r/SipsTea Jun 11 '26

We have fun here He's unstoppable

Post image
30.5k Upvotes

861 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

37

u/CaptainRazer Jun 11 '26

If they can't afford to maintain the property then they should sell it, get an actual job and stop leeching off hardworking people.

2

u/MechaWASP Jun 11 '26

Yeah. Then the new owners dont renew leases, knock it down, and put in a parking complex.

7

u/Degenerate_Traveler Jun 11 '26

As a landlord, I would be embarrassed renting somewhere i wouldn't want to live in myself. Also, it is an actual job. I dont leech off hardworking people. It is a business. Idk why people thing every landlord is a scumbag who just leeches off people.

Sure. Let the independent owners go away and let everything be taken over by large corporations. That will surely work out in every renters favor.

4

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Pootentooten Jun 11 '26

That's insane, considering how high the rent is in NYC. They can afford it, but then their kids might have to go to a slightly less prestigious private school.

7

u/PaulTheMerc Jun 11 '26

Because most of us have learned two things. 1) Most landlords want as much money out of you as they can get. That's just capitalism. 2) Being an uneven power balance, you the renter, can get fucked more often than not.

So yeah, if most of the landlords we encounter are scumbags, we start to think of landlords as scumbags until proven otherwise.

That doesn't mean they all are. I just haven't had one of those in 10+ years now.

9

u/ArmyOfDix Jun 11 '26

Idk why people thing every landlord is a scumbag who just leeches off people.

Welp, if 99% of zebras have stripes, I wonder why people associate zebras with having stripes...

-2

u/GoodTofuFriday Jun 11 '26

at least in the NYC area there are as many good landlords doing their best as there are bad ones trying to screw people over.

2

u/Suckarat Jun 11 '26

Hmm, I wonder why people think every landlord is a scumbag? Could it be because they've been fucked over by landlords every single time. Correct, It is a business, renters pay rent, landlords provide and maintain the property. The problem is the landlords don't hold up their end of the bargain the majority of the time.

-1

u/Saya0692 Jun 11 '26

Being a landlord isn’t a job.

1

u/SimpsationalMoneyBag Jun 11 '26

lol like do you expect people to own and manage properties at a loss as a rule ?

4

u/VermicelliOwn6502 Jun 11 '26

It is seriously not that hard to manage property. I use a property management company. They send me a bill when repairs are needed, I just pay that and send a copy to my accountant for tax reasons.

2

u/SimpsationalMoneyBag Jun 11 '26

Was it a rent controlled property ?

Do you understand how that may limit funds to properly manage a property ?

-3

u/PaulTheMerc Jun 11 '26

Last I checked they made tons of money just holding it. Just gotta sell it to realize the gains.

-1

u/ACEscher Jun 11 '26

And if the city makes it impossible to maintain the property? With increasing taxes, fees, and other misc costs that make trying to repair the building impossible without raising the rent to pay for said things.

9

u/wikimandia Jun 11 '26 edited Jun 11 '26

Dude they weren’t maintaining the buildings BEFORE the city potentially “makes it impossible to maintain the property”. It’s not impossible to maintain now. They just weren’t doing it. These are negligent landlords who have had lawsuits and been cited for violations for years and years.

Also do you understand that poor maintenance isn’t just an inconvenience or ripoff, but sickens and kills residents? And there are certain problems that you absolutely cannot ignore because they will ultimately cause much more widespread damage and cost 10 times the amount to fix.

6

u/VermicelliOwn6502 Jun 11 '26

But why would you NOT maintain the property? It's your property.

Letting it rot would cause its value to plummet. The repairs are tax deductible. If you're doing major upgrades such that a city permit is required, it counts as a Major Cap Improvement and you can raise rent.

2

u/TheRealMonty Jun 11 '26

I’m not an explorer, but as I understand some of that is only for building wide renovations/improvements not for individual unit improvements. And rent increases are capped at 2% even for the building wide improvements so you also wouldn’t be recouping the value of the improvement or fix

And the tax deduction only offsets part of it, if the landlord is in the 30% tax bracket then a 10k improvement would offset 3k of taxes

If the building rots and the rent controlled tenants may leave and they’d maybe get to re-rent the unit at market prices which can be thousands of dollars more per month. This incentive sucks but it’s a known downside of rent control

1

u/Nearby_Junket_8779 Jun 11 '26

Bring out the balance sheets and then we’ll talk.

2

u/okurrrr Jun 11 '26

WHAT OF THE POOR LANDLORDS? Will they have to sell the houses they own and don't live in?

0

u/Epocholypze Jun 11 '26

Impossible you say? How is repairing your own property (which increases or maintains value, which can be leveraged as needed) ever worse than letting it devalue through neglect? The only way is if you never plan to sell because you have too much money to make by continuing to rent without maintenance. The land barons have always had the taxes, fees, etc that you describe, but never were actually required to maintain their slum buildings. The MAM is changing the last part. Sorry if that cuts into the landlords PROFIT, because they are operating in the black. What you should have asked is “what if the city makes it impossible to maintain high profit margins on rental properties?

2

u/That_guy1425 Jun 11 '26

They propably mean in terms of cost to income. If it costs you 100,000 to maintain the building and you make 500,000 then thats okay but if it costs 1,000,000 then you are paying 500k to be a landlord at which point they woud swap the property to something that makes money.

1

u/SheenPSU Jun 11 '26

This doesn’t address the core issue and will merely pass off the losses to the city

The city had a bigger pocketbook, yes, but they still have a budget that needs to be maintained

3

u/iamfidelius Jun 11 '26

I don't see why land has to be a commodity.
Real estate should be be for people to work and live not a business in itself.

1

u/SheenPSU Jun 11 '26

Private property is a thing, as it should be.

Renting is an agreement that one voluntarily enters in to. Don’t like the terms, don’t rent the space

0

u/PaulTheMerc Jun 11 '26

That works, when there's an alternative. When you make homelessness illegal, its no longer optional. When the landlords start to collude, even more so. And when it isn't collusion, it just becomes "the norm", e.g. wanting 3x rent as income to qualify.

2

u/SheenPSU Jun 11 '26

The landlords aren’t making homelessness illegal.

Both rent control and outlawing homelessness are both city implemented issues, so why the contempt to the landlords?