Hat-tip to reader Mike for pointing out the telling exchanges in the comments section of ‘Renters rally to protect rights against unfair evictions’, Vancouver Sun, 7 May 2011.
The article deals with the plight of tenants facing ‘renovictions’, “a tactic in which landlords attempt to kick out renters under the guise of renovating the suites before substantially raising the rents.”
The comments reveal much about landlord investment mentality. And MikeD5 produces excellent retorts:
anon873211976 7 May 6:40pm - “This is crazy….Remember your a “RENTER” your not an “OWNER”. There should be a simple rule of a maximum of 6 months notice of eviction, regardless of the reason. There, now throw all the rest of the eviction paper work in the garbage….Its no wonder investors wont build new rental buildings, their simply too much trouble…”
anon309334271 7 May 7:01pm – “This idea of entitlement that seems to be sweeping across the current generation. Renters are NOT owners. I believe that an owner should be allowed to do whatever they want to with their property, as long as they do not violate the lease agreement.”
NEXTLINK 7 May 11:25pm – “At one time I had the opportunity to rent my home out… The tenants were a nightmare! The first check was good…. after that it was constant “running after them for the rent” I have no pity …. The tenants didn’t risk their savings to buy a home… they didn’t spend weeks if not months making my home livable.”
anon873211976 7 May 11:49pm – “All renters do not deserve the excessive rights the governments have handed to them on a silver platter.
Any owner of any type of building with with renters, should have complete control over his or hers substantial investment.
Having the government regulate the rules, is simply manipulation of the economy, and makes everything more expensive for owners and renters. [see CMHC -ed.]The most difficult thing for any building owner is to find “good, quality, responsible customers”
And renters can move any time they like….. and not have too pay rent, this is so one sided and flaky, i am amazed the courts even recognize the these one sided, so called regulations..”
anon801396618 8 May 12:18am – “I’m always amused when all these “Left” wingers (NDP & federal Liberals) cry because they want to rent in one of the world’s most sought after cities (Kits & dt Vancouver) BUT they want rents at 1970′s levels. If you want to live here, pay the freight baby ! These same “Lefty’s” are the first to invite the world to move to Vancouver, AND the first to scream when demand causes rents to increase. Grow a brain people.”
taxslave 8 May 11:22am – “Renters have right and landlords have bills. That is why there is so little rental housing available.”
realitbites 8 May 12:30pm – “I have seen first hand what happens when a landlord tries to be a nice guy and tries to fix up his suites without evictions: the tenants b1tch and moan about paint fumes and inconvenience, and some of them bail out on rent leaving the landlord screwed. So all you can really do is sit back and watch your suites slowly get trashed because renters want it both ways. Sorry folks, if you want to be secure, get an f’ing mortgage like the rest of us and shut the f up.”
anon498382070 8 may 1:20pm – “Maybe a little math will help. A building sells for say, $250,000 per suite. Rentals cost more to finance than owner-occupied homes, conservatively assume 6%. Principal & interest cost on $250,000 amortised over 35 years is $1,414 per month.
That’s 40% more than what the Brattens pay for rent. The landlord also has property taxes, management costs, repair & maintenance costs, periodic replacement of roofs, carpets, stoves, fridges, insurance & vacancy/credit loss.
Landlord are not a public service. We aren’t a small segment of society cursed with the obligation to provide subsidized housing to tenants. Landlords deserve a return on their investment.
I value the business of my tenants and strive to provide them good quality accommodation. But I don’t want to subsidize them.”
[Maybe a little math would help: The sales price of the suite is 2-3 times over fair value. Try the figures with a sales price of $100K and you'll see the rent makes sense. -ed.]
MikeD5 8 May 1:46pm – “If you can’t get the yields, than why do you stay in the business? There are a million other alternative investments.
Lots of landlords in this city accept low yields because they are speculating on property values. Fine than, but tenants aren’t going to pay for those increased values.
Also, vacancies are now 2% in Vancouver and 7% out in the Fraser Valley. There are actually far more apartments available than a few years ago, so even if the marker was totally unrestricted you wouldn’t get the yields you desire.
If you don’t like it, sell and invest in something else. If you like the property appreciation, deal with the low yields and shut up.”
[Brilliantly put. 'Mike', is that you? -ed.]
anon498382070 8 May 2:25pm -
“2 BR suite, theatre district NYC – $5,500 per month $Cnd
2 BR flat, London England – $6,847 per month $Cnd
550 sqft flat in Tokyo – 1BR, $2,641 per month $Cnd
Kitsilano 1 BR suite, new rent $1,075 $Cnd. Sounds like a deal to live in one of the most expensive areas, of one of the most expensive cities in the world. What are they complaining about?”
[ROTFLMAO regarding comparing Kits with those sites. 'Expensive' in price, not value, right? Market rents come closest to reflecting the actual value of a domicile. -ed.]
anon498382070 8 may 2:41pm – “There is a world of difference between low yield & negative yield. A negative yield is called a subsidy. If renters as a group need subsidy, by what logic does it fall to one small segment of society, landlords, to provide it?”
phreek11 8 May 3:05pm – “BC is already a HORRIBLE place to be a landlord, which is why so many foreign investors buy property and leave it vacant for many years and just rely on increase in value, rather than monthly income.”
TM7 8 may 5:05pm – “I have over the years seen so many landlords taken advantage of due to the Landlord Tenancy Act. Renters have all the rights, landlords have none. The ironic part of that is the fact that the person who owns the home, paid for the home, pays the taxes on the home, pays for all the repairs on the home, has zero rights.”
MikeD5 8 May 5:14pm – “When a unit vacates, a landlord can charge any rent they want for a new tenant. Despite that, even when they can charge any rent they want, rents are way way way below any kind of decent investment yield. This has NOTHING to do with rent controls or subsidizing tenants.
The facts are the prices of real estate are extremely out-of-line with fundamentals. You buy these days and you’re only buying to speculate. Anyone who buys Vancouver real estate for yield is totally out of their mind, and this has nothing to do with tenants.”
[Yes, this clearly is 'Mike'. -ed.]
anon498382070 9 May 1:23am – “MikeD you are wrong, this has everything to do with subsidizing tenants. Contrary to your view that real estate values are overpriced, when property changes hands between willing sellers & willing buyers – That establishes the value.
You’re saying that one who chooses to buy their accommodation must pay all costs associated with its occupancy, but a renter ought to pay only a fraction of the real costs that ownership of the property presents to the landlord. There’s no logic in that. If you want to live in a million dollar property, you’ll have to pay the costs associated with acquiring & operating million dollar properties – whether you own it or rent it. Renting should cost more because the landlord deserves a return on his investment & risk.
Can you think of any other business wherein you’d think it reasonable that the business sell it’s product at less than the cost of acquiring the product?
Why should landlords be singled out to provide subsidy to tenants?”
MikeD5 9 May 2:49am – “”landlord deserves a return on his investment & risk.”
That, my friend, is entitlement in a nutshell.
Million dollar houses are offered for rent for under $2500/month all the time in Vancouver. Check Craigslist, its quite common. One ad has a renovated 4 bdrm house in MacKenzie Heights renting for 2200/month. No government is setting that rent. The landlord is asking the market price if a tenant agrees to the rent.
You aren’t going to get Manhattan rents without Manhattan wages.”
pineal g. 8 May 7:54pm – “Good landlords who observe the tenancy act and behave in good faith have nothing to fear if this legislation is passed.”
LuckySlevin 8 May 4:32pm – “I am so tired of hearing landlords whining about how hard and costly it is to maintain their rental properties. How about you all go and find REAL jobs, because flipping properties is not an actual job.”
MarshallYVR 7 May 10:06pm – “There’s a crisis of affordable housing in Vancouver. People of my generation can no longer afford to buy. Yet they have no security in renting, either. Landlords should not be able to evict perfectly good tenants just because they want more money.”