this post was submitted on 20 Feb 2024
511 points (97.1% liked)

politics

19107 readers
3431 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Chriswild@lemmy.world 17 points 9 months ago (4 children)

Wait why wouldn't they? People piss and shit and if you damage a rental with it, you're billed for it. I feel like you're very angry about a problem you made up.

[–] evatronic@lemm.ee 9 points 9 months ago

Landlords, of course, can sue for damages, but it's almost always in small claims court, and the former tenant is almost always "judgement proof" -- no real assets and no real wages to garnish. These same individuals are often the sort of tenant who allows their pets to destroy a home, let cat urine soak into the floor boards, and so on.

Not everyone, of course. and in fact, probably a very small minority of tenants, but it only takes one terrible tenant to utterly destroy a home.

[–] EtherWhack@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I wouldn't say made up.

I think they are referring to the times when the cost of damages (think a pet hoarder) outweigh what the deposit would normally cover. Rather than taking the previous tenant to court (if even possible) to pay for the excess, some landlords will just slap on fresh coat of paint to appeal to the eyes and ignore everything else that need to be done.

With cat urine for instance, you may be able to hide the smell temporarily, but unless you replace the carpet/flooring, add an odor blocking primer to other stained permanent surfaces, replace odor-impregnated things like cabinetry or sheet rock, the smell will just keep coming back. It can sometimes be about as bad, cost-wise, as flood/mold remediation.

[–] groupofcrows@lemmy.ca 3 points 9 months ago

My friends' mother had several cats and she did not take care of any place she lived in. When visiting her there was a separation of the outside air and inside air which was more "dense", and had a smell which took a few minutes to adjust to. Her rent did not cover the damages she caused; mold, stains, rot if she lived there long enough.

[–] MSids@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

It's actually a bit risky to keep a deposit. If the tenant says you've done so unjustly, and a court agrees, the LL can be sued for triple what they kept. I have an owner occupied two unit and it would really need to be a lot of damage with evidence of intent or negligence. Why risk keeping a deposit and then being sued for triple while still having to carry out repairs caused by a careless tenant or their animal.

My place doesn't make me any money, it's a loss every year, but at least I'm building equity right?

[–] OpenPassageways@lemmy.zip -4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Have you ever known anyone who tried to rent out their place? My understanding is that it's near impossible to keep someone's security deposit when they damage your place, if they choose to fight you on it. I very much doubt that non-corporate landlords would be able to successfully collect damages from a renter with pets who trashed the place. This move will absolutely hurt individual landlords in favor of the corporate landlords that can afford lawyers.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Boo hoo. I'll definitely cry for the land leeches. Maybe they can get a job.

[–] OpenPassageways@lemmy.zip -1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Sounds like you're simping for corporate landlords.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Nope. All land leeches are leeches. To quote Adam "The Father of Capitalism" Smith:

"the landlords love to reap where they never sowed and demand a rent even for its natural produce.”