|
Barrack "Apologizes"
|
Barrack "Apologizes"
In article ,
says... On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 3:44:27 PM UTC-5, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... They are vetting the renter and gathering a bit of insurance. Exactly, but it certainly doesn't mean that because the renter came up with the money for first, last and security that he's going to pay on time each month. There's no certainty, but there's a far better chance of getting your rent than if you require nothing but a signature. A deadbeat has a much better chance of scraping up $1000 than they would ~$3000. I can tell you from a voice of experience that that isn't necessarily true, neither is a credit check! |
Barrack "Apologizes"
In article , says...
On 11/13/2013 3:36 PM, wrote: On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 1:44:41 PM UTC-5, iBoaterer wrote: In article 1269338540406053481.559632bmckeenospam- , says... Same way a landlord pretty much insures his renters can make the payments. First and last months rent and a security deposit. If the renter can come up with that much money, he can normally be able to pay his rent. Horse****. Then why else would a landlord require that? They are vetting the renter and gathering a bit of insurance. Ugh, in the middle of evicting yet another "family" that thinks it's ok to stop paying rent on Oct 31, if you are planning on leaving anyway next summer.... Idiot sent me a text clearly stating "I will be giving you no more rent money"... I saved the text, he's screwed... No he's not. I know from experience that the laws coddle the renter, and the owner is usually screwed. |
Barrack "Apologizes"
In article ,
says... On 11/13/2013 4:02 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 11/13/13, 4:00 PM, Charlemagne wrote: On 11/13/2013 3:36 PM, wrote: On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 1:44:41 PM UTC-5, iBoaterer wrote: In article 1269338540406053481.559632bmckeenospam- , says... Same way a landlord pretty much insures his renters can make the payments. First and last months rent and a security deposit. If the renter can come up with that much money, he can normally be able to pay his rent. Horse****. Then why else would a landlord require that? They are vetting the renter and gathering a bit of insurance. Ugh, in the middle of evicting yet another "family" that thinks it's ok to stop paying rent on Oct 31, if you are planning on leaving anyway next summer.... Idiot sent me a text clearly stating "I will be giving you no more rent money"... I saved the text, he's screwed... Maybe he wants running water or mold abatement? How long does it take to evict now-a-days? Last I knew it was about 6 months. Sounds like the renter's timetable is just about right. It depends on what state. And you are right, they can live free for about 6 months. That makes the argument from others that 1st, last, security deposit guarantees they'll pay rent absurd. I know this for a fact. There are people out there who are professionals at squatting, and know the laws and how to work them to their advantage. |
Barrack "Apologizes"
In article , says...
On 11/13/2013 4:18 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 11/13/2013 4:02 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 11/13/13, 4:00 PM, Charlemagne wrote: On 11/13/2013 3:36 PM, wrote: On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 1:44:41 PM UTC-5, iBoaterer wrote: In article 1269338540406053481.559632bmckeenospam- , says... Same way a landlord pretty much insures his renters can make the payments. First and last months rent and a security deposit. If the renter can come up with that much money, he can normally be able to pay his rent. Horse****. Then why else would a landlord require that? They are vetting the renter and gathering a bit of insurance. Ugh, in the middle of evicting yet another "family" that thinks it's ok to stop paying rent on Oct 31, if you are planning on leaving anyway next summer.... Idiot sent me a text clearly stating "I will be giving you no more rent money"... I saved the text, he's screwed... Maybe he wants running water or mold abatement? How long does it take to evict now-a-days? Last I knew it was about 6 months. Sounds like the renter's timetable is just about right. His mistake was putting it in writing that he refuses to pay rent. The last tenant locked me out... Both are "death blows" to the renter in the State of CT. The sheriff thinks it will be less than three more months but I am more concerened with this one tearing the place apart and me winning 15 dollars a month for life from him while I have to rebuild the house again... I'm going to bet the "in writing" won't amount to anything. |
Barrack "Apologizes"
In article 2059192535406073617.937751bmckeenospam-
, says... iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 1:44:41 PM UTC-5, iBoaterer wrote: In article 1269338540406053481.559632bmckeenospam- , says... Same way a landlord pretty much insures his renters can make the payments. First and last months rent and a security deposit. If the renter can come up with that much money, he can normally be able to pay his rent. Horse****. Then why else would a landlord require that? To try to recoup at least some of the loss. They are vetting the renter and gathering a bit of insurance. Exactly, but it certainly doesn't mean that because the renter came up with the money for first, last and security that he's going to pay on time each month. It is one of the easiest ways to get someone who can pay. As to paying on time, you make the penalty hurt for being late. That way they only do it once. You charge them a small amount and they will be late a lot of the time. I guess you've never been the victim, I have after going to great lengths, credit check, employment check, references, first last security deposit... They pay three months worth, takes you a minimum of six months to get them out AFTER you start proceedings, so they live for 8 months on three months rent, then move on. |
Barrack "Apologizes"
In article , says...
On 11/13/2013 5:37 PM, Califbill wrote: iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 1:44:41 PM UTC-5, iBoaterer wrote: In article 1269338540406053481.559632bmckeenospam- , says... Same way a landlord pretty much insures his renters can make the payments. First and last months rent and a security deposit. If the renter can come up with that much money, he can normally be able to pay his rent. Horse****. Then why else would a landlord require that? To try to recoup at least some of the loss. They are vetting the renter and gathering a bit of insurance. Exactly, but it certainly doesn't mean that because the renter came up with the money for first, last and security that he's going to pay on time each month. It is one of the easiest ways to get someone who can pay. As to paying on time, you make the penalty hurt for being late. That way they only do it once. You charge them a small amount and they will be late a lot of the time. All of these scumbags come up with the first and last months rent.. Usually from an employer who has them under his thumb, then as soon as they move in, the start playing games... It's bull**** that landlords have to put up with it... Should be able to put the **** in the street, especially when you have it in writing the tenant is intentionally breaking the lease... You are correct on this. Been there, done that. |
Barrack "Apologizes"
|
Barrack "Apologizes"
|
Barrack "Apologizes"
On 11/13/2013 11:00 PM, True North wrote:
L'il Snot was quick enough to threaten to send a "full patch biker" after you, but lays down for a deadbeat who might cost him thousands of dollars. What's with that? Are you talking about our resident deadbeat? |
Barrack "Apologizes"
On 11/14/2013 9:16 AM, John H wrote:
On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 20:00:32 -0800 (PST), True North wrote: On Wednesday, 13 November 2013 22:44:15 UTC-4, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 11/13/13, 8:32 PM, wrote: snippage Too bad you don't know some outlaw bikers who could scare them away. He claims to know some "full patch" outlaw bikers. Of course, he also believes everything Rush, Sean, and Fox tell him. L'il Snot was quick enough to threaten to send a "full patch biker" after you, but lays down for a deadbeat who might cost him thousands of dollars. What's with that? Earlier you made a post regarding cameras that was actually nice to read. Now you seem to be pandering to Krause. Why? John H. -- Hope you're having a great day! Is it admiration or is it fear that keeps Donnie so close to Krausie's backside? |
Barrack "Apologizes"
On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 20:00:32 -0800 (PST), True North wrote:
On Wednesday, 13 November 2013 22:44:15 UTC-4, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 11/13/13, 8:32 PM, wrote: snippage Too bad you don't know some outlaw bikers who could scare them away. He claims to know some "full patch" outlaw bikers. Of course, he also believes everything Rush, Sean, and Fox tell him. L'il Snot was quick enough to threaten to send a "full patch biker" after you, but lays down for a deadbeat who might cost him thousands of dollars. What's with that? Earlier you made a post regarding cameras that was actually nice to read. Now you seem to be pandering to Krause. Why? John H. -- Hope you're having a great day! |
Barrack "Apologizes"
|
Barrack "Apologizes"
On Thursday, 14 November 2013 10:16:06 UTC-4, John H wrote:
On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 20:00:32 -0800 (PST), True North wrote: On Wednesday, 13 November 2013 22:44:15 UTC-4, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 11/13/13, 8:32 PM, wrote: snippage Too bad you don't know some outlaw bikers who could scare them away. He claims to know some "full patch" outlaw bikers. Of course, he also believes everything Rush, Sean, and Fox tell him. L'il Snot was quick enough to threaten to send a "full patch biker" after you, but lays down for a deadbeat who might cost him thousands of dollars. What's with that? Earlier you made a post regarding cameras that was actually nice to read. Now you seem to be pandering to Krause. Why? John H. -- Hope you're having a great day! Who's pandering? I'm just musing out loud about your little BFF's erratic behavior. Why are you so anti-social Johnny. |
Barrack "Apologizes"
On 11/14/2013 10:20 AM, True North wrote:
On Thursday, 14 November 2013 09:29:46 UTC-4, Hank© wrote: On 11/13/2013 11:00 PM, True North wrote: L'il Snot was quick enough to threaten to send a "full patch biker" after you, but lays down for a deadbeat who might cost him thousands of dollars. What's with that? Are you talking about our resident deadbeat? Of course...your one and only BFF, Scott Ingersoll...who else, silly? You're a funny little guy. It's obvious to everyone but you that Harry is the deadbeat in question. Haven't you read about all of his bankruptcies, foreclosures, and tax evasion incidents? |
Barrack "Apologizes"
On Thursday, 14 November 2013 09:29:46 UTC-4, Hank© wrote:
On 11/13/2013 11:00 PM, True North wrote: L'il Snot was quick enough to threaten to send a "full patch biker" after you, but lays down for a deadbeat who might cost him thousands of dollars. What's with that? Are you talking about our resident deadbeat? Of course...your one and only BFF, Scott Ingersoll...who else, silly? |
Barrack "Apologizes"
On Thursday, 14 November 2013 09:45:39 UTC-4, Hank© wrote:
On 11/14/2013 9:16 AM, John H wrote: On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 20:00:32 -0800 (PST), True North wrote: On Wednesday, 13 November 2013 22:44:15 UTC-4, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 11/13/13, 8:32 PM, wrote: snippage Too bad you don't know some outlaw bikers who could scare them away. He claims to know some "full patch" outlaw bikers. Of course, he also believes everything Rush, Sean, and Fox tell him. L'il Snot was quick enough to threaten to send a "full patch biker" after you, but lays down for a deadbeat who might cost him thousands of dollars. What's with that? Earlier you made a post regarding cameras that was actually nice to read. Now you seem to be pandering to Krause. Why? John H. -- Hope you're having a great day! Is it admiration or is it fear that keeps Donnie so close to Krausie's backside? Is that why you have your nose stuck in between so much...or do you just like the view? |
Barrack "Apologizes"
On Thu, 14 Nov 2013 07:18:56 -0800 (PST), True North wrote:
On Thursday, 14 November 2013 10:16:06 UTC-4, John H wrote: On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 20:00:32 -0800 (PST), True North wrote: On Wednesday, 13 November 2013 22:44:15 UTC-4, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 11/13/13, 8:32 PM, wrote: snippage Too bad you don't know some outlaw bikers who could scare them away. He claims to know some "full patch" outlaw bikers. Of course, he also believes everything Rush, Sean, and Fox tell him. L'il Snot was quick enough to threaten to send a "full patch biker" after you, but lays down for a deadbeat who might cost him thousands of dollars. What's with that? Earlier you made a post regarding cameras that was actually nice to read. Now you seem to be pandering to Krause. Why? John H. -- Hope you're having a great day! Who's pandering? I'm just musing out loud about your little BFF's erratic behavior. Why are you so anti-social Johnny. Perhaps the definition of pandering escapes you. 1pan·der intransitive verb \'pan-d?r\ : to do or provide what someone wants or demands even though it is not proper, good, or reasonable There was no intent to be anti-social. That's why I asked a question and used the phrase 'seem to be'. John H. -- Hope you're having a great day! |
Barrack "Apologizes"
On 11/14/13, 10:21 AM, True North wrote:
On Thursday, 14 November 2013 09:45:39 UTC-4, Hank© wrote: On 11/14/2013 9:16 AM, John H wrote: On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 20:00:32 -0800 (PST), True North wrote: On Wednesday, 13 November 2013 22:44:15 UTC-4, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 11/13/13, 8:32 PM, wrote: snippage Too bad you don't know some outlaw bikers who could scare them away. He claims to know some "full patch" outlaw bikers. Of course, he also believes everything Rush, Sean, and Fox tell him. L'il Snot was quick enough to threaten to send a "full patch biker" after you, but lays down for a deadbeat who might cost him thousands of dollars. What's with that? Earlier you made a post regarding cameras that was actually nice to read. Now you seem to be pandering to Krause. Why? John H. -- Hope you're having a great day! Is it admiration or is it fear that keeps Donnie so close to Krausie's backside? Is that why you have your nose stuck in between so much...or do you just like the view? FlaJim got a lot of practice sticking his nose up butts while he was in the navy and faking that he was doing whatever **** job was assigned to him. -- Religion: together we can find the cure. |
Barrack "Apologizes"
On 11/14/13, 11:19 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 14 Nov 2013 08:01:03 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... Yup... Tried references, everything... Keep getting total deadbeats. This time we are going to let an agency rent it out, or just sell it... Too bad you don't know some outlaw bikers who could scare them away. snerk There is a guy around here who has signs on poles all over town saying that if you have deadbeats you can't get to move, call him. I am not sure if it is a lawyer or a thug. Maybe one of PsychoSnotty's "full patch" buddies moved to your neck of the woods. -- Religion: together we can find the cure. |
Barrack "Apologizes"
|
Barrack "Apologizes"
|
Barrack "Apologizes"
iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says... On 11/13/2013 7:34 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 11/13/2013 6:58 PM, Charlemagne wrote: On 11/13/2013 6:36 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 11/13/2013 5:56 PM, Charlemagne wrote: All of these scumbags come up with the first and last months rent.. Usually from an employer who has them under his thumb, then as soon as they move in, the start playing games... It's bull**** that landlords have to put up with it... Should be able to put the **** in the street, especially when you have it in writing the tenant is intentionally breaking the lease... Sounds like you should consider selling the place and be done with it. Yeah, looking more and more like that now... Tried to hold off till the prices come back up some but not... the ****er is that we almost sold in 08 and would have doubled our money but we kept it so a "friend" could move his family in as a favor to them... They were the first of four that screwed us over so far.... Four in 5 years? Yup... Tried references, everything... Keep getting total deadbeats. This time we are going to let an agency rent it out, or just sell it... There are people that are professional squatters! I know what you are talking about. Had tenants that knew the laws very well, and used them to their advantage. Need a better court. Get with the local judges and work with them. At Lake Tahoe, California side, takes 30 days or less to evict. |
Barrack "Apologizes"
iBoaterer wrote:
In article 2059192535406073617.937751bmckeenospam- , says... iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 1:44:41 PM UTC-5, iBoaterer wrote: In article 1269338540406053481.559632bmckeenospam- , says... Same way a landlord pretty much insures his renters can make the payments. First and last months rent and a security deposit. If the renter can come up with that much money, he can normally be able to pay his rent. Horse****. Then why else would a landlord require that? To try to recoup at least some of the loss. They are vetting the renter and gathering a bit of insurance. Exactly, but it certainly doesn't mean that because the renter came up with the money for first, last and security that he's going to pay on time each month. It is one of the easiest ways to get someone who can pay. As to paying on time, you make the penalty hurt for being late. That way they only do it once. You charge them a small amount and they will be late a lot of the time. I guess you've never been the victim, I have after going to great lengths, credit check, employment check, references, first last security deposit... They pay three months worth, takes you a minimum of six months to get them out AFTER you start proceedings, so they live for 8 months on three months rent, then move on. I always thought that the landlord should charge them criminally under the defrauding the innkeeper statutes. |
Barrack "Apologizes"
Not to mention his delinquent credit card accounts.
|
Barrack "Apologizes"
In article 216674866406141698.116458bmckeenospam-
, says... iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 11/13/2013 7:34 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 11/13/2013 6:58 PM, Charlemagne wrote: On 11/13/2013 6:36 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 11/13/2013 5:56 PM, Charlemagne wrote: All of these scumbags come up with the first and last months rent.. Usually from an employer who has them under his thumb, then as soon as they move in, the start playing games... It's bull**** that landlords have to put up with it... Should be able to put the **** in the street, especially when you have it in writing the tenant is intentionally breaking the lease... Sounds like you should consider selling the place and be done with it. Yeah, looking more and more like that now... Tried to hold off till the prices come back up some but not... the ****er is that we almost sold in 08 and would have doubled our money but we kept it so a "friend" could move his family in as a favor to them... They were the first of four that screwed us over so far.... Four in 5 years? Yup... Tried references, everything... Keep getting total deadbeats. This time we are going to let an agency rent it out, or just sell it... There are people that are professional squatters! I know what you are talking about. Had tenants that knew the laws very well, and used them to their advantage. Need a better court. Get with the local judges and work with them. At Lake Tahoe, California side, takes 30 days or less to evict. Uh, we owned rental property in CA, and that is horse****. You must give the tenant a minimum of 30 to vacate once notified for failure to pay rent. The rub is, if they've even paid a PORTION, that changes. Once they don't vacate, you must file with the court. Service can take easily three months or more, and then they can simply avoid service by not answering the door. In some counties you even have to go through a court hearing before they'll serve. THEN the tenant is given an opportunity to respond. The tenant has to file in five days, but once he responds, another two months or so goes by until the court sets a court date. Then when that finally happens, and the court finds in the landlords favor, in another month or two, the tenant is served the notice to vacate. By this time you are in it for 6 or 8 months. |
Barrack "Apologizes"
In article 960762587406141607.865994bmckeenospam-
, says... iBoaterer wrote: In article 2059192535406073617.937751bmckeenospam- , says... iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 1:44:41 PM UTC-5, iBoaterer wrote: In article 1269338540406053481.559632bmckeenospam- , says... Same way a landlord pretty much insures his renters can make the payments. First and last months rent and a security deposit. If the renter can come up with that much money, he can normally be able to pay his rent. Horse****. Then why else would a landlord require that? To try to recoup at least some of the loss. They are vetting the renter and gathering a bit of insurance. Exactly, but it certainly doesn't mean that because the renter came up with the money for first, last and security that he's going to pay on time each month. It is one of the easiest ways to get someone who can pay. As to paying on time, you make the penalty hurt for being late. That way they only do it once. You charge them a small amount and they will be late a lot of the time. I guess you've never been the victim, I have after going to great lengths, credit check, employment check, references, first last security deposit... They pay three months worth, takes you a minimum of six months to get them out AFTER you start proceedings, so they live for 8 months on three months rent, then move on. I always thought that the landlord should charge them criminally under the defrauding the innkeeper statutes. Way back my uncle owned an apt. house in Florida, and he had trouble with renters not paying. A friend of his in the realty business said that because the apartments were one bedroom he could get a hotel license. Sure as hell, he had the rate notice behind the door and everything! He'd give people a week to come up with the money, if not he'd call the cops. They tightened that law a few years later, but he had sold it by then anyway. |
Barrack "Apologizes"
On 11/14/2013 2:12 PM, True North wrote:
Not to mention his delinquent credit card accounts. I hadn't heard about Harry's credit card problems. Do tell. |
Barrack "Apologizes"
On 11/14/13, 4:34 PM, Charlemagne wrote:
Just for the record, I never threatened to send anybody to see harry... I told a guy what harry called his daughter.. period. Just sayin' but we can't expect don to tell the truth anyway... Remember, he's the one who has said twice over the years he is coming to beat me up, and ran when he had the chance.... so...... Your entire post immediately above is...entirely bull****. The cops came to your house based upon specific threats you made. *They* took it seriously. -- Religion: together we can find the cure. |
Barrack "Apologizes"
That L'il Snot is such a natural born liar!
He just can't control himself. |
Barrack "Apologizes"
On 11/14/2013 4:37 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 11/14/13, 4:34 PM, Charlemagne wrote: Just for the record, I never threatened to send anybody to see harry... I told a guy what harry called his daughter.. period. Just sayin' but we can't expect don to tell the truth anyway... Remember, he's the one who has said twice over the years he is coming to beat me up, and ran when he had the chance.... so...... Your entire post immediately above is...entirely bull****. The cops came to your house based upon specific threats you made. *They* took it seriously. And how would you know that? What was your involvement? |
Barrack "Apologizes"
On Thu, 14 Nov 2013 13:40:57 -0800 (PST), True North wrote:
That L'il Snot is such a natural born liar! He just can't control himself. That is the kind of post one could call 'pandering'. They occur immediately after Krause makes a derogatory comment, and then you follow with one of your own - seeking his approval, I reckon. You are a much better man than that. John H. -- Hope you're having a great day! |
Barrack "Apologizes"
On Thursday, November 14, 2013 5:20:10 PM UTC-5, John H wrote:
On Thu, 14 Nov 2013 13:40:57 -0800 (PST), True North wrote: That L'il Snot is such a natural born liar! He just can't control himself. That is the kind of post one could call 'pandering'. They occur immediately after Krause makes a derogatory comment, and then you follow with one of your own - seeking his approval, I reckon. You are a much better man than that. They strike me as a Yogi Bear and Boo-Boo act. And always wanting the free pic-a-nic basket. :- |
Barrack "Apologizes"
True North wrote:
On Thursday, 14 November 2013 10:16:06 UTC-4, John H wrote: On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 20:00:32 -0800 (PST), True North wrote: On Wednesday, 13 November 2013 22:44:15 UTC-4, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 11/13/13, 8:32 PM, wrote: snippage Too bad you don't know some outlaw bikers who could scare them away. He claims to know some "full patch" outlaw bikers. Of course, he also believes everything Rush, Sean, and Fox tell him. L'il Snot was quick enough to threaten to send a "full patch biker" after you, but lays down for a deadbeat who might cost him thousands of dollars. What's with that? Earlier you made a post regarding cameras that was actually nice to read. Now you seem to be pandering to Krause. Why? John H. -- Hope you're having a great day! Who's pandering? I'm just musing out loud about your little BFF's erratic behavior. Why are you so anti-social Johnny. Does your Playbook only allow one question mark per post now that Blackberry is on death's door? |
Barrack "Apologizes"
True North wrote:
On Thursday, 14 November 2013 09:29:46 UTC-4, Hank© wrote: On 11/13/2013 11:00 PM, True North wrote: L'il Snot was quick enough to threaten to send a "full patch biker" after you, but lays down for a deadbeat who might cost him thousands of dollars. What's with that? Are you talking about our resident deadbeat? Of course...your one and only BFF, Scott Ingersoll...who else, silly? Do you think he is in deeper than Harry? |
Barrack "Apologizes"
True North wrote:
Not to mention his delinquent credit card accounts. Harry's late on CC payments, too? What next - his rent? |
Barrack "Apologizes"
John H wrote:
On Thu, 14 Nov 2013 13:40:57 -0800 (PST), True North wrote: That L'il Snot is such a natural born liar! He just can't control himself. That is the kind of post one could call 'pandering'. They occur immediately after Krause makes a derogatory comment, and then you follow with one of your own - seeking his approval, I reckon. You are a much better man than that. John H. -- Hope you're having a great day! Probably you are in error about his character. |
Barrack "Apologizes"
iBoaterer wrote:
In article 216674866406141698.116458bmckeenospam- , says... iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 11/13/2013 7:34 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 11/13/2013 6:58 PM, Charlemagne wrote: On 11/13/2013 6:36 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 11/13/2013 5:56 PM, Charlemagne wrote: All of these scumbags come up with the first and last months rent.. Usually from an employer who has them under his thumb, then as soon as they move in, the start playing games... It's bull**** that landlords have to put up with it... Should be able to put the **** in the street, especially when you have it in writing the tenant is intentionally breaking the lease... Sounds like you should consider selling the place and be done with it. Yeah, looking more and more like that now... Tried to hold off till the prices come back up some but not... the ****er is that we almost sold in 08 and would have doubled our money but we kept it so a "friend" could move his family in as a favor to them... They were the first of four that screwed us over so far.... Four in 5 years? Yup... Tried references, everything... Keep getting total deadbeats. This time we are going to let an agency rent it out, or just sell it... There are people that are professional squatters! I know what you are talking about. Had tenants that knew the laws very well, and used them to their advantage. Need a better court. Get with the local judges and work with them. At Lake Tahoe, California side, takes 30 days or less to evict. Uh, we owned rental property in CA, and that is horse****. You must give the tenant a minimum of 30 to vacate once notified for failure to pay rent. The rub is, if they've even paid a PORTION, that changes. Once they don't vacate, you must file with the court. Service can take easily three months or more, and then they can simply avoid service by not answering the door. In some counties you even have to go through a court hearing before they'll serve. THEN the tenant is given an opportunity to respond. The tenant has to file in five days, but once he responds, another two months or so goes by until the court sets a court date. Then when that finally happens, and the court finds in the landlords favor, in another month or two, the tenant is served the notice to vacate. By this time you are in it for 6 or 8 months. Not at Tahoe. The judge there hates deadbeats. Puts the case on the fast track! |
Barrack "Apologizes"
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:25 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com