Berkeley landlord association throws party to celebrate restarting evictions (Oakland: rental, insurance)

[sav858]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Not particularly, no. But maybe. *shrug*. Just wondering what your basis was and I guess you are going with “seems logical.” Fair enough then. Your assumption is yours to have.

As opposed to being intentionally obtuse with "do we really know where most are actually from?"... yeah lol.

Protest at landlord party devolves into physical fights


Looks like the natives got angry. Or maybe they're from out of town

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by mattja

You can't really blame them, can you? Most landlords are mom and pop businesses renting an extra house. The rent and eviction moratoriums did not include mortgage payment and property tax moratoriums, did they? And how many years did this go on? Three years?

This. I'm surprised none of them had to sell their property. If it had been me, I'd have been forced to sell, due to the loss of income with which to pay the mortgage.

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by sav858

As opposed to being intentionally obtuse with "do we really know where most are actually from?"... yeah lol.

Protest at landlord party devolves into physical fights


Looks like the natives got angry. Or maybe they're from out of town

Antifa from Oakland.

[pathrunner]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Lol. I wasn’t talking about the 2.5% figure being an assumption … my question was / remains: do we know that these landlords are Berkelyites? Are the landlords locals? Why do you assume the landlords live and vote in Berkeley?

I am simply curious. Not a snark. Not an attempt at a ‘gotcha’. Not an argument. I don’t know the answer so I am asking: why do you guess they are local landlords? Maybe you had a reason to assume they are?

People assume, assume, assume. Simply because someone owns a home in Berkeley, they're a liberal? Not only that, a mercenary liberal? Funny how conservatives are not accused of being mercenary, they're lauded for being "business-savvy".

Not everyone in Berkeley is liberal, just like where I live not everyone is arch-conservative.

[GotHereQuickAsICould]

This thread is nonsense.

Landlords everywhere are celebrating getting rent paid again, regardless of their political persuasion.

[GotHereQuickAsICould]

I wonder if those getting evicted will be able to secure housing again.

Every place I've ever rented has asked for references. My understanding is the rental market is such that landlords can be picky about tenants.

[Mathguy]

So regardless of politics, what will occur?

Well, since the government introduce the *risk* of being stuck with non-paying tenants for years, the mathematics indicate that there now needs to be a risk premium added to rental units for years to come....or in some cases just selling a condo and saying forget renting.

What BOTH of these things do is drive up rental costs.

Now what will the complaint be? Cries of greedy renters and calls to put more regulation upon them...because they're meanies. LMAO.

Best of luck guys, you're going to need it.

[urbancuriosity]

And Berkeley also has rent control. Personally, I would not invest in a city with rent control. The idea that a city government can restrict your rent increases is a turnoff to many landlords.

https://berkeley-policies.glitch.me/

[MechAndy]

I know that some Berkeley landlords had to pay huge amounts of extortion to get tenants out of their properties.
$50K - $75K was a common fee and I wouldn’t be surprised if that “relocation fee” got into the $100k territory.
It seemed that the tenants had more rights than the property owner.
Crazy Marxist society that they set up there.

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by MechAndy

I know that some Berkeley landlords had to pay huge amounts of extortion to get tenants out of their properties.
$50K - $75K was a common fee and I wouldn’t be surprised if that “relocation fee” got into the $100k territory.
It seemed that the tenants had more rights than the property owner.
Crazy Marxist society that they set up there.

What time period are you referring to? I had a relative who bought a house in Berkeley years ago, that had a renter in a basement apartment. By Berkeley law, the renter had the right to stay when ownership changed hands. The buyer was advised by a RE lawyer, that the typical m.o. is to offer the tenant enough $$ for a European vacation (this doesn't have to be first class or anything, for college students, as in this case). Back then, around $5000 give/take did the trick. You pay them to go away, but usually nothing astronomical is required.



As to rent control in general, one of our members on this sub-forum posted a few years ago, that she was a LL of a rent-controlled building in San Francisco. She said she didn't have a problem with SF's rent control; it allowed her to keep up with maintenance, and she had good tenant relationships. It was interesting getting her perspective. Apparently, in SF at least, it is workable for the owners of rent-controlled buildings.