Posted on 11/26/2011 6:24:37 AM PST by 1010RD
But, to clarify, I would not move into a place with children. See the reasons stated above.
And, I will never buy a condo. You have no control over your neighbors nor their spawn.
I remember about 40 years ago a new building was built at #33 K st. N.W. Washington DC.
The building was to be for older people who needed housing and children were not to be allowed there.
Well it opened and sure enough before long Grandaughters moved in with Grandma and brought her kids along. Before long the trash chutes were being set afire, the light bulbs started disappearing in the halls ( people were stealing them to put them in their apartments),someone started peeing on the elevator buttons and in the stairwells< It was at least once a week getting people out of the elevators who were trapped there.
In one case a kid was killed while riding atop the elevator and using the manual elevator controls there to scare the old folks, He got caught between the elevator and the counter weight. After ten years the place needed rebuilding.
After 3 rebuilds they have torn it down. You wonder whay landlords don’t want kids?
Speaking of inappropriate occurrences, I was affected by a situation involving a 1982 Firebird. The dealer contacted me with the offer of replacing a mechanical component free of charge as long as a male drove the car in. I, too, had a lot going on at that time and had no time for dating. Needless to say, no replacement.
I agree with what you wrote. It is hard to explain but it was like someone was shaking their finger in my 21 year old face telling me not to get pregnant. It just felt wrong. I thought it might be illegal but I was up against a corporation and their lawyers so who was I to question.
And after looking for several weeks for a safe, convenient, affordable place, this was the only place we could move. I was earning about $13,000 as a new hire flight attendant and I think the place was $750 a month to be divided between me and and roommate.
Now, I feel the landlord should have the right to choose their tenants. I do think that situation could have been handled better with mothers and mothers-to-be. The apartment complex had other family friendly properties could have steered the families there. There could have been a strict noise rule and a very large deposit which would deter many single parents.
A few years ago, hubby and I had considered buying rentals but this situation has come up with children running amok and single mothers and we decided against it. I absolutely think that a property owner should have the right to decide who will be the renter.
Children damage the heck out of property, so if the parents don’t mind leaving a deposit of a couple of thousand extra to cover all the damage when they go there should be no issue.
If you have to replace carpet, fix and paint damaged walls after the kids are gone is it discrimination to have a good enough deposit to cover that? I think not.
Same think for new 18 year old types with money but no life experiance. Usually the time they move in is the last time that place will have an attempt at being cleaned till they move out. If they have pets there will be major carpet replacement. That’s the way it goes.
Or at least No Children Hours....like after 8pm or something? Which USED to be the norm.
Not sure what to make of your post so I will just quote George Costanza.
“Well, the jerk store called, and they are running out of you.”
I rent to families with children, but I have a clause in the lease that allows me to beat them.
I like the stores that have the sign that says,
‘Unaccompanied children will be given an espresso and a free puppy.’
No laws, just common sense renting.....
Nowadays in NJ it seems a lot of the most recent constructions are condos; whole towns have no interest in strangling their homeowners with the costs of schools (our teachers unions are infamous for the costs they burden us with), so they build the least-family friendly housing possible. Even though I have a family, I completely understand the position they’re in.
We flat out refused to rent to people with children. Why?
Answer: Lead based paint! And....We simply did not know the building history of the building. Was there asbestos in the plaster? Mercury anywhere? Had there been any chemical dumps in the backyard? There very likely was lead in the soil around the house. Gee! If the White House has soil contaminated with lead based paint, chances are that our house had a similar problem.
They will pretty much take care of my rental about the same as the take care of the inside of their car.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Good point!
If you lived in one unit of a duplex you owned, you are exempt from anti-discrimination laws. This is also true for a four-plex.
It was hard on my elderly landlady who lived downstairs when our baby began to run around. We tried to have rugs and keep quiet hours, but still...
OTOH, it was hard on me when she cooked asparagus soup and broccoli casserole for hours...when I was pregnant...and the odors came up through the floor and mingled with her cigarette smoke.
Units that are rented to people with kids normally have a lot more to fix once they move out.They spill stuff ruining carpets they write on walls they take chunks out of the exposed corners when running with toys,I know many people who have silt larger homes into one bedroom units to avoid having to take more than one child.
Not sure what to make of your post so I will just quote George Costanza.
Well, the jerk store called, and they are running out of you.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Actually the post makes a lot of sense. (Whether the circumstance was right or wrong).
It wasn’t all that long ago that the ‘lady of the house’ couldn’t sign for a driveway being resurfaced, plumbing work, buying insurance etc etc....the statement was “I will come back when your husband is home and you BOTH can sign the contract”. - Before you say it - if ONLY the husband signed the contract, business would continue.
And I am talking of the 70/80/90’s era.
Of course that ‘policy’ changed when hubby started saying ‘Hey, she is paying for it, I am not signing’, then the common sense thing to do was go with the flow and adjust to situations - or go out of business.
Which is the same tack they should have used with smoking in public places. If the business starts losing a lot of money because they allow smoking, they will change on their own rather than shut the door....common sense....
I’m listening.
Ok. I see your point. But I think it was HUD that stepped into the picture and made them stop presenting the document for signature. When we went to renew our lease a year after I signed the ‘no children’ agreement, that document was gone.
And sorry to be testy. I got no sleep last night and still feel terrible.
In my state there are regular visits to renting apartments by government monitors who will take one to court over discrimination. One must tread very carefully.
If you lived in one unit of a duplex you owned, you are exempt from anti-discrimination laws. This is also true for a four-plex.
_________________
That isnt true in my state.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.