TechPulseTechPulse
Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

33% Positive

Analyzed from 356 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#extra#landlord#doing#working#why#should#rent#landlords#wear#idea

Discussion (10 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

al_borland•about 1 hour ago
Assuming nothing illegal, it isn't the landlord's business what a tenant is doing inside, working or sitting around watching TV... why does it matter? They should just be happy the person has a job and can pay the rent on time.
crote•6 minutes ago
Landlords and HoAs have been doing this for ages, it has just mostly impacted less well-off people until now.

Want to do some nails as a side hustle, sell homemade goods via the internet, or make extra cash repairing people's cars in your garage over the weekend? Sorry, contract says no, enjoy your eviction for "operating a business" or "commercial use of the property".

Banning WFH or charging extra for it is just the logical next step. You're working, so that's commercial use! And you're saving money by not having to rent an office and causing extra wear & tear to the property, so to a landlord it is obvious that you should be paying extra - why should you get to freeload, after all?

Grombobulous•26 minutes ago
If you really want to do something this dumb, I think it would be less dumb as a landlord to implement this as a discount.

Submit a pay stub and job offer letter referencing hybrid/in-office/in-person employment and get a $200/month discount.

The idea of this is not completely crazy. I definitely wear on my home hardware when working from home. However, the rent is supposed to already be covering the typical amount of wear and tear and there’s no need to get this silly about it.

sitkack•12 minutes ago
what if you are retired? or unemployed? or sick?

what are the limits for all of those?

no the idea is stupid and greedy

crote•5 minutes ago
> no the idea is stupid and greedy

We're talking about landlords here. What else did you expect?

red-iron-pine•about 2 hours ago
that application fee is a scam man

but one of the pieces that didn't make it to the top of reddit's discussion was that it's a shared-living situation, not your own apartment or isolated basement.

its shitty, but it's not like a landlord trying to regulate how often you're in your own private apartment

notfromhere•about 1 hour ago
you're renting a space per month, and they're essentially adding an extra fee if you're doing more than sleeping there. kinda nuts
gtowey•2 minutes ago
The expectations of some bay area landlords when renting space in their own home are bonkers I've seen it all: not allowed to use the kitchen, not allowed to have guests, curfews, some are even contingent on not allowing the tenant to be there on the weekend at all.
richwater•about 1 hour ago
Why are we writing articles about some random, single-event rental ad. What are we doing here?
randycupertino•about 2 hours ago
Here is the screenshot of the original rental ad, with an also dubious $500 move-in fee: https://www.reddit.com/r/mildlyinfuriating/comments/1v3n4kw/...