Just curious for the people renting their places out there, is it standard for you guys to increase rent by 2% YoY to adjust for inflation? Or do you keep rent the same for "good residents"?

2-3% on $1600 is like $40

Not even worth the increase for the most part even just for the point of straying from that round number.

Different story as a building owner when you're increasing the rent of 100+ units at 2% though

I was going to say the same thing. When you have an asset, you have something to lose. Your place, your relationships, your job, whatever. But when you're one of those scumbag renters that has nothing to lose, how can you compete?

It's like getting revenge on the losers in those awesome Chilliwack videos on youtube. You think it would be great to get a shot in, but those fuckers can honestly make your life hell. They truly have nothing to lose, and nothing else to keep them busy.

I don't know why the article and the MLA keep staying it's 2%. The maximum amount you can increase the rent this year is 3.7%. That may not sound that much but over a year it adds up. Doing it every year is the key. Over 5 years it adds up to a lot.

This is exactly it.

The problem is though, if you do leave it for a 3 years and don't increase it. When the third year rolls around you can't increase it by 5% (even though if you had incrementally done it YoY you would have gone up by over 6%).

So if you don't increase it every year you are basically shooting yourself in the foot. It's less problematic if your tenants change every few years, because during that change you can increase the rent appropriately. But if you keep tenants for 5+ years you are really loosing quite a bit of money.

EDIT: I like that a lot of people in here recognize the risk the landlord puts themselves at, there is a lot being done by the RTB to protect renters in terms of not being kicked out willy nilly, and rent spikes, etc.

But there isn't as much being done for the landlords when their million dollar+ asset gets fucking destroyed by some asshole tenant, or when the fuckers start to squat in our units and wont get the fuck out even though the court has ordered them out. Then it's the landlord that suffers having to hire a bailiff or getting the police who don't do fuck all to drag the motherfucker out of the unit. Why doesn't the RTB grow some balls in this aspect and put some of these shit eating renters in their place?

kinda funny switch of sides here compared to some comments i made on facebook, as you said meme405, renters are taking on big time risk in renting their suites, homes, etc.

There was an article on facebook regarding Vancouver considering banning the practice of not allowing pets in rental units. I commented saying thats fine, but you sure as hell better believe that you're going to be paying that additional pet deposit + accepting any addendum's i make to the rental agreement regarding damages, noise, smells, etc.

Not to mention if i ask somone whether they are bringing a pet into the rental, they say no, and then they do, you think we're getting off on the right foot?

People attacked me from all angles saying things like fucking scumbag landlords, etc. etc. fucking "haters"

i said if i'm a hater for protecting assets in my possession and trying to position myself into being able to reclaim damages over value lost in those assets, then yea, i guess i'm a "hater" :sleepingzz:

You get that same reaction on Reddit too. It's a very lefty pro socialist forum.
I think this forum has an older & perhaps more wealthy demographic

You can write all the contracts you want but it's impossible to get blood out of a stone. If you take a person to arbitration for damages you first have to file with the RTBO. The RTBO gives you documents that you have to serve your former tenant within 72 hours.

1st problem is finding the person. Had one person call me from Nepal telling me he had moved out and another had his daughter from England call. 2nd problem is even if you serve the person and win a judgement how are you going to collect if the person is broke?

I think it's common knowledge that everyone on RS drives Lambos and bangs supermodels.

:awwyeah:

Posted this not too long ago.

this discussion came up on my FB feed too from a local news outlets article. ended up several hundred posts in the discussion. seemed like a majority of the people were on the side of the landlords tho. and most of the people who were on the side of the pet-tenants were teenagers with a "my dog is a family member" mentality, and most of those posts got shot down pretty fast. it was refreshing to see some logic because im usually the one banging my head on my keyboard on these topics.

on that note, BC is one of the only provinces that have a maximum of 1 month rent for security and pet deposits. alberta is 1 month for both.

as for people moving in with secret pets, if you cover your ass with "no pets" as a material term in your tenancy agreement, the tenancy act gives landlords a 30 days notice to end tenancy.


there is seriously so much information easily available right Residential Tenancies - Province of British Columbia

Well picking the pet example (but you can apply it to people just squatting and not paying their rent as well):

-You have to notify the tenant of the breach of the material term
-Then give them a reasonable timeframe to correct the problem (in one instance related to a pet the RTB said that 1 week not a reasonable timeframe to allow the family to re-house the pet). So what this reasonable timeframe is eludes me.
-If they don't correct the issue you then have to serve them with a one month notice of eviction
-after one month when they don't move out you have to file an order of possesion for cause (basically forcefully evict/remove them from the unit) - this can take upwards of 3 months.

And in all of these steps above if the landlord makes one mistake (doesn't serve the person properly, any mistakes in the forms, using the wrong forms, etc), the people just get to keep living there fucking up the place and laughing their asses off.

This is where the RTB collapses horribly.

I don't increase the rent on my properties because my tenants keep my places like new, and my mortgage and property tax are covered in the rent.

A great tenant is hard to find

while reading the article...

The law allows landlords to seek higher-than-normal rent increases if tenants are paying below market rates. Normally, owners can only hike rents by two per cent plus inflation per year.
"I've introduced legislation three times now to delete the geographic area increase clause. It's an unfair clause which is just about gouging renters for more rent," Chandra Herbert said Sunday.

.... it just contradicts itself, so.... by bringing the unit to market value... the landlord is gouging renters? WTF... how does that even make sense.... the renters should be happy that they were given a good discount before. And the landlord is not breaking any laws raising it to market value... some nerve....

plus the article is about a place that is a block away from English Bay... no sympathy from me... obviously the renter will have plenty of choices left, don't even have to move to Surrey (lol sorry to all the surrey folks out there) to probably end up with a decent place of the same pricing they are paying right now...

If $50/$100/$150 breaks you, you probably shouldn't be living there anyways.

you are definitely right. it is still a lengthy process. i was just getting at that there is a route thru the process provided to landlords. all forms are available from the government, and all serving requirements are laid out plainly. the biggest issue for landlords is they usually try to give verbal warnings. everything has to be in writing, with copies kept, and a folder created.

we just evicted a tenant in december and while it was a process, it was fairly easy to navigate after a bit of reading. we served him a notice, he took us to arbitration. he was a fucking shit tenant who badly wanted to stay due to very low rent and a lot of benefits we shouldn't have given. but without a huge cause for eviction other than causing disturbance to other occupants in the house which is one of the hardest cases to argue. RTB gave us an order of possession for the next day. and he willingly moved out. some tenants may stay after the order is given, but not everything is worst case scenario.

also, all prior arbitration hearings are public record and easily searchable to use as reference in your hearing. we found an exact match to our case.

Reminds me of some other lady while ago, was crying to newspaper about how high rent is in Kits but doesn't want to move out to east....
Typical Vancouverites?

As opposed to all the home owners who cried about their $570 a year home owners grant disappearing when their house shot up past 1.2 million lol

The worst are the older news stories they used to run about elderly people living in shaugnessy etc saying they can't afford the property taxes. Just die already

Just defer the tax! p;ay 1% of it and when you die and your house is sold the gov comes and collect the tax owe. Is not that hard.

haha yeah...i remember that one article about a family who had a budget of $750k - $850k and couldn't find a 3BR condo in Kits for their growing family

:fulloffuck:
:facepalm:

It's easier to whine about it and get the government to up the threshold for them