Posts
  • August 1, 2011 at 1:58 PM #18981
    bearishgurl
    Participant

    Except maybe on a “larger scale??”

    Managing income property is the bane of many a landlord’s existence. But Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. has locked in a tenant, on the cottage next to his waterfront home, that likely won’t be bouncing checks or moving out any time soon: The U.S. Secret Service detail that’s hired to protect him.

    To recap: Our tax dollars not only pay for the vice president’s protection, they are also feathering his pocket with a steady rent check. Yes, it’s legal. We leave it to the public to decide whether it’s right for the vice president to have snagged this tenant in Greenville, Del., where the rental vacancy rate for 2010 was a whooping 33.6 percent, according to Melissa Kresin, a survey spokesperson at the U.S. Census Bureau. The national vacancy rate is 9.2 percent…

    (emphasis added)

    see: http://realestate.aol.com/blog/2011/08/01/joe-biden-secret-service-covers-his-rental-too/?icid=main%7Chtmlws-main-w%7Cdl3%7Csec1_lnk3%7C220673

    August 1, 2011 at 2:21 PM #714129
    briansd1
    Guest

    I don’t see a problem. The secret service is paying the same price as the previous tenant. And they do need a base from which to operate. This closer location is likely more convenient for the secret service.

    August 1, 2011 at 2:21 PM #715335
    briansd1
    Guest

    I don’t see a problem. The secret service is paying the same price as the previous tenant. And they do need a base from which to operate. This closer location is likely more convenient for the secret service.

    August 1, 2011 at 2:21 PM #714975
    briansd1
    Guest

    I don’t see a problem. The secret service is paying the same price as the previous tenant. And they do need a base from which to operate. This closer location is likely more convenient for the secret service.

    August 1, 2011 at 2:21 PM #714822
    briansd1
    Guest

    I don’t see a problem. The secret service is paying the same price as the previous tenant. And they do need a base from which to operate. This closer location is likely more convenient for the secret service.

    August 1, 2011 at 2:21 PM #714221
    briansd1
    Guest

    I don’t see a problem. The secret service is paying the same price as the previous tenant. And they do need a base from which to operate. This closer location is likely more convenient for the secret service.

    August 1, 2011 at 4:37 PM #715360
    UCGal
    Participant

    I assume the secret service made the decision to rent, and weighed cost, location, etc as factors.

    I would have a problem if it looked like the rent was out of line with the market…

    According to the link it was the SS’s choice – they’d been renting a different space and chose to take advantage when the old tenant moved out.

    Hmmm… we’ve got a granny flat. I guess if I become president I could rent it out to the secret service.

    The problem I have with the linked post is that it suggests Biden should give it to them for free, even though he had a paying tenant in it previously.

    August 1, 2011 at 4:37 PM #714154
    UCGal
    Participant

    I assume the secret service made the decision to rent, and weighed cost, location, etc as factors.

    I would have a problem if it looked like the rent was out of line with the market…

    According to the link it was the SS’s choice – they’d been renting a different space and chose to take advantage when the old tenant moved out.

    Hmmm… we’ve got a granny flat. I guess if I become president I could rent it out to the secret service.

    The problem I have with the linked post is that it suggests Biden should give it to them for free, even though he had a paying tenant in it previously.

    August 1, 2011 at 4:37 PM #714245
    UCGal
    Participant

    I assume the secret service made the decision to rent, and weighed cost, location, etc as factors.

    I would have a problem if it looked like the rent was out of line with the market…

    According to the link it was the SS’s choice – they’d been renting a different space and chose to take advantage when the old tenant moved out.

    Hmmm… we’ve got a granny flat. I guess if I become president I could rent it out to the secret service.

    The problem I have with the linked post is that it suggests Biden should give it to them for free, even though he had a paying tenant in it previously.

    August 1, 2011 at 4:37 PM #715000
    UCGal
    Participant

    I assume the secret service made the decision to rent, and weighed cost, location, etc as factors.

    I would have a problem if it looked like the rent was out of line with the market…

    According to the link it was the SS’s choice – they’d been renting a different space and chose to take advantage when the old tenant moved out.

    Hmmm… we’ve got a granny flat. I guess if I become president I could rent it out to the secret service.

    The problem I have with the linked post is that it suggests Biden should give it to them for free, even though he had a paying tenant in it previously.

    August 1, 2011 at 4:37 PM #714847
    UCGal
    Participant

    I assume the secret service made the decision to rent, and weighed cost, location, etc as factors.

    I would have a problem if it looked like the rent was out of line with the market…

    According to the link it was the SS’s choice – they’d been renting a different space and chose to take advantage when the old tenant moved out.

    Hmmm… we’ve got a granny flat. I guess if I become president I could rent it out to the secret service.

    The problem I have with the linked post is that it suggests Biden should give it to them for free, even though he had a paying tenant in it previously.

    August 1, 2011 at 5:58 PM #714296
    briansd1
    Guest

    [quote=UCGal]
    The problem I have with the linked post is that it suggests Biden should give it to them for free, even though he had a paying tenant in it previously.[/quote]

    I had the same problem.

    Notwistanding the vacancy rate in the area, I’m sure that Biden would not have any problem renting out his cottage.

    If a famous person lived in La Jolla (or anywhere waterfront for that matter), do you think that he will have problem renting out his cottage?

    Biden is a very down-to-earth person. As a senator, he commuted daily to his home in Delaware on Amtrak.

    August 1, 2011 at 5:58 PM #715410
    briansd1
    Guest

    [quote=UCGal]
    The problem I have with the linked post is that it suggests Biden should give it to them for free, even though he had a paying tenant in it previously.[/quote]

    I had the same problem.

    Notwistanding the vacancy rate in the area, I’m sure that Biden would not have any problem renting out his cottage.

    If a famous person lived in La Jolla (or anywhere waterfront for that matter), do you think that he will have problem renting out his cottage?

    Biden is a very down-to-earth person. As a senator, he commuted daily to his home in Delaware on Amtrak.

    August 1, 2011 at 5:58 PM #715050
    briansd1
    Guest

    [quote=UCGal]
    The problem I have with the linked post is that it suggests Biden should give it to them for free, even though he had a paying tenant in it previously.[/quote]

    I had the same problem.

    Notwistanding the vacancy rate in the area, I’m sure that Biden would not have any problem renting out his cottage.

    If a famous person lived in La Jolla (or anywhere waterfront for that matter), do you think that he will have problem renting out his cottage?

    Biden is a very down-to-earth person. As a senator, he commuted daily to his home in Delaware on Amtrak.

    August 1, 2011 at 5:58 PM #714203
    briansd1
    Guest

    [quote=UCGal]
    The problem I have with the linked post is that it suggests Biden should give it to them for free, even though he had a paying tenant in it previously.[/quote]

    I had the same problem.

    Notwistanding the vacancy rate in the area, I’m sure that Biden would not have any problem renting out his cottage.

    If a famous person lived in La Jolla (or anywhere waterfront for that matter), do you think that he will have problem renting out his cottage?

    Biden is a very down-to-earth person. As a senator, he commuted daily to his home in Delaware on Amtrak.

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 41 total)
1 2 3
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.