In Alberta, some rental agencies like to charge unrealistically more than what it’s worth, and expect some 18 year old Eastern Canadian (some with no financial discipline) making $28 an hour to pay for it. I’m talking about $1000 for a bachelors in an ancient complex, with only heat and water included.
$28 an hour is a lot when working in the patch during the winter, then you’re mostly bumming for the rest of the year. Kinda explains why Red Deer has a car theft problem lately.[/quote]
granted but i am looking at more the local picture … costs of maintaining rental property here are very high … building new here because of our distance from everything is even worse
[quote=“PLA”]What I’m saying is if the local economy booms, some property management companies may try to adjust their rates to unreasonable increases.
And Rupert is not even isolated.[/quote]
it can happen business is business supply and demand … most rental agencies have vast holdings of property in different cities with vast diverse write offs and things i am not even aware of, its the small private owner that is often subject to considerable costs with less ability to recover losses. For shipping in building materials this place is isolated
[quote=“jamesbrown”]I have to laugh or I would cry at some of the judgement calls on this thread…
Telling someone with inadequate income to move if they can’t get a decent affordable rental… or saying a subsidy is a hand out to low income earners …
The cost of moving isnt cheap and sometimes subsidies to people that need them are the only answer often employment programs are so mickey mouse they arent worth it anyway.
I do understand why landlords have to charge more given costs and often people work hard for low wages, often work programs just nurse people into low wage employment[/quote]
The cost of moving is very cheap if you are looking to settle somewhere and start a new. When I moved I brought a bed, kitchen stuff and clothes. I sold/gave away everything else and paid for my move that way. If you already have nothing well guess what? your moving costs are whatever it costs to get yourself to your new destination.
Like I said easier said than done but there is no reason you cant line up employment in a new town where you can more than afford to get by on minimum wage. There are still plenty of them left in BC. Prince rupert is no longer one of them. Alternatively you can sit around and hope either rent comes down or min wage goes up while you slowly fall behind.
The smart money is on either finding a way to find a career in rupert (good luck) or leaving to where you can afford to live. It wouldnt be easy but nothing worthwhile ever is.
There was a letter in the paper complaining about rent prices last week. Many people have already mentioned, correctly, the great risk involved as a landlord allowing people to live in your home or suite, so I’ll leave that. Another thing I think it’s important to remember is that home owners don’t have to rent to you at all. They could just keep their suite as a guest space or let their empty house collect dust – they’re under no obligation to open it up to the public for rent – this is obvious. Why, then, when someone decides to rent out their extra space, are some people now suggesting that those landlords have some kind of moral obligation towards the renters of the city by offering properties at low rents?
I see nothing wrong with discussing government assistance for people who can’t afford a place to live. (I can’t remember where it was, but somewhere in the States they’ve decided to try giving homeless people places to live. It turns out that this is much, much cheaper in the long run than years of hospital visits and wasted police time.) Still – I can’t take these people seriously who, lately, have taken to brow-beating local landlords as unfair and apathetic for not trusting them enough or giving them a good enough deal.
You also have good renters who have been told to move out because landlord wants to renovate (slaps some paint on walls) then increase rent double or triple the amount. let’s not kid ourselves this all has to do with LNG people are greedy. and that’s it. and you sure can tell who the home owners are on this forum. Also the Former Bc housing complex on west side has about 5 years of life in them. and no talk about replacing them. I hope the inflated housing market bursts and come down a bit like it did a few years ago when the investors in the pulp mill was trying to get some life back in to it. prices increased then dropped back. Anyway good luck to those needing a place to live.
I know it’s been said already, but those who find the rent prices too high may actually have to think about moving. Getting angry won’t change the situation. Landlords in this town have taken big hits over the years. Bad tenants who have no respect for other peoples property, who treat their rented homes like garbage an feel that their $750 a month for a 3 bedroom house justifies this.
Remember that no one owes you a place to live at a low price. Not landlords, not the city, not the govt. Save your money. Build up a nest egg and use it to buy a place that you can call your own. Renovate, pay your taxes, grow to love your investment. Then rent it out at a cut rate and let someone destroy it. I’ll bet you’ll change your tune.
Let’s say hypothetically for a moment that you own a rental home. The market dictates that you can get $1500 per month for it. But you, being the good guy that you are, are going to rent it for $800 per month and personally subsidize a low income renter to the tune of $700 per month? A 200,000 mortgage ($1500/month) , $2500 a year in property tax and another $1000 a year in utilities ($90/month) running you around $1600/month and you’re going to rent at a loss? Not to mention maintenance, repairs, etc. It’s not cheap owning a property and rental prices certainly aren’t necessarily about greed. It’s about making ends meet sometimes. Your perception is that property owners are milking their renters but in reality they owe them nothing. They owe it to themselves and their family to be responsible, not to personally subsidize the less fortunate.
I don’t blame ANYONE who charges rent at higher rates like this, especially after the stories I have heard from numerous landlords of the incredible amount of damage done to their properties by people paying lower rent.
A higher rent attracts reliable and RESPECTFUL renters who will not obliterate the landlords investment. There are tons of people in Prince Rupert who are attracting workers making middle class wages with these rental increases and I say good for them, it is their right, is much less risky on their investment. and is certainly not greedy.
I also think it is VERY fair for the landlord to agree to a rent reduction so long as the tenant has reliable references…that is very fair IMO.
People seem to forget it is the landlord taking all the risk here…they are the ones forking over 100K+ to purchase these rental properties…they have every risk while the tenant continually gets away with reckless damage. If I owned a decent rental property I would be doing the same damn thing.
And also at the end of the day, landlords are not responsible for supporting lower-income earners at the expense of their own well-being.
I cant say i disagree. that said if the home has been paid off for decades (or even if it hasnt) and you have had good tennants for years and decide its time to cash in on the new demand by evicting them then youre a cocksucker and i hope your next tennants destroy the place. Itd be sweet karma.
I agree with this (to a degree)…yes that would certainly be a dick move…but again it is within their rights.
I do think it is totally fair for a landlord to raise the rent by the legally allowed rate in a situation like this however. The property is an income earner for them, and while they may have invested during a down market, it is not fair to expect them to not ever earn more on their investment, especially in a high demand market.
Go ask some of the Crest servers how much they make in tips “serving our food” and you will be amazed at how much they make. They could MORE than afford the $1300 rent.
There is TONS of money to made in the serving industry, especially in this city.
Let’s say hypothetically for a moment that you own a rental home. The market dictates that you can get $1500 per month for it. But you, being the good guy that you are, are going to rent it for $800 per month and personally subsidize a low income renter to the tune of $700 per month? A 200,000 mortgage ($1500/month) , $2500 a year in property tax and another $1000 a year in utilities ($90/month) running you around $1600/month and you’re going to rent at a loss? Not to mention maintenance, repairs, etc. It’s not cheap owning a property and rental prices certainly aren’t necessarily about greed. It’s about making ends meet sometimes. Your perception is that property owners are milking their renters but in reality they owe them nothing. They owe it to themselves and their family to be responsible, not to personally subsidize the less fortunate.[/quote]
[quote=“Caribou”]I know it’s been said already, but those who find the rent prices too high may actually have to think about moving. Getting angry won’t change the situation. Landlords in this town have taken big hits over the years. Bad tenants who have no respect for other peoples property, who treat their rented homes like garbage an feel that their $750 a month for a 3 bedroom house justifies this.
Remember that no one owes you a place to live at a low price. Not landlords, not the city, not the govt. Save your money. Build up a nest egg and use it to buy a place that you can call your own. Renovate, pay your taxes, grow to love your investment. Then rent it out at a cut rate and let someone destroy it. I’ll bet you’ll change your tune.[/quote]
I’m just reading through this thread and I’m amazed at the hostility shown by some towards landlords. Renters need to remember that the return on owning real estate is almost always less than they think, especially after you account for repairs, vacancy, taxes etc. Not to mention the risk involved in committing a large sum of money to a single asset.
Some people also seem to believe that landlords set the market rent. This is the ‘greedy landlord’ fallacy. But in reality, any landlord that attempts to rent his/her unit for higher than market rent will just end up with an empty unit. Equally, no rational landlord will put his property on the rental market for significantly less than the market rent. What do people expect - some altruistic desire to subsidize a tenant? It is stating the obvious to say that landlords have families, debts and obligations that need to be met, just like tenants.
If people believe the cost of housing is becoming too high in Prince Rupert, there’s not much they can realistically do. Introducing rent controls only leads to price spikes in the housing that isn’t rent controlled, along with much poorer maintenance in the cheaper, rent-controlled units. Rezoning for more building is often a good idea in the medium term, but the lack of suitable land in Rupert seems to rule that out. Having read today’s article in the Financial Post (business.financialpost.com/2014/ … =c0af-bfe1), which speaks of more-or-less full employment in Rupert, I can only see rents going up further. There is no one to blame for this, no landlord ‘bogeyman’ to point the finger at… just the invisible hand of the free market.
Housing costs will rise and fall, just like any other asset - it is the individual’s responsibility to adequately prepare for this. Whether that means buying a house, investing smarter, working harder, or moving to another city… its up to you.
lets keep it real OK!!! housing pricing is not yet like the god damn lower mainland but the fricken rent is… if i have a 500 thousand to a million dollar house then sure the rent is fair but the fricking 350 thousand inflated house price of a war time house is way to fricken much if I see another 1 bedroom basement suite for 1500.00 i will hurl buckets of bile. so many have lots there places of rent to landlords who have done the renovictions there should be laws against this…
AGAIN THIS IS HAPPENING DUE TO ONE REASON GREED AND THE PROMISE OF HIGH PAYING JOBS FOR THE MILLIONS OF LNG PLANTS THAT SEEM TO BE POPPING UP LIKE UNWANTED ZIT’S…
the only people who are going to be able to live in this town are the families who work in these industries, everyone else will have to move … but then again who wants to live in Rupert if it surrounded by LNG Plants. Rupert will be just a industrial park with no access…lol… Im just playing with ya its going to be great…
Property investment firms likes to charge more for rent than it’s really worth. Private homeowners are usually much more reasonable.
Go ask my co-worker. He rents a 1 bedroom condo from a private owner for $890 a month, and comes with heat, water, and an energized parking stall. Meanwhile, an investment company attempted to rent out an identical flat on the same floor for $1000 a month, doesn’t include an assigned parking spot, and poor customer service.
[quote=“PLA”]^^^
Go ask my co-worker. He rents a 1 bedroom condo from a private owner for $890 a month, and comes with heat, water, and an energized parking stall. Meanwhile, an investment company attempted to rent out an identical flat on the same floor for $1000 a month, doesn’t include an assigned parking spot, and poor customer service.[/quote]
Couple of obvious points here:
Your co-worker probably rented his unit when market rents were lower.
You say the investment company ‘attempted to rent out’ their unit at $1000. If that rent really was too high, then that’s why they haven’t managed to find a tenant. They will therefore drop the rent until they do find a tenant, as no real estate investor likes an unoccupied rental unit. This is how the market works.
You need to understand that it is not ‘evil landlords’ that drive up rents. Its actually the demand from tenants that pushes rents higher. If there are few tenants and lots of rental properties, rents will fall. If there are lots of tenants competing for few rental properties, prices will rise. It really is that simple.
Again… the ‘greedy landlord’ argument. There is a very simple argument for why LNG and the other developments have caused rents to climb higher. It is because there are more jobs, those jobs are paying better salaries and there is net migration into the Rupert area. I guess your argument is that landlords should keep their rents artificially low, even when the market rent is higher. But why should they subsidize their tenants when they don’t have to?
More people and jobs => more demand for housing => rents and prices go up
Why do people think that the laws of supply and demand don’t apply to housing?