So I just want to start the conversation by saying our new agreements ask for the resident to pay the first $100 of any repair. Right now they're having difficulty keeping up what's repair request due to contractors schedule. The other day we got a repair request for the parts and the amount of time should be next to nothing. That was even stated by the resident. They got him before the new agreements were put forth asking for the first hundred dollars of repairs and unfortunately I'm not sure of the nicest way to respond to this repair request. On the one hand they are valued resident we want to keep. We have had difficulty in the past with Lawn Care Etc. However they pay a healthy amount for the place that they're at. In my opinion I feel as though we are setting the wrong stage if we show up to do this repair at the same time I feel as though it should be done but it is not the most pressing by any means. Could you please advise?

So if they pay the first $100, do they get to call their own repair people? I would not want that. If they have to pay that, they may very well just not let you know about something that is $100 to fix now, but when things get worse, will cost you much more. People are renters so they don't have to deal with these things.

My rental agreement says that T is responsible for "small repairs". Teach your T to act responsibly, whine less, be more careful around your property.

As of today, small repairs are under $175. Most T's damages will fall under that limit. Sometimes a T can cause a $5K damage and be off the hook - that's the nature of the beast (like AC system damage).

If I decide to take care of a small repair for a good tenant, that fact would not change the wording of the R.A.

I make a difference between normal wear and tear and ordinary maintenance (which is on me) and abnormal wear and tear (which I have in my lease so that they're responsible for it).

So, for example, normal wear and tear is "the ceiling fan is old and stopped working right." That's mine to replace. Abnormal wear and tear would be "Someone's doing chin-ups on the ceiling fan and tore it out of the ceiling".

Normal maintenance is "roots are growing in the clay sewer lines and I need to rotoroot". I pay for that. Abnormal wear and tear is "let's pour grease down the kitchen sink and flush condoms down the toilet and now we need a rotoroot."

Hate to say it but Fred from California’s procedure would concern me. If you let a tenant make repairs they are your quasi-employee. And what happens when an employee is injured on the job, it’s lawyer time.

Hate to say it but Fred from California’s procedure would concern me. If you let a tenant make repairs they are your quasi-employee. And what happens when an employee is injured on the job, it’s lawyer time.

Hate to say it but Fred from California’s procedure would concern me. If you let a tenant make repairs they are your quasi-employee. And what happens when an employee is injured on the job, it’s lawyer time.

Hate to say it but Fred from California’s procedure would concern me. If you let a tenant make repairs they are your quasi-employee. And what happens when an employee is injured on the job, it’s lawyer time.

Hate to say it but Fred from California’s procedure would concern me. If you let a tenant make repairs they are your quasi-employee. And what happens when an employee is injured on the job, it’s lawyer time.

45 years experience tells me that a repair that would cost $100 if undertaken from the start will cost $200 or more after the tenant messes it up. Some tenants will throw away anything that comes loose and thus require replacement of the entire assembly, costing many times more than tightening the loose part.

45 years experience tells me that a repair that would cost $100 if undertaken from the start will cost $200 or more after the tenant messes it up. Some tenants will throw away anything that comes loose and thus require replacement of the entire assembly, costing many times more than tightening the loose part.

45 years experience tells me that a repair that would cost $100 if undertaken from the start will cost $200 or more after the tenant messes it up. Some tenants will throw away anything that comes loose and thus require replacement of the entire assembly, costing many times more than tightening the loose part.

You wrote: However they pay a healthy amount for the place that they're at.

Yes the goal was to not have a tenant call about a squeaky drawer or the slightest of repairs that is cosmetic not functional or safety. There are exclusions in that which would include electrical plumbing that his major and roof work furnace etc. The reason this was put into it is because a tenant can beat our Fossett and make them be something that needs replaced every six months or they can actually take care of things if they know that we’re not there to answer their Request every other day.

I know of an attorney who uses $500 as the amount not $100. And some of his places would rent for slightly over $500.

The attorney notated is not the attorney for the properties that I deal with. It is not located in a rent control city. I cannot say that we’ve seen someone who needs a faucet replaced every six months. But we have had tenants who will do damage to cabinets and then contact us to say that they need repaired without ever expecting that repair cost is going to come out of their pocket.

The goal was simply to make tenants more accountable and think about how they treat the place they live in. The ones that were talking about are low income renters. It is not uncommon to get the place back with several thousand dollars between rent owed and damages. It is not at all uncommon to get the place back with $1000-$2000 worth of damages. If that’s factored into a $600 a month rental and the person was there less than two years or even less than a year....

The decision was made with one or two responses that this repair will be taken care of. The reason the additional information was put out was to simply state the thought process that was behind the first $100 paid by a resident.

Damage is something we all have the tenants pay for. If your kids swings on the cabinet door, then it is damage and the tenant pays for all of it, not the first xx dollars. And if it happens multiple times, then they keep paying or they go find another place. Plain and simple.

Repairs from things wearing out, or normal wear and tear are the LLs responsibility to repair. The faucet is clogged with minerals, the LL pays to fix it and maybe pays for a water softner so they don't keep fixing it.

As others said, you are setting your self up for the tenants not reporting problems to you, and costing you much more down the road. Good luck on changing their mindset!

I am a licensed contractor, owner of many properties and property manager. When my clients put the repairs onto their tenants, it lead to much deterioration of the property an many hazards. Such as leaking faucets, smoke detectors, loose banisters and pests. This lead to floods, fires, falls and infestations. A property that was once worth almost 2 million dollars, in just a few years got sold for under 1 million. The repairs to keep that building up would have cost less than a million dollars, not even $100,000.

Jim [OC]

You noticed that I mentioned that T is responsible for small repairs, which are usually the result of negligence. It doesn't say they must fix them themselves. Also my R.A says that all small repairs must be done by qualified subs who have to be approved by me or handymen known to me.

I think you naysayers need to chill. John Schaub (Florida)has been using this method for many years and with excellent results.

Funny that was said. I did hear him speak and say that. Never said this was an original idea :).

If you have $600/month places and you "COMMONLY" get them back with $1000-$2000 in damages, then I feel that you are likely doing other things poorly too.

Seriously -- I have lots of low-end rentals (at $500/month and under). While we sometimes have people owing rent at the end, we almost never have DAMAGE at the end -- and, if so, it is maybe a couple hundred bucks at the most for a hole punch in a door. :)

You said that it is "not uncommon" for your places to come back to you with THOUSANDS in damage. Again, if that is really the case, then you have bigger things to worry about than $100 minimum repair costs.

- John...

Also, I have no problem saying that I very much disagree with John Schaub when it comes to certain levels of rentals.

With a lower-end rental like this, the reality is that if you tell tenants that they are responsible for things under $100, it just causes them to not report things that need to be fixed until they become bigger problems.

We've seen that happen over and over again to LLs that try this "you pay for the cheap stuff" clause. It just causes them to ignore the cheap stuff until it isn't cheap stuff any more -- and then you finally get notified about it!

That is not a good long-term plan, sorry.

- John...

Jen.

(I have not yet read all 39 replies to your post)

The "They pay the first $100" sounds great in a seminar but in real life it backfires. I know because I tried it for a few years.

Here's what happens in real life:

People don't have money. Repairs cost money so they don't do them.

People don't have skills. They don't do the repairs.

The apt assoc says the number one reason people move out is LACK OF REPAIRS. So Momma moves out because "this house needs to much work". My move OUT rate soared.

People RENT because they want someone else to make the repairs. If you don't they move out because your home and management is not to their liking.

I was left with a long list of repairs at EVERY turnover. MANY were leaks which rotted floors because the res was hiding from that $100 thing and just let it drip. Now I had a $1000 rotted floor to replace and lose a week of rent to construction.

I had several ViseGrips on shower handle stems where plastic handles had cracked off. Pliers teeth chewed up the stems so we had to replace the stems AND the knobs.

Broken doors, toilets with rope to replace broken handles, broken toilet tank lids, screens, glass...

I'd be stuck with a turnover needing exterior painting in the middle of winter. Could not paint until late Spring.

At the time my limit was $50 so I got a few receipts for $51 faucets that were junk brands installed by drunken brother in laws.

I shifted my thinking to keeping MY homes it top condition and serving my customers well. People appreciated that and stayed longer, turnovers were a breeze because we had kept up the home, no more surprise rotted floors, we are pro-active making curb appeal repairs in the Fall in case the home comes open in winter...

Take care of your investments.

BRAD

Thank you all for the information It was meant to reduce calls due to difficulties getting reliable handymen and not paying $30-40/hr