Categories
Maintenance & Repairs

Mold remediation infographic

Here is a link to a mold remediation infographic published by American Apartment Owners Association.  It contains some practical ideas and may be a good future reference.

 

Categories
Filling Vacancies Leases & Rental Agreements Tenant Screening

Follow-up question on application fees

The follow-up question:

Thanks Tim,
Can we charge a “general ” application fee to the prospective tenant to cover our office costs to process an application and keep the fee? Other people are doing it. How?
No, the law is clear on this.  If you do not accept the tenant, then all the money collected except for the actual amount you paid for a national bureau credit report, must be refunded.
 
If people are charging a non-refundable application fee in excess of what they paid for a credit report or more than $20, they are in violation of ATCP 134.05 (2)  Some owners try to be clever by calling the earnest money by some other name.  That fails.(See the legal definition of Earnest Money below)
 

However, if the prospective tenant fails to pay the balance and move in, you may retain the earnest money to cover and costs and lost rents you incurred due to their failure to take possession. In fact the prospective tenant could owe a lot more than the earnest deposit. See ATCP 134.05(3)(b) below.

 
Earnest Money is legally defined as:
 
ATCP 134.02 (3) ”Earnest money deposit” means the total of any payments or deposits, however denominated or described, given by a prospective tenant to a landlord in return for the option of entering into a rental agreement in the future, or for having a rental agreement considered by a landlord. “Earnest money deposit” does not include a fee which a landlord charges for a credit check in compliance with s. ATCP 134.05 (3).
The requirements to refund the earnest deposit if the tenant withdraws the app or the landlord rejects the app either explicitly or by nonaction:
 
ATCP 134.05 (2) Refunding or crediting an earnest money deposit.
(a) A landlord who receives an earnest money deposit from a rental applicant shall send the full deposit to the applicant by first-class mail, or shall deliver the full deposit to the applicant, by the end of the next business day after any of the following occurs:
1. The landlord rejects the rental application or refuses to enter into a rental agreement with the applicant.
2. The applicant withdraws the rental application before the landlord accepts that application.
3. The landlord fails to approve the rental application by the end of the third business day after the landlord accepts the applicant’s earnest money deposit, or by a later date to which the tenant agrees in writing. The later date may not be more than 21 calendar days after the landlord accepts the earnest money deposit.
 

Law permitting witholding of Earnet Money for failure to take possession:

 

ATCP 134.05 (3) Withholding an earnest money deposit.

(a) A landlord may withhold from a properly accepted earnest money deposit if the prospective tenant fails to enter into a rental agreement after being approved for tenancy, unless the landlord has significantly altered the rental terms previously disclosed to the tenant.

(b) A landlord may withhold from an earnest money deposit, under par. (a), an amount sufficient to compensate the landlord for actual costs and damages incurred because of the prospective tenant’s failure to enter into a rental agreement. The landlord may not withhold for lost rents unless the landlord has made a reasonable effort to mitigate those losses, as provided under s. 704.29, Stats.

 
Categories
Filling Vacancies Tenant Screening

Can I charge a rental application fee?

A reader asks

[C]an I charge a flat application fee ( $20-25) to prospective tenants that includes the cost of the checking them out, labor etc. in our office, this may not include a credit check. Do I have to give it back if I don’t accept them?

No, you can only charge the actual amount you paid for a national credit bureau report.  Any amount collected above the cost of the credit report must be refunded if the tenant is rejected or applied to the amounts they owe if they are accepted.

For us the cost of the report in minimal (less than ten bucks) and the requirement of the law to provide a copy of the report to the applicant violates our terms of use with the bureau we use, so we do not charge a fee.

We do require a $50 deposit to hold the unit while it is being processed.  If the tenant is accepted the money is applied to their move in money.  If the tenant is rejected, the $50 money order is returned to them.  If they are accepted, but then fail to take the unit and we lose rent because of this, the earnest money is used to offset part of the lost rent they owe under ATCP 134.05 (3).

The law:

ATCP 134.05 (4) Credit check fee.
(a) Except as provided under par. (b), a landlord may require a prospective tenant to pay the landlord’s actual cost, up to $20, to obtain a consumer credit report on the prospective tenant from a consumer reporting agency that compiles and maintains files on consumers on a nationwide basis. The landlord shall notify the prospective tenant of the charge before requesting the consumer credit report, and shall provide the prospective tenant with a copy of the report.
(b) A landlord may not require a prospective tenant to pay for a consumer credit report under par. (a) if, before the landlord requests a consumer credit report, the prospective tenant provides the landlord with a consumer credit report, from a consumer credit reporting agency that compiles and maintains files on consumers on a nationwide basis that is less than 30 days old.

Note: Paragraph (b) does not prohibit a landlord from obtaining a more current consumer credit check at the landlord’s expense.

ATCP 134.05 (3) Withholding an earnest money deposit.

(a) A landlord may withhold from a properly accepted earnest money deposit if the prospective tenant fails to enter into a rental agreement after being approved for tenancy, unless the landlord has significantly altered the rental terms previously disclosed to the tenant.

(b) A landlord may withhold from an earnest money deposit, under par. (a), an amount sufficient to compensate the landlord for actual costs and damages incurred because of the prospective tenant’s failure to enter into a rental agreement. The landlord may not withhold for lost rents unless the landlord has made a reasonable effort to mitigate those losses, as provided under s. 704.29, Stats.

Note: See Pierce v. Norwick, 202 Wis. 2d 588 (1996), regarding the award of damage claims for failure to comply with provisions of this chapter related to security deposits. The same method of computing a tenant’s damages may apply to violations related to earnest money deposits.
Categories
Apartment Association Code Enforcement Government Behaving Badly Housing policies Housing Stats Maintenance & Repairs Milwaukee Our industry Property Taxes

Journal’s “Landlord Games” and the LLC Taskforce

Recently the Milwaukee Journal ran a series “Landlord Games” that inaccurately portrayed LLCs as being used simply to avoiding paying property taxes and fines.  The result is the Milwaukee Common Council is creating a committee to study LLCs and rental housing. Text of proposal. The rental industry is again, noticeably absent from those invited to the table.

View as formatted pdf with footnotes

Let’s agree that all property owners pay a cost when someone fails to pay their taxes or their property is foreclosed and abandoned.

The Apartment Association does not support bad actors. None of those owners featured in the Journal article are members of the Association.

Rather we see the importance of the city, and private investors working together to make rental housing, and therefore neighborhoods, succeed for the mutual good of both.

Rental housing is an important and integral element of Milwaukee. About 58% of the residents of Milwaukee are tenants. In some neighborhoods, such as 53233 the number of renters exceeds 97%. The success or failure of neighborhoods and rental housing are closely tied.

Rental Housing is the largest small business in Milwaukee with over $7 billion invested in Milwaukee. (MPROP assessor records October 2015) Rental properties account for well over a half billion dollars a year of economic impact, starting with $190 million in property taxes, sewer and water charges, maintenance, insurance and everything else that goes into running rental housing. The Census Bureau found the yearly median operating costs per unit for multifamily rental properties vary between $3,600 per unit for small properties and $5,170 per unit for large properties, adjusted to 2016 dollars. These numbers exclude interest and mortgage servicing.

Providing rental housing in older, poorer neighborhoods is difficult, challenging and unappreciated work. Many have failed, some are opportunists or worse, but the majority were simply overwhelmed financially and mentally by the task at hand.

Owners are impacted by the financial and social problems of their tenants, the high costs of maintenance and lack of capital to address those problems. It is not the owner’s lifestyle that contributes to insect infestations or broken windows, yet it is the owner and not the occupant that is accountable both financially and recently in the media.

Not only do private owners suffer these burdens. One only needs to look at the long history of failure among Milwaukee’s nonprofit housing providers. (see excerpt below) These groups had every advantage over the small private investor. They had significant financial resources, typically through Block Grant and other government funding and grants; they had well-paid and well-educated staff; they often obtaining properties without costs, and they had access to the best tenants on Rent Assistance. Nearly all of Milwaukee’s nonprofit housing providers failed financially.

These groups had every advantage over the small private investor. They had significant financial resources, typically through Block Grant and other government funding and grants; they had well-paid and well-educated staff; they often obtaining properties without costs, and they had access to the best tenants on Rent Assistance. Nearly all of Milwaukee’s nonprofit housing providers failed financially.

Or one could look at the Milwaukee’s Housing Authority budget to see the costs they incur housing low-income Milwaukeeans. Here too is an organization that gets Rent Assistance tenants, tenants who risk losing their housing subsidy if they fail to comply with the rules or pay their rent. HACM does not rent to the populations with bad histories, leaving the segment most in need of housing to the private sector.

Milwaukee should strive to encourage a successful private rental housing market in this once great city, but since the mid-1980s’ the city adopted a culture of hatred towards private rental owners. That has not produced positive results, but instead, discourages the right people from participating.

If Milwaukee rental housing became more sustainable, where people willing to invest their time and money were to make reasonable profits, it would be harder for the few charlatans to exist because of increased competition for available properties. An added benefit is more interest in investing in Milwaukee’s rental housing will result in an increase in values and therefore an increase in the tax base.

Alderman Witkowski, who is the co-author of this proposal, created a Local Business Action Team to help small business succeed. Rental housing is the largest segment of small business within the city and one that may have the greatest impact on the well-being of the city. With our half billion dollars a year of economic impact, a similar effort should be undertaken towards making private rental housing more successful.

Let’s look at the recent Journal Sentinel series on landlords.

This investigative reporting – using easily available public records – showed that the individual owners behind LLCs could be revealed and that other properties owned by these individuals or different LLCs could also be exposed. Changes in the LLC laws are not necessary, contrary to the assertions of Aldermen Murphy and Witkowski that bad landlords are operating in secret. The City Attorney’s office has recently been successful in having a receiver appointed for the various ownership entities used by inner city landlord

Within existing laws, the city could have caused most of the featured landlords out of business, through docketing and enforcing code enforcement fines, and foreclosing f tax delinquencies. For whatever reason the city allowed these owners to continue unabated.

Perhaps most troubling is the relentless attack on James H. Herrick, who works for Baird, that went as far as the Mayor calling for the guy to be fired. He is not a member of the Association nor known to us.

The Journal reports that inspectors show up and find basement doors illegally padlocked. In the article, the owner’s manager states he did this in an attempt to keep drug dealers from entering the property.

There is no argument that inoperable fire doors are an unreasonable risk to occupants. Clearly, this was a novice mistake made by someone who did not understand fire codes.

The correct response by DNS would be for the inspector to explain the problem and demand the owner’s rep immediately remove the padlocks. If the owner did not comply, the Department of Neighborhood Services has an essential services program where the city can contract a repair and then bill the owner.

Instead, the inspection supervisor chose to placard the building and force 50 families out onto the street. Closing a 50 unit building would not have been the DNS response had the property been located on the Eastside, Bayview or the Southwest side. In these more affluent neighborhood they would have compelled a solution that kept the tenants safely in their homes.

But this building is in a poor, minority neighborhood.  The city’s response was harsh as it typically is in these neighborhoods. The DNS employees who acted out of spite towards the owners and a disregard of the tenant population, instead of attempting to protect the homes of 50 low income, primarily minority tenants, should lose their jobs.

The 50 unit building remained closed for a couple of months. It is no surprise that the building ended in foreclosure and sold at a distressed price due to this.

The owner’ use of single property LLCs, in this case, were an advantage to the city. Because the owner had his properties in separate LLCs, this allowed only this one to be foreclosed upon, instead of all 13.

It is a lending industry practice in larger real estate deals to require single asset entities to separate liability from one project and others with a similar ownership interest.

It would actually be in Milwaukee’s best interest if every investment property was in a properly segregated LLC. That way a failure at one property would not have a domino effect and bring down perhaps dozens or more other properties that are under similar ownership.

Then the Journal and Mayor put pressure on Baird, Herrick’s employer, placing his job in jeopardy. What advantage does the city receive in this? If he loses his job, his remaining properties will likely fall into financial problems as well, resulting in more boarded buildings, displaced tenants, and distressed sales.

Similarly, what did the city gain by the public attack on NBA basketball star Devin Harris? While it may have been expedient in causing the payment of some fines and taxes, overall it sent a clear warning to others with capital “Do not invest in Milwaukee. If you fail, you will be ridiculed and perhaps lose your career.” Similar results could have been obtained with a private conversation with Harris, thereby not discouraging outside investment.ïżŒ
ïżŒ

ïżŒ Journal article on non-profit failures

West End joins a list of other nonprofit housing organizations that have failed in the last 10 years, including Walker’s Point Development Corp., East Side Housing Action Coalition and Community Development, and the Westside Conservation Corp.

 

Categories
Cost Controls Office Effectiveness

Pitney Bowes Late fees for timely payments

Okay, time for a rant here…

For the sixth time in less than ten months, Pitney Bowes postage (PB.com) has posted late fees to our account for payments received posted two or more days prior to the due date.
 
Pitney Bowes has gone from the industry leader in SMB postage solutions to adopting slimy, time-consuming business practices.
 
If it has happened to us, then I’m sure it is happening to countless other small businesses. If it happened to you I would like to hear from you.  Maybe it is time for legal actions.

 

I would also like recommendations for alternative services for businesses sending 400-1000 pieces of mail a month.
 
Categories
Government Behaving Badly Housing policies Legislative

The rental industry needs to be more active legislatively.

The rental industry needs to be more active legislatively.
The first step in legislative action is knowing who your elected officials are and sharing your concerns.  Here is a link to find yours.
Categories
Evictions

What is wrong with the Milwaukee Eviction Court

A reader sent this to me today. I thought it was worth sharing as his frustration has been echoed by many owners lately.

I read your blog and wanted to relate my experience yesterday, Wednesday, October 21st with the disaster of the Milwaukee Kangaroo Eviction Court.

  1. Case is called by clerk. Myself and the tenant come forward.
  2. It is automatically placed with a commissioner for the commissioner to conduct a hearing.
  3. When the commissioner calls the case for the hearing, I come forward, but the tenant is gone. Has he just taken off? Who knows, but get this, the commissioner suggests that I go out into the hallway outside the court room to see if I can find the tenant! What? Being the good person that I am, I do that, TWICE within about 5-10 minutes of the commissioner telling me that he will recall the case and to give it a “few” minutes. I let him know that I have parking that is about to expire (I had already extended it the maximum amount of time). The commissioner seems indifferent.
  4. After the MKE Park program notifies me my parking has expired, I tell myself I have had it, and I approach the clerks’ pen (where by the way they now have 3 clerks there, instead of what was traditionally two clerks, one calling and the other as “support”. But now they have a third person, in this case I lady I have seen in the past who used to be the “support” clerk, just standing where the files are placed for the commissioner to call the case for hearings, standing and talking, really doing nothing). Well, I am in the process of letting the third support lady know that my parking is expired and I would like the case called whether the tenant is there or not, when the tenant smoothly walks up and is by my side like nothing has happened. What? No reprimand from the commissioner or the clerk, but they turn on me with the approach that nothing has happened, where I had to explain that I had been sitting on the front row bench waiting for the case to be called, and all the third support clerk could do is point to the file and state “see, it is marked as P.P.” (I guess that means Party Present). I let her know that that was when the case was initially called and not when the commissioner called it.
  5. When the commissioner comes from his office, I direct myself to him and state “the tenant was not here when you called it, right?” Nothing. His manner was just let’s go back and look at the case.
  6. What floors me now is that I am entitled to the Writ of Restitution, because the tenant has not paid December’s rent. Done deal, right? Wrong! The commissioner states he will not issue a Writ immediately (despite the Statutes, what is supposed to be the Law, stating the Writ shall be issued immediately. Crystal clear language, right? I guess the courts in Milwaukee County don’t follow the law, and why the city is a mess!) and that he will stay the writ until the end of the month, another ten days! I point out that he is allowing someone to use my property. The commissioner seems to not care. What message does that send to the tenant? Exactly. What he is doing is OK.

I guess I should have asked for a judge’s hearing, but I was informed that the judge is just going to stand behind his minions doing a terrible bidding.

This is exactly why I won’t buy another piece of real estate in Milwaukee, ever.

Would it do any good to call my state legislature representatives? Is there a way to begin to have the courts apply the statutes? Are they allowed to disregard the Legislature with impunity? And that is why I wonder what good is it sometimes to have the statutes changed, i.e. the recent changes to the Wis. Stats. relating to landlord/tenant law, when the courts don’t apply what is the law?

So frustrating, so very frustrating…

A reader
Milwaukee, Wisconsin

Oh, thanks for taking the time to read the story.

Categories
Code Enforcement Government Behaving Badly

Milwaukee’s DNS computer system & orders

An update:

The bookmarked link we used yesterday, the one we used for years to look up DNS records no longer works today.  The link from the Assessor page to DNS no longer works in a meaningful manner.  Using the city site to find owner information for screening purposes does not return the phone number, just the information found on the Assessor’s site.  Plus it takes a lot of clicks to get to.

Yesterday we called an inspector who met with us two weeks ago to sign off an order because the order showed as open in the city computer system.  First thought – the inspector failed to sign off the order.  It has happened before with this inspector.

 
The inspector’s response was enlightening, if not scary.  It seems DNS recently replaced their computer system with a new one that works so poorly that they must do everything by hand, as in paper and pencil by hand.
 
I asked ‘What was wrong with the old system?’  His answer, ‘Nothing, it worked fine.’
 
So then I asked the obvious why.  His answer – The Mayor demanded the change. I thought it odd that a mayor would be dictating database software, sounds more like the job for IT. The inspector speculated that the purchase of the new, nonfunctional system was the Mayor returning a political favor.
 
Glad to see the original HeathlCare.gov* programers landed on their feet. 😉
 
Seriously though if you have completed orders from the City of Milwaukee you should check to make sure the status in the city system is correct.  If not, call 414-286-2268 and ask that a supervisor fixes the problem. You do not want to have an open order for say a smoke detector,complete the order and then have a fire with that order remaining open, or you fixed a broken step but it remained open and now someone tripped there.
 

* The GAO report on the failure of the original HealthCare.gov

http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/668834.pdf

Categories
Our industry

The ingrained hatred of landlords

My daughter was flying home from Atlanta and the following was a game provided by the airline to pass the time:

img_3295
Fight the landlord

I forgot to send this. A game that was available to play on my flight home from ATL. They had screens in each of the seats. -Jess

Categories
Crowdfunding Financing Purchasing Real Estate

Crowdfunding Real Estate & Small Businesses

Yesterday I attended an all day Crowdfunding seminar held by Venture Hive,  a Startup Incubator and Accelerator located in downtown Miami.

The main speakers were Jason Best and Woody Neiss from Crowdfunding Capital Advisors. Neiss was the founder of FlavorRX, a company that created the flavor additives that are available for a pharmacist to add to kids liquid prescription meds so your child will actually take them.

Why do these guys matter? They are the coauthors and promoters of Title III of the 2012 JOBS Act (overview of Act) that allows for equity and debt crowdfunding.

I was really surprised at the quality and depth of the presentation. Both guys were engaging speakers.

The day started off with Jason speaking about the political process and how both parties tried to pull them to “their” side. They resisted those forces and in doing so the bill received bipartisan support, changing SEC rules that dated back to 1933 and 1934. There is a lot to be learned from them on political success.

What is crowdfunded equity? I’m sure most of us are at least basically familiar with how stocks work. You pay a few hundred dollars and now own 1/1,000,000,000th of General motors or some such thing. If GM does well the value of your portion of the company goes up. If they fail and the government has to bail them out your stock value plummets or disappears completely.

Crowdfunding equity is similar but for smaller offerings with a cap of $1 million per year per business. Investors need to be “accredited” (see below) and are limited to how much each investor can invest. Those limits are 10% of their income/net worth, up to $100,000, for investors with more than $100,000 of income or assets and 5% for those with income and assets less than $100k. Everyone is permitted to invest $2000 per year regardless of income.

You are required to use an approved platform for the offering, think of something like Kickstarter, as well as a licensed broker-dealer to promote it

Regulation A+ has changed to allow for offerings up to $50 million per year. Only accredited investors may invest, but now offerings may be offered and sold publicly. There is a ton, read expensive, paperwork involved in a Regulation A+ offering.

The interesting thing is using these tools for debt. So rather than give up a portion of ownership, you can crowdfund debt, i.e. mortgage money.

Manhattan Attorney Douglas Ellenoff presented via video feed.   His presentation was on the ethics requirements and how painful it is to get it wrong.

Ellenoff is a founder/principal in iDisclose.com, an online tool for creating the required SEC disclosures.

He also is a founder/principal in LexShares.com, an investment platform for commercial litigation.  You can think of this in the context of the recent case where billionaire PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel took out his arch enemy Gawker media by funding Hulk Hogan’s litigation against Gawker.

The real use of a litigation equity tool is in allowing cases that would make a difference be heard despite the cost involved being too great for any individual to cover.  For example,  you have a  case that could change our industry.  There is so much at stake you realize that if you win, your opponents will appeal, perhaps all the way to the US Supreme Court.  How the heck do you afford a case that will cost perhaps hundreds of thousands of dollars or more?  This is where litigation investing comes in.

So what does this mean to us in rental real estate? Let’s say you found this great deal on a $4 million property. But there is that sticky wicket of the $800k downpayment. Something like this could conceivably work, although those numbers are at the outer edge and realistically would impossible to achieve, at least until you had a couple of successful offerings. But I see this as viable for smaller deals, allowing small investors to be in properties that they otherwise could not.

Heck, with Reg A+ you and your buddies could conceivably buy something really big. A $50 million down payment would go quite a ways.

If you are thinking about giving crowdfunding a go, be prepared to spend a lot of time learning the ropes and a bit of money getting the legalities correct.

A couple of mainstream articles on real estate crowdfunding

Inside the Real Estate Crowdfunding Land Rush

http://rismedia.com/2016/07/06/crowdfunded-real-estate-should-you-jump-on-the-bandwagon/

What is an accredited investor?
It is a person with a net worth of at least $1 million, excluding the value of their primary residence, or have income at least $200,000 each year for the last two years (or $300,000 combined income if married) and are expected to make the same amount this year.