Not to get too dramatic--because I am totally fine and it was a fluke thing--I fainted on Saturday. My blood pressure dropped to 92/51. As Marty was giving me fluids and nursing me back to health, all I could think of was, "Now is definitely the time for some bad news to come in from Alabama because right now I don't have to worry about having a stroke."
No bad news came in either. I can live with that as well.
Saturday, July 31, 2010
Non-Drama
Well now, summer is two-thirds over and I am peeking out of my hidey hole again to check the status of our fledgling accidental business. I am going out on a limb here: this is nothing like the last two summers.
There I said it. Hopefully putting it out in the universe won't jinx anything.
Of course, this summer has had its challenges. But, the challenges aren't summer-related. And they don't even measure on the Ricketier Scale compared to evictions, stolen air conditioners, freezer fulls of meat left rotting in a home for 30 days because I couldn't gain access, or tenants filing bankruptcy and not leaving. Not to mention the other things I just can't write about because of emotional trauma to my psyche, legalities or I just plain forgot about. And whatever I forgot about, I am sure Carolsue will be happy to remind us all.
And as far as fledgling goes, we are weathering the economic downturn as well as to be expected. Mr. Partner seems to think the business should be able to sustain itself. When I met him for pizza on Wednesday, I explained that won't be the case, so please stop expecting this. Not for at least another year or two. But, let's be grateful we have tenants who want to stay, take reasonable care of our homes and we haven't seen a drug lab or two in quite a while.
That really isn't too much to ask, is it?
There I said it. Hopefully putting it out in the universe won't jinx anything.
Of course, this summer has had its challenges. But, the challenges aren't summer-related. And they don't even measure on the Ricketier Scale compared to evictions, stolen air conditioners, freezer fulls of meat left rotting in a home for 30 days because I couldn't gain access, or tenants filing bankruptcy and not leaving. Not to mention the other things I just can't write about because of emotional trauma to my psyche, legalities or I just plain forgot about. And whatever I forgot about, I am sure Carolsue will be happy to remind us all.
And as far as fledgling goes, we are weathering the economic downturn as well as to be expected. Mr. Partner seems to think the business should be able to sustain itself. When I met him for pizza on Wednesday, I explained that won't be the case, so please stop expecting this. Not for at least another year or two. But, let's be grateful we have tenants who want to stay, take reasonable care of our homes and we haven't seen a drug lab or two in quite a while.
That really isn't too much to ask, is it?
Friday, July 30, 2010
Insurance Assurance
Carolsue's news last week about Mamma Quincy's home got me to thinking. I have two vacant homes. Well, technically, I have one. The house in Fultondale.
As I am currently between tenants, I am fully aware insurance companies don't really care for this scenario. It means the home is vulnerable to vandalism and whatever else one might come up with to keep me awake at night. My goal is not to borrow trouble, and I certainly don't need it looking for me.
So, just to make sure I have my bases covered during my Summer 2010 of Non-Drama, I e-mailed my insurance agent, admitting my dark little secret: Artie and Candy moved out. It turns out vacant homes are indeed an issue. According to the insurance agent,
The other "vacant" home is on Hysteria Lane. The non-tenant still has about three articles of clothing and beer in the refrigerator. And for that, she dutifully pays the rent each month. After reading over my agent's e-mail, I forwarded it to Kirby explaining I didn't want trouble there either.
Kirby responded with promising to contact the tenant after her check rent clears. His take on this "vacancy" was simply,
As I am currently between tenants, I am fully aware insurance companies don't really care for this scenario. It means the home is vulnerable to vandalism and whatever else one might come up with to keep me awake at night. My goal is not to borrow trouble, and I certainly don't need it looking for me.
So, just to make sure I have my bases covered during my Summer 2010 of Non-Drama, I e-mailed my insurance agent, admitting my dark little secret: Artie and Candy moved out. It turns out vacant homes are indeed an issue. According to the insurance agent,
If the dwelling is vacant for more than 30 days vandalism/theft is excluded under the policy. I also have to notify the company dwelling is vacant and write a vacant policy.I have to tell you, that sounds like a lot of work on her part. Nor do I want a vacant dwelling policy--though I don't know exactly what that means. It just sounds ominous. Actually, what I really prefer is a tenant. A sane, stable, employed tenant. And I am hoping that isn't as tough to find as I am starting to think.
The other "vacant" home is on Hysteria Lane. The non-tenant still has about three articles of clothing and beer in the refrigerator. And for that, she dutifully pays the rent each month. After reading over my agent's e-mail, I forwarded it to Kirby explaining I didn't want trouble there either.
Kirby responded with promising to contact the tenant after her check rent clears. His take on this "vacancy" was simply,
I am not sure how the insurance company looks at this but technically it is not vacant because the tenant still has their remains in the house and paying the rent. They are just not physically living there all of the time. I would look at it as her having a job where she travels a lot, and is living somewhere else 6 months out of the year.Kirby was pretty sure the house should be covered under those circumstances. I am just hoping I don't have to find out.
Thursday, July 29, 2010
The Fix-It Club
I don't mean to nit-pick, but it seems to me tenants can tell me they have repair issues at more opportune times. It isn't like I don't get things fixed. In fact, I often work extra hard for the comfort of my tenants--when their demands are reasonable.
Last time I was in Birmingham, I brought Ms. Kathy some mortar so she could fix her front steps. Of course, in the entire time she had lived in this home, she never mentioned the loose front steps. The reason I knew about them is because I almost cracked my skull on the loose bricks. And worse, apparently this had been an issue for the first year she lived there. Instead of telling me about it or fixing it herself, she had just trained her kids to avoid the top step of the porch. For $6.99 her steps are now safe.
Ms. Kathy also didn't bother to tell me about her septic back-up until a holiday weekend--two weeks after the mess started. Might you remember, Ms. Kathy only has one bathroom. I wasn't paying holiday weekend prices to have the system drained. I have no idea how Ms. Kathy resolved that one, but the septic guy didn't show up until Wednesday the following week.
Earlier this month, sweet Ms. Angie sent me an e-mail. She asked when I was going to fix the water leak at her house. My answer, "What water leak?"
It turns out, her water leak had been going on for months. I would have been happy to have fixed it--long before it became the going concern it was at that particular moment. The bizarre part was: it isn't as if Ms. Angie doesn't contact me twice a month anyway to say hello. How did this slip her mind?
Tuesday night, I sent Ms. Robin a new lease. Wednesday she wrote me back and asked what I was planning on doing about repairs for the air conditioner and roof. After Marty administered the smelling salts, I wrote her back a quick note. All it said was, "What is wrong with the air conditioner and roof??" It turns out there is nothing wrong with either. She just wanted to make sure. Note to Ms. Robin. I am not amused.
Ms. Robin did ask what maintenance she was responsible for. I found this interesting, as she has lived in the same place for almost two years. My reply: anything that a handyman will charge me a ridiculous amount of money to take care of, please fix yourself. If you have expenses, call me first for approval and then send me the receipts for reimbursal. And please! Don't tell me afterwards expecting me to be happy to write a check. Ok. I didn't add that part. But my lease says something to that affect.
Part of what bugs me about repairs after the fact is finding out a tenant lived with something small, yet unsatisfactory. I expect to maintain my homes. I know issues come up. However, I expect my tenants to handle the little things--screw the outlet plate on tight, change the battery in the smoke detector and make sure the towel bar is on the wall. Generally, bigger repairs aren't too terrible and fixing them upfront is a heck of a lot cheaper than finding out the little water leak is now a geyser.
Are you listening Ms. Angie?
Last time I was in Birmingham, I brought Ms. Kathy some mortar so she could fix her front steps. Of course, in the entire time she had lived in this home, she never mentioned the loose front steps. The reason I knew about them is because I almost cracked my skull on the loose bricks. And worse, apparently this had been an issue for the first year she lived there. Instead of telling me about it or fixing it herself, she had just trained her kids to avoid the top step of the porch. For $6.99 her steps are now safe.
Ms. Kathy also didn't bother to tell me about her septic back-up until a holiday weekend--two weeks after the mess started. Might you remember, Ms. Kathy only has one bathroom. I wasn't paying holiday weekend prices to have the system drained. I have no idea how Ms. Kathy resolved that one, but the septic guy didn't show up until Wednesday the following week.
Earlier this month, sweet Ms. Angie sent me an e-mail. She asked when I was going to fix the water leak at her house. My answer, "What water leak?"
It turns out, her water leak had been going on for months. I would have been happy to have fixed it--long before it became the going concern it was at that particular moment. The bizarre part was: it isn't as if Ms. Angie doesn't contact me twice a month anyway to say hello. How did this slip her mind?
Tuesday night, I sent Ms. Robin a new lease. Wednesday she wrote me back and asked what I was planning on doing about repairs for the air conditioner and roof. After Marty administered the smelling salts, I wrote her back a quick note. All it said was, "What is wrong with the air conditioner and roof??" It turns out there is nothing wrong with either. She just wanted to make sure. Note to Ms. Robin. I am not amused.
Ms. Robin did ask what maintenance she was responsible for. I found this interesting, as she has lived in the same place for almost two years. My reply: anything that a handyman will charge me a ridiculous amount of money to take care of, please fix yourself. If you have expenses, call me first for approval and then send me the receipts for reimbursal. And please! Don't tell me afterwards expecting me to be happy to write a check. Ok. I didn't add that part. But my lease says something to that affect.
Part of what bugs me about repairs after the fact is finding out a tenant lived with something small, yet unsatisfactory. I expect to maintain my homes. I know issues come up. However, I expect my tenants to handle the little things--screw the outlet plate on tight, change the battery in the smoke detector and make sure the towel bar is on the wall. Generally, bigger repairs aren't too terrible and fixing them upfront is a heck of a lot cheaper than finding out the little water leak is now a geyser.
Are you listening Ms. Angie?
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Off the Deep End
Ray is looking for a home. The house in question he will live in for a few years and then convert into a rental. A swell plan if I do say so myself.
Because of this mission, Ray is looking at what he is buying with the eyes of an investor. Thankfully, he is not doing "the paint is the wrong color and just won't match my sofa," emotional home rejection we agents see again and again. (And let me just say to you buyers--and you know who you are--YOU CAN ALWAYS PAINT! But, I digress...).
One of the items Ray is debating about is whether or not to buy a home with a pool. On one hand, a pool is mighty nice this time of year. And, given where he is looking and his overall criteria, we are running into a tremendous amount of homes that have said pool.
His innocent question to me the other day was, if I were to have a rental home, would I pick one with a pool?
As it turns out, I have actually put some thought into this one. For my homes in Alabama, the answer is No!, with a capital N. And, if you took it upon yourself to add any modifiers in front of no, you would even have a more accurate assessment of my thoughts on the topic.
In Arizona, I am mixed, but leaning towards no. Out here, a pool is a way of life. Homes in the Phoenix metro area rent better with a pool. Landlords get a bit more money for a home with a pool. Last year, when Marty Sunshine was facing whether he wanted to move us to Seattle or face unemployment, we discussed renting out our home. And yes, we have a pool. Thankfully, an offer came into the Mesa division and we were let off the hook, because we never reached a verdict.
In my line of work, as well as through my own experiences, I have seen how some tenants treat homes. A pool is one more expense for the tenant and landlord. There is some training that needs to go into effectively maintaining a pool. If a tenant is short on cash, it is the first item to be neglected. It is one more thing to break. It is also somewhat delicate. If I had a rental home with a pool, I would hire a pool service, only because I want to be absolutely certain I am not getting back a big black mosquito-breeding hole in the ground at the end of the lease.
As an agent, I don't wish to project my personal values on another's purchase decision. Ray's vision for what is important needs to be kept in check. This is Ray's money. I can show him statistics of what rents better in the city he is shopping in. I can provide him with pool barrier guidelines. I can direct him to his local city council so that he knows what zoning restrictions might need to be in place. But, I can't say, "don't buy this house because of what may or may not come into play later."
Think of it this way, if you go shopping with someone you have met only a few times, and they fall in love with a ghastly pair of neon orange and green shoes, it isn't really up to you to stop them from buying. You can voice your opinion. Agents can't do that. We can only give the facts. Or, at least agents who wish to keep their licenses can't voice opinions. It isn't our purchase decision. We are there to facilitate a transaction.
What I did share with Ray was this: A few years ago, my 70 year old father called me around 9 p.m. It is one of the two times in my life I have heard my father sob. The home across the street from him was a rental. The toddler living there managed to find his way out the back door and into the pool. The boy's parents didn't find the child until hours later because the pool was dark green. The tenants weren't taking care of the pool. My father was beside himself over the senseless death.
Even though the landlord had a pool fence that complied with city ordinance, the tenants eventually took their grief out on the landlord and sued. In this case, because the tenants didn't maintain the pool I doubt they won. In the event the landlord lost, he would have home owner's insurance, or perhaps an umbrella policy, to financially cover this kind of a loss. Either way, it still doesn't bring the child back to his mother.
If I were Ray and I bought a home with a pool to rent out, I would take my time and make sure I carefully picked my tenants. I would invest in an hour of a lawyer's time to make sure my lease spelled out everything and anything pertaining to a swimming pool. I would find a reputable pool service and add the cost of maintenance on to the lease. And hopefully, whomever rented the home would take care of my pool. And more importantly, take care of thier children.
Because of this mission, Ray is looking at what he is buying with the eyes of an investor. Thankfully, he is not doing "the paint is the wrong color and just won't match my sofa," emotional home rejection we agents see again and again. (And let me just say to you buyers--and you know who you are--YOU CAN ALWAYS PAINT! But, I digress...).
One of the items Ray is debating about is whether or not to buy a home with a pool. On one hand, a pool is mighty nice this time of year. And, given where he is looking and his overall criteria, we are running into a tremendous amount of homes that have said pool.
His innocent question to me the other day was, if I were to have a rental home, would I pick one with a pool?
As it turns out, I have actually put some thought into this one. For my homes in Alabama, the answer is No!, with a capital N. And, if you took it upon yourself to add any modifiers in front of no, you would even have a more accurate assessment of my thoughts on the topic.
In Arizona, I am mixed, but leaning towards no. Out here, a pool is a way of life. Homes in the Phoenix metro area rent better with a pool. Landlords get a bit more money for a home with a pool. Last year, when Marty Sunshine was facing whether he wanted to move us to Seattle or face unemployment, we discussed renting out our home. And yes, we have a pool. Thankfully, an offer came into the Mesa division and we were let off the hook, because we never reached a verdict.
In my line of work, as well as through my own experiences, I have seen how some tenants treat homes. A pool is one more expense for the tenant and landlord. There is some training that needs to go into effectively maintaining a pool. If a tenant is short on cash, it is the first item to be neglected. It is one more thing to break. It is also somewhat delicate. If I had a rental home with a pool, I would hire a pool service, only because I want to be absolutely certain I am not getting back a big black mosquito-breeding hole in the ground at the end of the lease.
As an agent, I don't wish to project my personal values on another's purchase decision. Ray's vision for what is important needs to be kept in check. This is Ray's money. I can show him statistics of what rents better in the city he is shopping in. I can provide him with pool barrier guidelines. I can direct him to his local city council so that he knows what zoning restrictions might need to be in place. But, I can't say, "don't buy this house because of what may or may not come into play later."
Think of it this way, if you go shopping with someone you have met only a few times, and they fall in love with a ghastly pair of neon orange and green shoes, it isn't really up to you to stop them from buying. You can voice your opinion. Agents can't do that. We can only give the facts. Or, at least agents who wish to keep their licenses can't voice opinions. It isn't our purchase decision. We are there to facilitate a transaction.
What I did share with Ray was this: A few years ago, my 70 year old father called me around 9 p.m. It is one of the two times in my life I have heard my father sob. The home across the street from him was a rental. The toddler living there managed to find his way out the back door and into the pool. The boy's parents didn't find the child until hours later because the pool was dark green. The tenants weren't taking care of the pool. My father was beside himself over the senseless death.
Even though the landlord had a pool fence that complied with city ordinance, the tenants eventually took their grief out on the landlord and sued. In this case, because the tenants didn't maintain the pool I doubt they won. In the event the landlord lost, he would have home owner's insurance, or perhaps an umbrella policy, to financially cover this kind of a loss. Either way, it still doesn't bring the child back to his mother.
If I were Ray and I bought a home with a pool to rent out, I would take my time and make sure I carefully picked my tenants. I would invest in an hour of a lawyer's time to make sure my lease spelled out everything and anything pertaining to a swimming pool. I would find a reputable pool service and add the cost of maintenance on to the lease. And hopefully, whomever rented the home would take care of my pool. And more importantly, take care of thier children.
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Down the Drain
Joe the plumber called me on Monday. Yes. His name is Joe. He works for the Best Plumber in Birmingham--who are the only plumbers in Birmingham that I can half-way stand. So, being the "best" in this case is debatable.
Joe called because Friday he had just done some work at Ms. Angie's home. And, just to show what a great company they are, they wanted to provide some value-added service. In this case, there is a cracked potty at Ms. Angie's home. Now, they didn't fix it while they were there, but they wanted to know if I wanted it fixed. If so, they can squeeze me in this week. Would Thursday work? And by the way, it will cost $385?
And, in all fairness, I didn't exactly hear the price the first time he said it. I was focusing on a bigger issue: keeping Ms. Angie happy. Her lease is up soon. I don't want her leaving.
I did some mental calculations in my head. If they already did the work over there, and didn't call me for authorization, that means they spent less than $200 (my authorization limit), so perhaps this can work. Just to be sure, I ask Joe how much I am currently on the hook for already at Ms. Angie's home.
Now then, being the "best" plumber in Birmingham, you might imagine Joe simply told me some number under $200. But of course, if that were the case, I wouldn't be writing this blog. I would like to go on record here, the only reason I didn't engage Joe was because I was with a real estate client. So, Joe got a "Bless your heart. I will call you back," instead.
It turns out the lack of authorization cost me slightly more--but I am not paying it without a fight and a darn good explanation. However, I am torn. What he fixed needed to be fixed and I would have authorized it (had they asked). But, they didn't call like they were supposed to. And, that particular issue I will be taking up with Ms. Suzy--who will be in on Wednesday.
They may be the best plumber in Birmingham, but they aren't the only ones. It seems it is time to find the second-best plumber in Birmingham. Maybe a plumber who can can follow directions.
But, back to Joe and Ms. Angie's toilet. By the time I got around to calling Joe back, I had time to let the cost of the potty sink in. $385!!! At my first break, I called around to a local plumber friend I know for a reality check. "Is it a diamond-encrusted toilet?" he asked. Nope.
My friend did give me a bit of a reality check. I got off pretty easy on the rest of the repairs. Apparently Joe's children will be going to college on the toilet-replacement racket he is running.
My next several calls were to everyone I could find in Birmingham who might be able to replace a potty. When I got to Carolsue--who wasn't my first choice, only because I can't envision her with a wrench and low-low rise jeans--she said something a bit more colorful than my plumber friend. However, she knows people. Why I didn't call her first is beyond me.
Carolsue is on this. She called Baseball Guy, who knows some guy who installs toilets. My cost: $100 plus the cost of materials.
Perhaps if this guy is any good, he can be the new Best Plumber in Birmingham.
Joe called because Friday he had just done some work at Ms. Angie's home. And, just to show what a great company they are, they wanted to provide some value-added service. In this case, there is a cracked potty at Ms. Angie's home. Now, they didn't fix it while they were there, but they wanted to know if I wanted it fixed. If so, they can squeeze me in this week. Would Thursday work? And by the way, it will cost $385?
And, in all fairness, I didn't exactly hear the price the first time he said it. I was focusing on a bigger issue: keeping Ms. Angie happy. Her lease is up soon. I don't want her leaving.
I did some mental calculations in my head. If they already did the work over there, and didn't call me for authorization, that means they spent less than $200 (my authorization limit), so perhaps this can work. Just to be sure, I ask Joe how much I am currently on the hook for already at Ms. Angie's home.
Now then, being the "best" plumber in Birmingham, you might imagine Joe simply told me some number under $200. But of course, if that were the case, I wouldn't be writing this blog. I would like to go on record here, the only reason I didn't engage Joe was because I was with a real estate client. So, Joe got a "Bless your heart. I will call you back," instead.
It turns out the lack of authorization cost me slightly more--but I am not paying it without a fight and a darn good explanation. However, I am torn. What he fixed needed to be fixed and I would have authorized it (had they asked). But, they didn't call like they were supposed to. And, that particular issue I will be taking up with Ms. Suzy--who will be in on Wednesday.
They may be the best plumber in Birmingham, but they aren't the only ones. It seems it is time to find the second-best plumber in Birmingham. Maybe a plumber who can can follow directions.
But, back to Joe and Ms. Angie's toilet. By the time I got around to calling Joe back, I had time to let the cost of the potty sink in. $385!!! At my first break, I called around to a local plumber friend I know for a reality check. "Is it a diamond-encrusted toilet?" he asked. Nope.
My friend did give me a bit of a reality check. I got off pretty easy on the rest of the repairs. Apparently Joe's children will be going to college on the toilet-replacement racket he is running.
My next several calls were to everyone I could find in Birmingham who might be able to replace a potty. When I got to Carolsue--who wasn't my first choice, only because I can't envision her with a wrench and low-low rise jeans--she said something a bit more colorful than my plumber friend. However, she knows people. Why I didn't call her first is beyond me.
Carolsue is on this. She called Baseball Guy, who knows some guy who installs toilets. My cost: $100 plus the cost of materials.
Perhaps if this guy is any good, he can be the new Best Plumber in Birmingham.
Monday, July 26, 2010
Mother of the Year
So... Carolsue calls me on Friday afternoon.
As you may remember, last year my air conditioner was stolen from the 508 house. Everyone--from the police to Carolsue--knew who stole it. The thief, Quincy, actually admitted to it to some of the folks in the neighborhood, but nobody had proof. And the police, did not feel there was sufficient evidence to go after him.
After all, it wasn't like Quincy was walking around with an air conditioner in his arms. At least my air conditioner. I have it on good authority, Quincy has managed to lift several air conditioners. And lots of other valuables from hard-working people.
Quincy's mother, who never taught her boy right from wrong, knew what her adult son was doing. She turned a blind eye. She lied to the police. She never made her son be accountable.
A few months ago, Quincy and his mother moved out of town. I'm guessing the wave of crime got to be too much for her. Ironically, the crime stats went down after Quincy left town too. In an enterprising move, Quincy's mom decided to rent out her house. The tenant was to move in on Saturday.
Sometime last week, someone managed to break into Mama Quincy's home. The "thief" didn't jimmy a door, break a window or do anything to suggest forced entry. However, the air conditioner was mysteriously removed. As a matter of coincidence--because I am just sure this is the case--Quincy happened to be in town the day the AC was stolen.
Mama Quincy did not manage to tell her home owner's insurance company she 1) had a vacant home and 2) was converting into a rental. Therefore, the home owner's policy is not covering a vacant home and a missing air conditioner.
Additionally, Mama Quincy signed a deal with the Veteran's Administration, renting out the home to a convalescing veteran. Now, because the home is missing an air conditioning unit, Mama Quincy is in violation of her agreement with the VA. Additionally, the Veteran cannot move in. And, the VA is pursuing Mama Quincy for the terms of the agreement (six month's rent they paid and the deposit). Additionally, the contract the VA has with Mama Quincy says she is now financially responsible for housing for the Veteran until he can find another landlord willing to take him in under the circumstances.
If I am adding right, she is into this for more than $10,000 (six month's rent, deposit and an air conditioner). I'm thinking it might have been in Mama Quincy's best interests to teach her adult son right from wrong 20 years earlier.
As you may remember, last year my air conditioner was stolen from the 508 house. Everyone--from the police to Carolsue--knew who stole it. The thief, Quincy, actually admitted to it to some of the folks in the neighborhood, but nobody had proof. And the police, did not feel there was sufficient evidence to go after him.
After all, it wasn't like Quincy was walking around with an air conditioner in his arms. At least my air conditioner. I have it on good authority, Quincy has managed to lift several air conditioners. And lots of other valuables from hard-working people.
Quincy's mother, who never taught her boy right from wrong, knew what her adult son was doing. She turned a blind eye. She lied to the police. She never made her son be accountable.
A few months ago, Quincy and his mother moved out of town. I'm guessing the wave of crime got to be too much for her. Ironically, the crime stats went down after Quincy left town too. In an enterprising move, Quincy's mom decided to rent out her house. The tenant was to move in on Saturday.
Sometime last week, someone managed to break into Mama Quincy's home. The "thief" didn't jimmy a door, break a window or do anything to suggest forced entry. However, the air conditioner was mysteriously removed. As a matter of coincidence--because I am just sure this is the case--Quincy happened to be in town the day the AC was stolen.
Mama Quincy did not manage to tell her home owner's insurance company she 1) had a vacant home and 2) was converting into a rental. Therefore, the home owner's policy is not covering a vacant home and a missing air conditioner.
Additionally, Mama Quincy signed a deal with the Veteran's Administration, renting out the home to a convalescing veteran. Now, because the home is missing an air conditioning unit, Mama Quincy is in violation of her agreement with the VA. Additionally, the Veteran cannot move in. And, the VA is pursuing Mama Quincy for the terms of the agreement (six month's rent they paid and the deposit). Additionally, the contract the VA has with Mama Quincy says she is now financially responsible for housing for the Veteran until he can find another landlord willing to take him in under the circumstances.
If I am adding right, she is into this for more than $10,000 (six month's rent, deposit and an air conditioner). I'm thinking it might have been in Mama Quincy's best interests to teach her adult son right from wrong 20 years earlier.
Friday, July 23, 2010
Empowerment Quote(s) Day
"No plan of battle ever survives contact with the enemy."
--Helmuth von Moltke
Thanks Freedom for this.
So... I have this grandiose plan to fix our undercapitalized issues and then life stepped in. No matter. We can work around a tenant of five years moving out with no notice. We can work around lots of things.
Challenges are just opportunities in disguse, right? In fact, the people at the Waterford home told us they wanted to buy. What a break!
Except they have been bizarrely silent since we responded to their offer. Not even a "thank you for playing, now buzz off." Nothing. That's fine too. They stay, the house is rented. Eventually the prices will go back up. Thankfully, they aren't as low as I was anticipating.
Then, we looked at getting a mortgage refinanced to some rate around at an historic low. We were moving forward. I was ready to roll. Then Matt, the loan officer, broke the news to me this past week. Banks aren't loaning for refinancing for properties in the name of an LLC. The home has to be in the name of the lien holder (Marty Sunshine and I) for six months, before they will touch this.
I ask you, who the hell made up this rule?
A Limited Liability Corporation (LLC for short), in this case, it is a pass through entity which holds title to a property. The people on the LLC are the ones wholy responsible for the property. Like me. Like Mr. Partner. Essentially, this is how we put on Mr. and Mrs.s Partners' names on title.
And even though I can prove I own the home (as we are part of the LLC), or conversely, if it really is this big a deal, ask Mr. Partner to cough up his financials to get this covered as well (though Marty and I are capable on our own), the banks aren't playing. Apparently every bank.
Matt called me Friday to give me the news. He promised to check a few more places, but I am getting the overall impression it won't matter if he checks The First National Bank of Guido and Vinnie. We aren't getting a refinance. Right now.
This brings up an interesting scenario. Can I somehow convince Mr. Partner to allow these properties to be re-titled back into Marty's name? Thus, acting as if Mr. Partner isn't really a partner in the LLC? And if I do that, what kinds of liabilities do Marty and I take on (or what kinds of liabilities does Mr. Partner get out of).
The government bailed out the banks with our tax money, making it possible for the banks to do their job. But, the banks aren't lending--even to taxpayers with A+ credit. Oh, yay us.
Off to plan B, C and D.
"I have not yet begun to fight!"
--John Paul Jones
--Helmuth von Moltke
Thanks Freedom for this.
So... I have this grandiose plan to fix our undercapitalized issues and then life stepped in. No matter. We can work around a tenant of five years moving out with no notice. We can work around lots of things.
Challenges are just opportunities in disguse, right? In fact, the people at the Waterford home told us they wanted to buy. What a break!
Except they have been bizarrely silent since we responded to their offer. Not even a "thank you for playing, now buzz off." Nothing. That's fine too. They stay, the house is rented. Eventually the prices will go back up. Thankfully, they aren't as low as I was anticipating.
Then, we looked at getting a mortgage refinanced to some rate around at an historic low. We were moving forward. I was ready to roll. Then Matt, the loan officer, broke the news to me this past week. Banks aren't loaning for refinancing for properties in the name of an LLC. The home has to be in the name of the lien holder (Marty Sunshine and I) for six months, before they will touch this.
I ask you, who the hell made up this rule?
A Limited Liability Corporation (LLC for short), in this case, it is a pass through entity which holds title to a property. The people on the LLC are the ones wholy responsible for the property. Like me. Like Mr. Partner. Essentially, this is how we put on Mr. and Mrs.s Partners' names on title.
And even though I can prove I own the home (as we are part of the LLC), or conversely, if it really is this big a deal, ask Mr. Partner to cough up his financials to get this covered as well (though Marty and I are capable on our own), the banks aren't playing. Apparently every bank.
Matt called me Friday to give me the news. He promised to check a few more places, but I am getting the overall impression it won't matter if he checks The First National Bank of Guido and Vinnie. We aren't getting a refinance. Right now.
This brings up an interesting scenario. Can I somehow convince Mr. Partner to allow these properties to be re-titled back into Marty's name? Thus, acting as if Mr. Partner isn't really a partner in the LLC? And if I do that, what kinds of liabilities do Marty and I take on (or what kinds of liabilities does Mr. Partner get out of).
The government bailed out the banks with our tax money, making it possible for the banks to do their job. But, the banks aren't lending--even to taxpayers with A+ credit. Oh, yay us.
Off to plan B, C and D.
"I have not yet begun to fight!"
--John Paul Jones
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Random Bama
Harold's lady friend called Monday. She overnighted the check to me. I hate it when tenants overnight checks to me. In this case, it meant Marty Sunshine stood in line at the post office forever to pick up the check. I feel for him.
Ms. Harold mentioned again that the account was "only" seven dollars overdrafted and started another round of "can you believe it?" This time she ended with her seven dollars cost her another $35 for the overnight fees. Last I checked, it was only $16 to send something overnight from Alabama. Perhaps her math skills have something to do with the reason she was off seven dollars to begin with.
____________________________________________________
With regard to Ms. Harold asking if I was planning on tattling to Jack, Carolsue told me on Monday that she was pretty sure she (Carolsue) could stand down Jack if he was mad.
She wasn't sure if she could handle me though.
____________________________________________________
Artie and Candy have been gone for four days and I am already feeling desperate. I wrote Kirby a note telling him he could offer a potentially sane prospective tenant a "move-in" special. Then I realized I should wait until he finds the potentially sane prospective tenant before we head that direction and quickly erased the e-mail.
Mr. 114 is heading out there to take care of a few odds and ends in the next week. So, there is no reason to think this place can be rented until then anyway.
____________________________________________________
And finally, I am sure we all have contemplated this burning question: Just how many Alabamans does it take to wrestle an alligator? As a corollary, just what is the single best use for duct tape?
Here's the answers. The rest of the story is here.
Ms. Harold mentioned again that the account was "only" seven dollars overdrafted and started another round of "can you believe it?" This time she ended with her seven dollars cost her another $35 for the overnight fees. Last I checked, it was only $16 to send something overnight from Alabama. Perhaps her math skills have something to do with the reason she was off seven dollars to begin with.
____________________________________________________
With regard to Ms. Harold asking if I was planning on tattling to Jack, Carolsue told me on Monday that she was pretty sure she (Carolsue) could stand down Jack if he was mad.
She wasn't sure if she could handle me though.
____________________________________________________
Artie and Candy have been gone for four days and I am already feeling desperate. I wrote Kirby a note telling him he could offer a potentially sane prospective tenant a "move-in" special. Then I realized I should wait until he finds the potentially sane prospective tenant before we head that direction and quickly erased the e-mail.
Mr. 114 is heading out there to take care of a few odds and ends in the next week. So, there is no reason to think this place can be rented until then anyway.
____________________________________________________
And finally, I am sure we all have contemplated this burning question: Just how many Alabamans does it take to wrestle an alligator? As a corollary, just what is the single best use for duct tape?
Here's the answers. The rest of the story is here.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
The Drama Diva
Last week, I was under the impression Artie and Candy moved out. Actually, as of Saturday, I was sure Candy had. She called me to say Artie still had a very large television left in the home and--here's a shock--they had broken up.
Her other issue was that she couldn't get in touch with Kirby, the property manager, who was now handling this house. And, what should she do with the keys? Given I had no clue what she should do with the keys, I thought of the only thing that vaguely made sense: I told Candy to call Carolsue, swing by her house and drop the keys off.
Candy, somehow interpreted this as call Carolsue, ask her to stop whatever she was doing and drive directly to Fultondale to pick up the keys. When Carolsue said, no, Candy could drop them off, Candy, through her sobs, mentioned she and Artie broke up. Fortunately, Carolsue is as cold-hearted as I am and didn't find Candy's episode any more compelling than I did.
Carolsue did tell Candy to hide the key in the shed. That worked for me. I wish I would have thought of that.
Later Saturday, I heard from Candy again, it turns out the subtext of all this drama was that she wanted me to mail her half of the security deposit to her as soon as humanly possible. Of course, that wasn't going to be possible until I heard what kind of condition the home was left in and where Artie's key happened to be.
But no matter, Artie also called me Saturday afteroon. His big TV was now out of the house and could he please call Kirby on Monday to turn in the key? He didn't want to disturb him over the weekend.
Oh, by the way, he and Candy broke up. But, he didn't add that last part through tears.
Her other issue was that she couldn't get in touch with Kirby, the property manager, who was now handling this house. And, what should she do with the keys? Given I had no clue what she should do with the keys, I thought of the only thing that vaguely made sense: I told Candy to call Carolsue, swing by her house and drop the keys off.
Candy, somehow interpreted this as call Carolsue, ask her to stop whatever she was doing and drive directly to Fultondale to pick up the keys. When Carolsue said, no, Candy could drop them off, Candy, through her sobs, mentioned she and Artie broke up. Fortunately, Carolsue is as cold-hearted as I am and didn't find Candy's episode any more compelling than I did.
Carolsue did tell Candy to hide the key in the shed. That worked for me. I wish I would have thought of that.
Later Saturday, I heard from Candy again, it turns out the subtext of all this drama was that she wanted me to mail her half of the security deposit to her as soon as humanly possible. Of course, that wasn't going to be possible until I heard what kind of condition the home was left in and where Artie's key happened to be.
But no matter, Artie also called me Saturday afteroon. His big TV was now out of the house and could he please call Kirby on Monday to turn in the key? He didn't want to disturb him over the weekend.
Oh, by the way, he and Candy broke up. But, he didn't add that last part through tears.
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Gobbledy Goop
So... it appears Alec is going to grad school and has a super-cute place to live.
He sent me his lease the other day and asked me what I thought of it. My first and foremost thought was there needed to be a drinking game to go along with all the "henceforth", "herewith," and "thuslys" that were bandied about in this particular lease. And, I must say, Kudos to Alec for trudging through that lease. I know my head was spinning after I read it.
There were a few things he and I questioned, one being the clause stating how the landlord isn't liable for bodily harm done to tenants under the following circumstances:
Um... ya... I don't see this holding up in court if the roof collapses.
Then there was this piece of prose that made me scratch my head. I read it to a couple of agents in the office and none of them had any idea what this meant either:
Other than a few weird items, the lease looked pretty standard. Though there were two clause number 21 and 22s. That really isn't all that peculiar. I think my lease had two item 12s for a while too.
He sent me his lease the other day and asked me what I thought of it. My first and foremost thought was there needed to be a drinking game to go along with all the "henceforth", "herewith," and "thuslys" that were bandied about in this particular lease. And, I must say, Kudos to Alec for trudging through that lease. I know my head was spinning after I read it.
There were a few things he and I questioned, one being the clause stating how the landlord isn't liable for bodily harm done to tenants under the following circumstances:
Landlord shall not be liable for any damage or injury of or to the Tenant, Tenant's family, guests, invitees, agents or employees or to any person entering the Premises or the building of which the Premises are a part or to goods or equipment, or in the structure or equipment of the structure of which the Premises are a part, and Tenant hereby agrees to indemnify, defend and hold Landlord harmless from any and all claims or assertions of every kind and nature.
Um... ya... I don't see this holding up in court if the roof collapses.
Then there was this piece of prose that made me scratch my head. I read it to a couple of agents in the office and none of them had any idea what this meant either:
Tenant shall not record this Agreement on the Public Records of any public office. In the event that Tenant shall record this Agreement, this Agreement shall, at Landlord's option, terminate immediately and Landlord shall be entitled to all rights and remedies that it has at law or in equity.Marty Sunshine suggested it meant don't put the lease on the Internet. So, Alec, you might not want to post this. But then again, that might not be what it means either.
Other than a few weird items, the lease looked pretty standard. Though there were two clause number 21 and 22s. That really isn't all that peculiar. I think my lease had two item 12s for a while too.
Monday, July 19, 2010
Bad Cop, Bad Cop
So... Marty Sunshine calls me Friday afternoon, to dish up his own vinegar pie. He says, "I hate to upset you, but..."
We had a rent check bounce. Given the amount, it had to be from Mr. Noble or from Harold. I guessed Harold. And, thanks to the ever-so-awesome Gina at the bank, she pulled up the image and broke the obvious news: it wasn't Mr. Noble.
Harold, as you may remember, is renting the home Jack and I own. Jack happens to be in Alaska right now with Mrs. Jack, escaping the heat, Alabama humidity and stupid renter issues.
However, I am perfectly capable of channeling Jack. Which I did right into Harold's voice mail. My totally furious message was thus, call me within 6 hours or face an eviction. And by the way, I garnish (sorta--it might not be worth it for one month's rent, but I didn't tell him that).
I then called the other, mystery number, I happened to have for Harold. This isn't the number he put on his application, but it is a number he called me from once and I saved in my phone. It turns out, the mystery number is his cell phone. His initial comments vacillated between being astonished to find out I had his cell phone number and how could his rent check possibly happen to bounce?
I have to tell you, my end of our chat wasn't very Southernly. I said something along the lines of this was his first rent check since he moved in and he has now left me with a lasting bad taste for the way he does business that will haunt him the rest of the lease. I got a few "yes, ma'ams, I am so sorry ma'am" and a promise I would get a call back in two minutes.
Ten minutes later, Harold's lady friend called me. She wanted me to know Harold was at work and he was very sorry. It turns out the account was short $7. "Can you believe it? Seven dollars!" she gasped. Let me get this straight: can I believe a check bounced because it was written for more than the account balance? Seriously? Can I believe it? What was this world coming to?
I barked, "That $7, cost me $50. So, now I want a cashier's check, including the extra $50 sent to me immediately. if I don't have it by Wednesday, I am taking legal action."
I thought my threat got her attention with that one, until she brought me down a notch or two. She said, "Yes ma'am. We will take care of it. But, you won't tell Mr. Jack will you?"
We had a rent check bounce. Given the amount, it had to be from Mr. Noble or from Harold. I guessed Harold. And, thanks to the ever-so-awesome Gina at the bank, she pulled up the image and broke the obvious news: it wasn't Mr. Noble.
Harold, as you may remember, is renting the home Jack and I own. Jack happens to be in Alaska right now with Mrs. Jack, escaping the heat, Alabama humidity and stupid renter issues.
However, I am perfectly capable of channeling Jack. Which I did right into Harold's voice mail. My totally furious message was thus, call me within 6 hours or face an eviction. And by the way, I garnish (sorta--it might not be worth it for one month's rent, but I didn't tell him that).
I then called the other, mystery number, I happened to have for Harold. This isn't the number he put on his application, but it is a number he called me from once and I saved in my phone. It turns out, the mystery number is his cell phone. His initial comments vacillated between being astonished to find out I had his cell phone number and how could his rent check possibly happen to bounce?
I have to tell you, my end of our chat wasn't very Southernly. I said something along the lines of this was his first rent check since he moved in and he has now left me with a lasting bad taste for the way he does business that will haunt him the rest of the lease. I got a few "yes, ma'ams, I am so sorry ma'am" and a promise I would get a call back in two minutes.
Ten minutes later, Harold's lady friend called me. She wanted me to know Harold was at work and he was very sorry. It turns out the account was short $7. "Can you believe it? Seven dollars!" she gasped. Let me get this straight: can I believe a check bounced because it was written for more than the account balance? Seriously? Can I believe it? What was this world coming to?
I barked, "That $7, cost me $50. So, now I want a cashier's check, including the extra $50 sent to me immediately. if I don't have it by Wednesday, I am taking legal action."
I thought my threat got her attention with that one, until she brought me down a notch or two. She said, "Yes ma'am. We will take care of it. But, you won't tell Mr. Jack will you?"
Sunday, July 18, 2010
You Can't Hide
Hypothetically speaking, let's say you owe money/committed a crime and don't want to be found. Well then, may I suggest staying off all social media? Even the most innocent of connections might be enough for those who are looking to find enough of what they need.
I had a (now former) tenant once friend me on Twitter. I wasn't excited about it and instinctively went to block her. And then I read a few things she had to say and decided it might be in my best interest to have access to her posts. When she moved out, I wasn't shocked. Her marriage had been in trouble. I knew this because of Twitter.
I have a tenant who owes me a bit of money. Currently she is unemployed. I check on Linked In every so often to see if she is working. At the moment, no. But given her pattern, she will be.
Then there is the biggie. The mother of all social media. Our friends are on it. Even my brother--Mr. Anti 20th century (as in 1901 to 2000) has an account.
But, let's say you aren't my friend. In fact, you don't want to be found, so there is no way will you consider friending me if I asked. Might I suggest it can happen? Yes. It can. It does.
For example, a few months ago I set up a fake account. I found some photos, created a name and e-mail address and went to town. I started by randomly friending anyone in the Birmingham area who went to certain high schools and colleges. Then I started looking for church affiliations. Then I started by looking at employers in the area. I friended anyone who asked.
In 30 days, I had 1,000 friends. I never updated my status. I never poked or built a farm. I did find Ms. Betty and went to work friending the people on her list. Several said yes. So, then I friended Ms. Betty. Incidently, she writes an awful lot about her preschoolers passing gas.
For the past few weeks, I have been watching Mr. Smith. Yesterday I found out where he is working. What a treat! Legal Eagle is already aware and promised she would do her magic as soon as she gets back from her vacation.
The amazing part of this is that only two people ever asked who I was and how I knew them. Two! In one case I told the woman I didn't know her and she still friended me. The other one opted against us connecting.
My goal isn't to spy on my tenants. In fact, for ethical reasons I have no desire to look for them. For that matter, I don't have any compunction to find former tenants who left and fulfilled their end of the lease.
But there are those who felt their trash could stay and they didn't need to pay the last month's rent. Those are the ones I am looking for.
And it is easier than one might think.
I had a (now former) tenant once friend me on Twitter. I wasn't excited about it and instinctively went to block her. And then I read a few things she had to say and decided it might be in my best interest to have access to her posts. When she moved out, I wasn't shocked. Her marriage had been in trouble. I knew this because of Twitter.
I have a tenant who owes me a bit of money. Currently she is unemployed. I check on Linked In every so often to see if she is working. At the moment, no. But given her pattern, she will be.
Then there is the biggie. The mother of all social media. Our friends are on it. Even my brother--Mr. Anti 20th century (as in 1901 to 2000) has an account.
But, let's say you aren't my friend. In fact, you don't want to be found, so there is no way will you consider friending me if I asked. Might I suggest it can happen? Yes. It can. It does.
For example, a few months ago I set up a fake account. I found some photos, created a name and e-mail address and went to town. I started by randomly friending anyone in the Birmingham area who went to certain high schools and colleges. Then I started looking for church affiliations. Then I started by looking at employers in the area. I friended anyone who asked.
In 30 days, I had 1,000 friends. I never updated my status. I never poked or built a farm. I did find Ms. Betty and went to work friending the people on her list. Several said yes. So, then I friended Ms. Betty. Incidently, she writes an awful lot about her preschoolers passing gas.
For the past few weeks, I have been watching Mr. Smith. Yesterday I found out where he is working. What a treat! Legal Eagle is already aware and promised she would do her magic as soon as she gets back from her vacation.
The amazing part of this is that only two people ever asked who I was and how I knew them. Two! In one case I told the woman I didn't know her and she still friended me. The other one opted against us connecting.
My goal isn't to spy on my tenants. In fact, for ethical reasons I have no desire to look for them. For that matter, I don't have any compunction to find former tenants who left and fulfilled their end of the lease.
But there are those who felt their trash could stay and they didn't need to pay the last month's rent. Those are the ones I am looking for.
And it is easier than one might think.
Saturday, July 17, 2010
Friday, July 16, 2010
Alec
Alec is moving. I am not ok with that. When he was about 12, his family moved to Singapore. I cried, inconsolably, for what seemed like days. In this case, he and his sweet girlfriend are going to graduate school in the Midwest where they are going to learn how to be even more awesome architects.
Nope. I'm totally not ok.
This past week, Alec has called me asking for landlord and apartment advice. From what I understand, he has done pretty well on his own. This is a brand-new city, and his experiences there have been limited to a trip in April to check out the campus, lots of Googling and a trip last week to find a place to live.
During his trip, Alec looked at 10 apartments in less than 48 hours. He didn't say so, but I am guessing his head was spinning. He checked out crime rates for the area, accessibility to campus and a litany of tangible and intangible attributes to each home. What it boiled down to was he liked two places: a condo near campus and a duplex (I believe) where the landlord didn't accept pets.
Though he didn't have to be a reader of this blog to know how to handle this (his mother is a master-negotiator), he did pursue the duplex. He managed to make a good enough impression on the landlord, that the guy was willing to let Alec keep his 10 year old cat. Not that Alec would be a hard sell. A well-mannered, polite grad student was probably a welcome change from the guy who had the tin-foil hat. No offense Alec.
Alec has called asking about the application, wondering if he should send a letter attached in the interest of full disclosure specifically stating he didn't have a job. Alec will be a starving student, living on his life savings and financial aid. He won't have a steady income right away.
I said, "no!" Let the landlord figure this one out on his own. It turns out the application asked these questions anyway. But there is no reason to bring this to the forefront of the landlord's attention.
My guess is the landlord has already made up his mind about Alec, long before he ever saw Alec's application. Most of the time I know who I want to rent to long before I see the application. I use the application as a litmus test to see if my potential tenants are as attractive on paper as they are on the phone or in real life. I want to see what potential tenants omit on the application as well as what they answer. Omissions speak loud and clear.
Last I heard, the landlord was showing the house again (hopefully to some crazed, tinfoil hat type). However, he told Alec if everything looked good and his credit was decent, it would probably be his. That said, the landlord hasn't asked for a security deposit yet.
I would like to tell you Alec has found a place to live. But, I can only speak from my experiences. Hopefully he has. Hopefully the landlord is as accountable as Alec happens to be and is now holding the duplex for him for a couple more weeks.
If not, maybe Alec will change his mind about the whole graduate school thing and stay here just a little longer.
But, probably not.
Nope. I'm totally not ok.
This past week, Alec has called me asking for landlord and apartment advice. From what I understand, he has done pretty well on his own. This is a brand-new city, and his experiences there have been limited to a trip in April to check out the campus, lots of Googling and a trip last week to find a place to live.
During his trip, Alec looked at 10 apartments in less than 48 hours. He didn't say so, but I am guessing his head was spinning. He checked out crime rates for the area, accessibility to campus and a litany of tangible and intangible attributes to each home. What it boiled down to was he liked two places: a condo near campus and a duplex (I believe) where the landlord didn't accept pets.
Though he didn't have to be a reader of this blog to know how to handle this (his mother is a master-negotiator), he did pursue the duplex. He managed to make a good enough impression on the landlord, that the guy was willing to let Alec keep his 10 year old cat. Not that Alec would be a hard sell. A well-mannered, polite grad student was probably a welcome change from the guy who had the tin-foil hat. No offense Alec.
Alec has called asking about the application, wondering if he should send a letter attached in the interest of full disclosure specifically stating he didn't have a job. Alec will be a starving student, living on his life savings and financial aid. He won't have a steady income right away.
I said, "no!" Let the landlord figure this one out on his own. It turns out the application asked these questions anyway. But there is no reason to bring this to the forefront of the landlord's attention.
My guess is the landlord has already made up his mind about Alec, long before he ever saw Alec's application. Most of the time I know who I want to rent to long before I see the application. I use the application as a litmus test to see if my potential tenants are as attractive on paper as they are on the phone or in real life. I want to see what potential tenants omit on the application as well as what they answer. Omissions speak loud and clear.
Last I heard, the landlord was showing the house again (hopefully to some crazed, tinfoil hat type). However, he told Alec if everything looked good and his credit was decent, it would probably be his. That said, the landlord hasn't asked for a security deposit yet.
I would like to tell you Alec has found a place to live. But, I can only speak from my experiences. Hopefully he has. Hopefully the landlord is as accountable as Alec happens to be and is now holding the duplex for him for a couple more weeks.
If not, maybe Alec will change his mind about the whole graduate school thing and stay here just a little longer.
But, probably not.
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Waterford Update
No word from the tenants at the Waterford Home. Last I heard, they wanted to buy. So, they threw out a number and we caught it, threw it back and thought we might possibly have a deal in the works.
However, since then, they have been oddly silent. From what I understand, Mrs. Tenant told Kirby there is a home with the exact same floor plan for sale in that subdivision for $30,000 less than my price.
Kirby can't find that particular home listed--not that it changes my price. Besides, I am asking market price, not distressed foreclosure price. If that is Mrs. Tenant's bargaining position, it really didn't move me. I will be willing to come in writing a small check to sell this home and cover a future headache, not a $30,000 check.
When Kirby and I were talking on Tuesday, he was beginning to think they weren't as serious as he first thought. That seems to be the case. No matter. We will survive if we don't sell the home. And who knows! Maybe they will stay a bit longer than they expected to anyway.
However, since then, they have been oddly silent. From what I understand, Mrs. Tenant told Kirby there is a home with the exact same floor plan for sale in that subdivision for $30,000 less than my price.
Kirby can't find that particular home listed--not that it changes my price. Besides, I am asking market price, not distressed foreclosure price. If that is Mrs. Tenant's bargaining position, it really didn't move me. I will be willing to come in writing a small check to sell this home and cover a future headache, not a $30,000 check.
When Kirby and I were talking on Tuesday, he was beginning to think they weren't as serious as he first thought. That seems to be the case. No matter. We will survive if we don't sell the home. And who knows! Maybe they will stay a bit longer than they expected to anyway.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
A Crazy Update
Poor Kirby. He really didn't know what he was getting into when he decided to take me on as a client. Of course, if I let him talk with Bliz, Carolsue or Legal Eagle he probably would have run screaming. Because, I am sure one of them would let slip I might be a tad high strung and have a few minor control issues.
Fortunately for me, Kirby blissfully took my homes and thought nothing else about representing me until about three seconds into our contract when I started calling asking loads of questions. I have no idea where Kirby stands on the whole working with me thing as of today, but I can only guess. As Legal Eagle has pointed out on a few occasions, I "amuse" her. I suspect Kirby might have similar thoughts in between rolling his eyes when my number comes up on caller ID.
When I talked with Kirby on Tuesday, Candy and Artie were expected to be out by Thursday. Kirby had been fielding calls from the homeless for the soon to be vacant Fultondale house and, as he explained, "Most of the callers are just crazy." Sadly, my first instinct was to wonder why Kirby thought that was a black mark against a possible future tenant. But then again, he doesn't read this blog.
I hope.
Kirby did tell me he is showing the home to sane-sounding people this weekend. So, I am crossing my fingers for a short vacancy. Apparently there isn't much for rent in that area. And, the price (which has been raised to cover the property management costs) doesn't seem to be scaring renters away--at least the crazy ones.
On top of that, I spoke with Candy (who called me--No. I wasn't checking up on Kirby). She told me Artie mowed the lawn yesterday. Also, she has cleaned everything they can until the furniture is out. She expects to have it spit-shined by her move-out Thursday. A tenant cleaning on their way out the door? That is crazy!
Fortunately for me, Kirby blissfully took my homes and thought nothing else about representing me until about three seconds into our contract when I started calling asking loads of questions. I have no idea where Kirby stands on the whole working with me thing as of today, but I can only guess. As Legal Eagle has pointed out on a few occasions, I "amuse" her. I suspect Kirby might have similar thoughts in between rolling his eyes when my number comes up on caller ID.
When I talked with Kirby on Tuesday, Candy and Artie were expected to be out by Thursday. Kirby had been fielding calls from the homeless for the soon to be vacant Fultondale house and, as he explained, "Most of the callers are just crazy." Sadly, my first instinct was to wonder why Kirby thought that was a black mark against a possible future tenant. But then again, he doesn't read this blog.
I hope.
Kirby did tell me he is showing the home to sane-sounding people this weekend. So, I am crossing my fingers for a short vacancy. Apparently there isn't much for rent in that area. And, the price (which has been raised to cover the property management costs) doesn't seem to be scaring renters away--at least the crazy ones.
On top of that, I spoke with Candy (who called me--No. I wasn't checking up on Kirby). She told me Artie mowed the lawn yesterday. Also, she has cleaned everything they can until the furniture is out. She expects to have it spit-shined by her move-out Thursday. A tenant cleaning on their way out the door? That is crazy!
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Donning the Crash Helmet
Was this summer of peaceful tenants too good to be true? Maybe. But, does it count as a disaster if it takes until mid-July for the rocks o'distruction to come crashing down?
Ms. Robin--who has been absolutely fabulous in the almost two years she has rented from me--bounced a check two months ago. Three weeks ago, she said last month's payment was coming last week. As this was unusual for her, I let it go. However, I made a mental note.
This past Friday she said she just didn't have the rent. And, they were happy to move on. She didn't offer tons of excuses. Just that they were behind. Life had gotten crazy--Mr. Robin had surgery two months ago. And, that is where they are.
When I talked to her Friday, I offered her up a few suggestions. Ms. Robin is someone I am willing to work with, if she indeed wants to. I don't want to urge her to stay if it won't work out in the long run. Neither of us benefit from that. But, if there was something that can be done, yep. I will play.
She did get back to me with a somewhat viable solution I will accept. The reasons I will accept it are: 1) they have history with me of being very good tenants 2) they have jobs that are recession-proof (Birmingham's unemployment rate right now is over 12 percent) and 3) them moving out gives me a vacant home. Though I could rent it out again, this seemed significantly easier.
Once Ms. Robin was set in place, Ms. Kathy decided to e-mail me. Mind you, her rent is due on the 3rd. I heard from her on the 12th. She is on widow's social security--which (ideally) is a guaranteed rent check. As anyone who has read this blog for any length of time knows, "guarantee" and "Ms. Kathy" in the same sentence is questionable.
According to Ms. Kathy, Social Security messed up her check this month and should have it fixed by next month. So, could she pay two months on August 3? I would have been so much happier if she had mentioned this to me nine days ago. I might have even believed her.
Now what? Here was the dilemma: Ms. Kathy has been the picture perfect tenant since our encounter in March. No rent problems, with only the occasional septic tank needing to be drained. I can handle that. Truly, it would take longer to kick Ms. Kathy out (who probably doesn't have the money to move anyway--no matter where her "lost" Social Security check might happen to be) than it would be to wait for her to send me two rent checks next month. To her credit--and I mean this sincerely--she offered up a solution instead of making me bring one to the table. This is the only reason I went along her.
Except, I am not sure I believe I will be getting two rent checks. I am expecting I will probably will get one month's worth of rent and tons of excuses. Begrudgingly, I did agree to her silly plan as long as she sent me a token amount--which she swears she put in the mail immediately after she got my e-mail.
All this, plus Artie and Candy are supposed to move out this week. Marty Sunshine tells me if this is the worst it gets, it isn't too bad. Both Ms. Robin and Ms. Kathy's situations are sorta resolved, with me giving in more than I really care for. Kirby is handling Artie and Candy's Fultondale home. So, hopefully this is a momentary rock slide and not an avalanche.
Ms. Robin--who has been absolutely fabulous in the almost two years she has rented from me--bounced a check two months ago. Three weeks ago, she said last month's payment was coming last week. As this was unusual for her, I let it go. However, I made a mental note.
This past Friday she said she just didn't have the rent. And, they were happy to move on. She didn't offer tons of excuses. Just that they were behind. Life had gotten crazy--Mr. Robin had surgery two months ago. And, that is where they are.
When I talked to her Friday, I offered her up a few suggestions. Ms. Robin is someone I am willing to work with, if she indeed wants to. I don't want to urge her to stay if it won't work out in the long run. Neither of us benefit from that. But, if there was something that can be done, yep. I will play.
She did get back to me with a somewhat viable solution I will accept. The reasons I will accept it are: 1) they have history with me of being very good tenants 2) they have jobs that are recession-proof (Birmingham's unemployment rate right now is over 12 percent) and 3) them moving out gives me a vacant home. Though I could rent it out again, this seemed significantly easier.
Once Ms. Robin was set in place, Ms. Kathy decided to e-mail me. Mind you, her rent is due on the 3rd. I heard from her on the 12th. She is on widow's social security--which (ideally) is a guaranteed rent check. As anyone who has read this blog for any length of time knows, "guarantee" and "Ms. Kathy" in the same sentence is questionable.
According to Ms. Kathy, Social Security messed up her check this month and should have it fixed by next month. So, could she pay two months on August 3? I would have been so much happier if she had mentioned this to me nine days ago. I might have even believed her.
Now what? Here was the dilemma: Ms. Kathy has been the picture perfect tenant since our encounter in March. No rent problems, with only the occasional septic tank needing to be drained. I can handle that. Truly, it would take longer to kick Ms. Kathy out (who probably doesn't have the money to move anyway--no matter where her "lost" Social Security check might happen to be) than it would be to wait for her to send me two rent checks next month. To her credit--and I mean this sincerely--she offered up a solution instead of making me bring one to the table. This is the only reason I went along her.
Except, I am not sure I believe I will be getting two rent checks. I am expecting I will probably will get one month's worth of rent and tons of excuses. Begrudgingly, I did agree to her silly plan as long as she sent me a token amount--which she swears she put in the mail immediately after she got my e-mail.
All this, plus Artie and Candy are supposed to move out this week. Marty Sunshine tells me if this is the worst it gets, it isn't too bad. Both Ms. Robin and Ms. Kathy's situations are sorta resolved, with me giving in more than I really care for. Kirby is handling Artie and Candy's Fultondale home. So, hopefully this is a momentary rock slide and not an avalanche.
Monday, July 12, 2010
List O'Demands
One of the more exasperating part of being a real estate agent is when a buyer decides they love the home they are looking at and then wants to put an offer in for significantly less than asking price. I can tell them different reasons why it isn't a good idea until the end of time. Rarely do buyers listen.
Most of the time the seller will:
1. ignore the offer
2. wait until something better comes along (in the case of a short sale or bank foreclosure)
3. counter back with something much more reasonable.
In every case, the other agent and I are groaning, knowing what has happened is a colossal waste of time, and will result in either no sale or a sale with ill-will among the parties ("I am selling it for less, so I won't fix the leaky sink...").
My experience shows me buyers need to learn on their own. The ridiculous lowball game benefits nobody. And me telling them repeatedly, or more likely showing them historical trends, doesn't lend to my credibility--even when I am right. No, this is one they will have to learn the hard way. And generally they get the third time around--if I haven't fired them as my clients by then.
I'm working with one right now who fits this pattern. And, if I wasn't on this mad-dash to fix our undercapitalized issues, I would be referring her to someone I immensely dislike. But, I digress...
In general, home sales that do go through tend to done fairly. And, "fair" doesn't always mean the seller and buyer get their price. A reasonable buyer won't necessarily quibble about $2,000 when they are getting some extras thrown in. A seller is more likely to come down $2,000 when they are guaranteed a closing in 30 days. These things make a difference. Experience tells me those willing to look at a transaction as a win-win who are the happiest when the home closes.
I am keeping this in perspective as I sell my Waterford Home. We don't have a formal contract written up just yet. This is not unusual in the South. Generally, everything is done on a handshake and then when all terms are ironed out, then the paperwork is done.
Instead, we are working through Kirby, who is negotiating on our behalf. The tenant/buyer happens to be a licensed agent as well. I have never spoken with the tenant. I do know she is also post-pardum and was very pissy about the whole HOA swimming pool thing. So, I have no idea what kind of buyer I am dealing with.
I do know the buyers don't really want to haul their stuff somewhere else if they don't need to. I have an idea what they want to pay. I also know they wanted/needed closing costs rolled into the loan. I also have to pay Kirby. Those are my costs. However, I want this to go through.
So, we listened to what they wanted. Countered at our our price. We offered up a home warranty. We also offered a termite bond (which I renew every year anyway). I will pay their closing costs, but that will include an appraisal. Also, I am not making repairs. The house was in good shape when they moved in. If they decide they have something they want fixed, they could have asked long before now.
I am also willing to let them use their security deposit as earnest money, with the understanding if the sale doesn't go through, the money is returned to Kirby as a security deposit. And, they must keep their rent current. So, no skipping August's rent payment, unless they are closing by August 1 (which I doubt). I didn't say I wouldn't prorate the rent--but I will if they ask. I am letting them figure that part out.
My only two non-negotiable points are that Kirby must be present for the appraisal. I don't want the tenants bending the appraiser's ear, telling them about defects that might cause the appraisal to come in lower. And, the closing must go through Attorney Jon.
What I don't know is how serious they are. Were they just throwing out the concept to see if we would bite? Do they really want to buy? Are we off so much from their bottom line and my bottom line that there is no room to breathe? When faced with the actual idea of committing money, are they going to balk and back down?
When I last spoke with Kirby on Friday, he said they were planning on getting back to him next week. I am hoping that is serious enough to accept our offer or send us a counter. And, hopefully if they send a counter-offer, it is realistic enough to move forward.
Most of the time the seller will:
1. ignore the offer
2. wait until something better comes along (in the case of a short sale or bank foreclosure)
3. counter back with something much more reasonable.
In every case, the other agent and I are groaning, knowing what has happened is a colossal waste of time, and will result in either no sale or a sale with ill-will among the parties ("I am selling it for less, so I won't fix the leaky sink...").
My experience shows me buyers need to learn on their own. The ridiculous lowball game benefits nobody. And me telling them repeatedly, or more likely showing them historical trends, doesn't lend to my credibility--even when I am right. No, this is one they will have to learn the hard way. And generally they get the third time around--if I haven't fired them as my clients by then.
I'm working with one right now who fits this pattern. And, if I wasn't on this mad-dash to fix our undercapitalized issues, I would be referring her to someone I immensely dislike. But, I digress...
In general, home sales that do go through tend to done fairly. And, "fair" doesn't always mean the seller and buyer get their price. A reasonable buyer won't necessarily quibble about $2,000 when they are getting some extras thrown in. A seller is more likely to come down $2,000 when they are guaranteed a closing in 30 days. These things make a difference. Experience tells me those willing to look at a transaction as a win-win who are the happiest when the home closes.
I am keeping this in perspective as I sell my Waterford Home. We don't have a formal contract written up just yet. This is not unusual in the South. Generally, everything is done on a handshake and then when all terms are ironed out, then the paperwork is done.
Instead, we are working through Kirby, who is negotiating on our behalf. The tenant/buyer happens to be a licensed agent as well. I have never spoken with the tenant. I do know she is also post-pardum and was very pissy about the whole HOA swimming pool thing. So, I have no idea what kind of buyer I am dealing with.
I do know the buyers don't really want to haul their stuff somewhere else if they don't need to. I have an idea what they want to pay. I also know they wanted/needed closing costs rolled into the loan. I also have to pay Kirby. Those are my costs. However, I want this to go through.
So, we listened to what they wanted. Countered at our our price. We offered up a home warranty. We also offered a termite bond (which I renew every year anyway). I will pay their closing costs, but that will include an appraisal. Also, I am not making repairs. The house was in good shape when they moved in. If they decide they have something they want fixed, they could have asked long before now.
I am also willing to let them use their security deposit as earnest money, with the understanding if the sale doesn't go through, the money is returned to Kirby as a security deposit. And, they must keep their rent current. So, no skipping August's rent payment, unless they are closing by August 1 (which I doubt). I didn't say I wouldn't prorate the rent--but I will if they ask. I am letting them figure that part out.
My only two non-negotiable points are that Kirby must be present for the appraisal. I don't want the tenants bending the appraiser's ear, telling them about defects that might cause the appraisal to come in lower. And, the closing must go through Attorney Jon.
What I don't know is how serious they are. Were they just throwing out the concept to see if we would bite? Do they really want to buy? Are we off so much from their bottom line and my bottom line that there is no room to breathe? When faced with the actual idea of committing money, are they going to balk and back down?
When I last spoke with Kirby on Friday, he said they were planning on getting back to him next week. I am hoping that is serious enough to accept our offer or send us a counter. And, hopefully if they send a counter-offer, it is realistic enough to move forward.
Friday, July 09, 2010
Hopefully Letting Go
The folks at the Waterford home are interested in buying. We are interested in selling. However, we are coming in writing a check. Though, I don't recommend this scenario, this upfront check will be less than the loss we will take if we keep it another year.
One of the main reasons we are selling is that the neighborhood is seeing diminishing rents. The last two years I have noticed this, but managed--in both cases--to find the only tenants in the area who weren't paying attention to what their neighbors were paying in rent.
The first ones had bad credit and worse housekeeping skills. I ended up replacing the carpet and painting walls that shouldn't have needed to be painted when they moved out. The second have better credit and realized their poor shopping skills early on. Essentially, they aren't staying past their lease when they can rent the house down the street, or even buy the house down the street, for much less.
I can keep this house, but I expect to take a $200 gross hit in rent. That would be what I loose before Kirby, the property manager, takes his rightful cut. The way I estimate it, if I ask market rent price for this home, it is about $200 less than I am getting now. With the influx of homes available for rent in the area, it will still take at two months to get it re-rented, maybe even more, as the tenants' lease is up in November.
Then there is the HOA.... The HOA cut out about $900 in late fees and fines off my bill when I paid it last week. I was two years behind (which, if I am doing the math correctly, means the first tenant--the original tenant--I had in place, paid the HOA for a number of years before she moved out). At any rate. The HOA isn't going away. I don't want to write another check to them. Ever.
And, there is the biggie. If you learn anything from this blog, gentle reader, it is this: do as I say, not as I did.
We bought the property with a little down and an adjustable rate mortgage (and for any reader who might likely make a comment about adjustable rate mortages--please don't. I learned my lesson). In theory the loan is going down next month. But, I haven't seen a letter from the bank proving it. That said, I am estimating the payment jumping significantly, at which point this home will be a perpetual loss for us. As a company, we can cover one upside down mortgage if we have to. But, I would rather not.
So, it boils down to this: are the tenants willing to save the moving costs to buy the home they live in? I sure hope so.
One of the main reasons we are selling is that the neighborhood is seeing diminishing rents. The last two years I have noticed this, but managed--in both cases--to find the only tenants in the area who weren't paying attention to what their neighbors were paying in rent.
The first ones had bad credit and worse housekeeping skills. I ended up replacing the carpet and painting walls that shouldn't have needed to be painted when they moved out. The second have better credit and realized their poor shopping skills early on. Essentially, they aren't staying past their lease when they can rent the house down the street, or even buy the house down the street, for much less.
I can keep this house, but I expect to take a $200 gross hit in rent. That would be what I loose before Kirby, the property manager, takes his rightful cut. The way I estimate it, if I ask market rent price for this home, it is about $200 less than I am getting now. With the influx of homes available for rent in the area, it will still take at two months to get it re-rented, maybe even more, as the tenants' lease is up in November.
Then there is the HOA.... The HOA cut out about $900 in late fees and fines off my bill when I paid it last week. I was two years behind (which, if I am doing the math correctly, means the first tenant--the original tenant--I had in place, paid the HOA for a number of years before she moved out). At any rate. The HOA isn't going away. I don't want to write another check to them. Ever.
And, there is the biggie. If you learn anything from this blog, gentle reader, it is this: do as I say, not as I did.
We bought the property with a little down and an adjustable rate mortgage (and for any reader who might likely make a comment about adjustable rate mortages--please don't. I learned my lesson). In theory the loan is going down next month. But, I haven't seen a letter from the bank proving it. That said, I am estimating the payment jumping significantly, at which point this home will be a perpetual loss for us. As a company, we can cover one upside down mortgage if we have to. But, I would rather not.
So, it boils down to this: are the tenants willing to save the moving costs to buy the home they live in? I sure hope so.
Thursday, July 08, 2010
The Pizza Pow-Wow
Sitting around at Vitos, in Mesa on Wednesday, Marty, Mr. Partner and I (along with Buckaroo and Polly--who came for the food and because I didn't have a babysitter to watch them), sat down for an impromptu discussion. Essentially, it was a follow up from my e-mail, where I begged for wild amounts of money in exchange for his cooperation.
And, I got it.
All of it.
Mr. Partner did lament this was the third year we have shot an influx of cash into our business account. I happily pointed out, he was correct. However, this was the first year we shot an influx of cash and it was going to better the company, not buy an overgrown band-aid for our company and a vat of wine for me.
And, while I had his attention, I also hit him up with a few other tidbits, like property taxes would be again due in December. And, I wasn't promising we wouldn't have to write a check out of pocket one more time. And, while I was shoveling out the reality, this is a two-year plan and I am only in phase 1. So, it would be best for Mr. Partner not to get too comfortable. We will be doing this again. This is only to fix our poor planning from years earlier.
Mr. Partner agreed to everything without conditions. Although, I think he will draw the line if the house we are selling doesn't appraise for anywhere near what we are asking for it. But, I will cross that bridge when I come to it.
I'm on a high at this moment. The best part is I am not writing about evicting or trashed homes. I am writing about growing and moving forward. We may be along way from our undercapitalized issues being resolved. But we are building momentum.
It can happen.
And, I got it.
All of it.
Mr. Partner did lament this was the third year we have shot an influx of cash into our business account. I happily pointed out, he was correct. However, this was the first year we shot an influx of cash and it was going to better the company, not buy an overgrown band-aid for our company and a vat of wine for me.
And, while I had his attention, I also hit him up with a few other tidbits, like property taxes would be again due in December. And, I wasn't promising we wouldn't have to write a check out of pocket one more time. And, while I was shoveling out the reality, this is a two-year plan and I am only in phase 1. So, it would be best for Mr. Partner not to get too comfortable. We will be doing this again. This is only to fix our poor planning from years earlier.
Mr. Partner agreed to everything without conditions. Although, I think he will draw the line if the house we are selling doesn't appraise for anywhere near what we are asking for it. But, I will cross that bridge when I come to it.
I'm on a high at this moment. The best part is I am not writing about evicting or trashed homes. I am writing about growing and moving forward. We may be along way from our undercapitalized issues being resolved. But we are building momentum.
It can happen.
Wednesday, July 07, 2010
Good News?
Mr. Partner got back to me. He said:
"I believe that you are on the right track. More later...."
The was the entirety of the note. Nothing more.
Zip.
Nada.
In true girl fashion, I have over-analyzed this, looking for the deep-seated meaning. Does he mean he will be willing to move forward with the sale and the refinance? Does it mean he is willing to fix one but not the other? If so, which one?
Of course (in true girl fashion), I am not willing to call him and ask for clarification. Not yet. That "more later" was not lost on me. It sounds like a major pow-wow is probably going to be in order. Whether I want one or not.
"I believe that you are on the right track. More later...."
The was the entirety of the note. Nothing more.
Zip.
Nada.
In true girl fashion, I have over-analyzed this, looking for the deep-seated meaning. Does he mean he will be willing to move forward with the sale and the refinance? Does it mean he is willing to fix one but not the other? If so, which one?
Of course (in true girl fashion), I am not willing to call him and ask for clarification. Not yet. That "more later" was not lost on me. It sounds like a major pow-wow is probably going to be in order. Whether I want one or not.
Monday, July 05, 2010
Apparently, I Will Never Rule The World
And, that is fine by me.
I found this article today from the London Evening Standard. Interesting, most of the night owls I know are introverts. Go figure?
Why morning people rule the world
Philip Delves Broughton
We are all morning or evening people. Scientists have established that our genes dictate around half of what they call our “chronotypes” — our natural preference for certain times of the day.
Evolution has produced a range of humans capable of being alert to danger at every hour of the day. Our experience confirms these findings. We all know people who love to be at work bright and early, with a cup of coffee to hand and decisions to make, and others who would rather stumble through the day until reaching a state of relaxed clarity around dusk, when their minds are purring.
The problem is that those with the genetic gift of “morning-ness” tend to be more highly rewarded. Morning-ness is perceived as a sign of activity and zest, whereas evening-ness implies laziness and loafing. How often did we have to see David Cameron on one of his early-morning runs to get the idea that here was a leader of potency and vigour? How different would it have been if he slunk out of bed to work, then exercised at around 8pm? Could a Prime Minister be elected today who worked like Churchill, reading, writing and thinking in bed before getting out of it at noon?
History is full of great bores praising the virtues of early rising, but few have made the case for letting the day drift by until you kick into gear around happy hour.
Yet the research continues to mount, arguing that evening people have qualities which should be nurtured. They tend to be more creative, intelligent, humorous and extroverted. They are the balance to morning people, who are said to be more optimistic, proactive and conscientious.
Evening and morning are the right and left sides of our brain, the creative and the analytical, both of which we need to organise, process and advance our lives.
New research by Christoph Randler, a biology professor at the University of Education at Heidelberg, however, concludes that morning people are more likely to succeed in their careers because they are more proactive than evening people.
He surveyed 367 university students, asking them when they were most energetic and willing to change a situation. It was the morning people who were more likely to agree with statements such as “I feel in charge of making things happen” and “I spend time identifying long-range goals for myself.”
Discussing his research in the Harvard Business Review, Randler says: “When it comes to business success, morning people hold the important cards. My earlier research showed that they tend to get better grades in school, which gets them into better colleges, which then leads to better job opportunities. Morning people also anticipate problems and try to minimise them. They're proactive.”
Christopher Coleridge, the founder of V Water, the fast-growing vitamin-enhanced water brand, has a different view on the advantages of morning-ness. “Morning is always the best time to get people to make decisions because people are full of optimism in the morning. By 9am, nothing really can go wrong. You're full of hope. By 4pm, at least six annoying things will have happened, so by the evening you're slightly annoyed and frustrated. Fortunately, you then have the rest of the evening to pick yourself up.”
Earlier in his career, when Coleridge worked in advertising, he found the culture much more focused on the evenings, when conversations over drinks would lead to creative ideas. But as an entrepreneur, he found mornings were the best time to corral people's energies.
Evening-ness, he says, can be exploited by companies that are full of young people. But mornings appeal more to people with families who want a schedule which allows them to get in early and leave on time. For the growing army of part-time and freelance workers, tight schedules are just as important. “They tend to be very focused because they are moving from project to project and they don't have time to yack away.”
In certain environments, morning-ness is unavoidable. In the City, many of the most significant meetings take place before the markets open. Schools, however, force morning-ness on teenagers at a moment when everything else in their lives — their hormones, their social lives, their working patterns — is drifting towards the evening.
But can one change one's chronotype from evening to morning? Randler says “somewhat”, but it can be hard. He cites one study that showed half of school pupils were able permanently to shift the time they woke up by one hour. Chronotypes, however, do evolve over one's life. Adolescents tend towards evening-ness; from the ages of 30 to 50, people are evenly split between morning and evening; and over-50s are more morning types.
The challenge for companies, Randler says, is to accept that evening-ness is an inherent trait and, rather than battling against it, find ways to “get the best out from their night owls”.
I found this article today from the London Evening Standard. Interesting, most of the night owls I know are introverts. Go figure?
Why morning people rule the world
Philip Delves Broughton
We are all morning or evening people. Scientists have established that our genes dictate around half of what they call our “chronotypes” — our natural preference for certain times of the day.
Evolution has produced a range of humans capable of being alert to danger at every hour of the day. Our experience confirms these findings. We all know people who love to be at work bright and early, with a cup of coffee to hand and decisions to make, and others who would rather stumble through the day until reaching a state of relaxed clarity around dusk, when their minds are purring.
The problem is that those with the genetic gift of “morning-ness” tend to be more highly rewarded. Morning-ness is perceived as a sign of activity and zest, whereas evening-ness implies laziness and loafing. How often did we have to see David Cameron on one of his early-morning runs to get the idea that here was a leader of potency and vigour? How different would it have been if he slunk out of bed to work, then exercised at around 8pm? Could a Prime Minister be elected today who worked like Churchill, reading, writing and thinking in bed before getting out of it at noon?
History is full of great bores praising the virtues of early rising, but few have made the case for letting the day drift by until you kick into gear around happy hour.
Yet the research continues to mount, arguing that evening people have qualities which should be nurtured. They tend to be more creative, intelligent, humorous and extroverted. They are the balance to morning people, who are said to be more optimistic, proactive and conscientious.
Evening and morning are the right and left sides of our brain, the creative and the analytical, both of which we need to organise, process and advance our lives.
New research by Christoph Randler, a biology professor at the University of Education at Heidelberg, however, concludes that morning people are more likely to succeed in their careers because they are more proactive than evening people.
He surveyed 367 university students, asking them when they were most energetic and willing to change a situation. It was the morning people who were more likely to agree with statements such as “I feel in charge of making things happen” and “I spend time identifying long-range goals for myself.”
Discussing his research in the Harvard Business Review, Randler says: “When it comes to business success, morning people hold the important cards. My earlier research showed that they tend to get better grades in school, which gets them into better colleges, which then leads to better job opportunities. Morning people also anticipate problems and try to minimise them. They're proactive.”
Christopher Coleridge, the founder of V Water, the fast-growing vitamin-enhanced water brand, has a different view on the advantages of morning-ness. “Morning is always the best time to get people to make decisions because people are full of optimism in the morning. By 9am, nothing really can go wrong. You're full of hope. By 4pm, at least six annoying things will have happened, so by the evening you're slightly annoyed and frustrated. Fortunately, you then have the rest of the evening to pick yourself up.”
Earlier in his career, when Coleridge worked in advertising, he found the culture much more focused on the evenings, when conversations over drinks would lead to creative ideas. But as an entrepreneur, he found mornings were the best time to corral people's energies.
Evening-ness, he says, can be exploited by companies that are full of young people. But mornings appeal more to people with families who want a schedule which allows them to get in early and leave on time. For the growing army of part-time and freelance workers, tight schedules are just as important. “They tend to be very focused because they are moving from project to project and they don't have time to yack away.”
In certain environments, morning-ness is unavoidable. In the City, many of the most significant meetings take place before the markets open. Schools, however, force morning-ness on teenagers at a moment when everything else in their lives — their hormones, their social lives, their working patterns — is drifting towards the evening.
But can one change one's chronotype from evening to morning? Randler says “somewhat”, but it can be hard. He cites one study that showed half of school pupils were able permanently to shift the time they woke up by one hour. Chronotypes, however, do evolve over one's life. Adolescents tend towards evening-ness; from the ages of 30 to 50, people are evenly split between morning and evening; and over-50s are more morning types.
The challenge for companies, Randler says, is to accept that evening-ness is an inherent trait and, rather than battling against it, find ways to “get the best out from their night owls”.
Friday, July 02, 2010
Vinegar Pie
In a moment of universal upheaval last Friday, while eating breakfast at Cindy's cafe at some horrid hour of dawn, I wanted to talk financials. Diamond Jim wanted to talk baseball. Of course, had I known what Diamond Jim wanted to say I probably would have completely ditched the financial conversation to begin with.
Friday morning, bright and cheery from breakfast and Jim's wonderful news (which I predicted--thankyouverymuch), I composted a sales pitch to Mr. Partner. No, that wasn't a typo.
There are many ways to say something. This past week my cyber-friend Lori and I have been having quick chats about "vinegar pie," the ability to serve up a heaping dose of the unpleasant in such a way that, in theory, it goes down smoothly. "Bless your heart..." is a great example.
Or, my favorite, "I mean this in the nicest way..." Now tell me, when have you ever heard this: "I mean this in the nicest way, I am pleased about your totally appropriate and honorable actions."? By including that opening clause, it is a lot easier for the intended audience to be open to your message.
In the report I sent to Mr. Partner, I started with some of the "opportunities" that have been handed to us. For example, one of our tenants wants to buy our home.
Mr. Partner has made it expressly clear, he has no interest in selling at a (perceived) loss. So, I explained that because of depreciation, we actually would be selling the house at a gain--and have to pay capital gains tax--and if we didn't sell this year, that "gain" would go up. But yea, we pretty much were selling it for less than we paid for it. I also gave him some somewhat legitimate numbers showing a significant loss if we chose to keep the house.
In truth, I have done the analysis, it is in our best interest to do this. Now. I don't like selling a home for less than we paid for it, but I don't like the idea of holding on to it for sentimental value either. We have done well by this property, but it is time for it to go.
I also told him I wanted to refinance one of our properties. And, I picked the home. It was the most logical choice in my mind: 1) it has a balloon note coming up in the next few years, 2) it is in a good neighborhood that hasn't seen a wave of foreclosures, thus the value is (presumably) stable, and 3) it is one of the homes with a loan in Marty Sunshine's name.
Not that I think Mr. Partner will question refinancing when we can get a better interest rate or that this house makes the most sense (it does), but we need to come in with some cash to make this happen. Mr. Partner isn't a fan of parting with his cash. For that matter, neither am I. But, I would rather come in with cash for this than because of a toxic chemical spill. This is the first summer in three years where we haven't had a toxic chemical spill.
What I didn't tell Mr. Partner, was if he doesn't agree to the refinance, Marty and I will do it ourselves anyway. We will phrase it like this, "I hope you understand, because I mean this in the nicest way..."
Friday morning, bright and cheery from breakfast and Jim's wonderful news (which I predicted--thankyouverymuch), I composted a sales pitch to Mr. Partner. No, that wasn't a typo.
There are many ways to say something. This past week my cyber-friend Lori and I have been having quick chats about "vinegar pie," the ability to serve up a heaping dose of the unpleasant in such a way that, in theory, it goes down smoothly. "Bless your heart..." is a great example.
Or, my favorite, "I mean this in the nicest way..." Now tell me, when have you ever heard this: "I mean this in the nicest way, I am pleased about your totally appropriate and honorable actions."? By including that opening clause, it is a lot easier for the intended audience to be open to your message.
In the report I sent to Mr. Partner, I started with some of the "opportunities" that have been handed to us. For example, one of our tenants wants to buy our home.
Mr. Partner has made it expressly clear, he has no interest in selling at a (perceived) loss. So, I explained that because of depreciation, we actually would be selling the house at a gain--and have to pay capital gains tax--and if we didn't sell this year, that "gain" would go up. But yea, we pretty much were selling it for less than we paid for it. I also gave him some somewhat legitimate numbers showing a significant loss if we chose to keep the house.
In truth, I have done the analysis, it is in our best interest to do this. Now. I don't like selling a home for less than we paid for it, but I don't like the idea of holding on to it for sentimental value either. We have done well by this property, but it is time for it to go.
I also told him I wanted to refinance one of our properties. And, I picked the home. It was the most logical choice in my mind: 1) it has a balloon note coming up in the next few years, 2) it is in a good neighborhood that hasn't seen a wave of foreclosures, thus the value is (presumably) stable, and 3) it is one of the homes with a loan in Marty Sunshine's name.
Not that I think Mr. Partner will question refinancing when we can get a better interest rate or that this house makes the most sense (it does), but we need to come in with some cash to make this happen. Mr. Partner isn't a fan of parting with his cash. For that matter, neither am I. But, I would rather come in with cash for this than because of a toxic chemical spill. This is the first summer in three years where we haven't had a toxic chemical spill.
What I didn't tell Mr. Partner, was if he doesn't agree to the refinance, Marty and I will do it ourselves anyway. We will phrase it like this, "I hope you understand, because I mean this in the nicest way..."
I Hope to Have the Crash Helmet for Sale in September
On the invitation of a very good friend, I went to Prescott this week for three days to bask in the cool 90 degree weather. I hiked. I biked. I got to sit on the floor of the bookstore and look at what I wanted to look at without interruption. It was awesome.
Though the summer is (thankfully) 1/3 over, I am still gun shy about all hell breaking loose the way it did for the past two summers. By now, two years ago, I was in shock as things were crashing down and I just wasn't able to put on a safety helmet in time. Last summer, a similar story, but I thought I was somewhat ready, so I ditched the helmet early on, only to replace three air conditioners, get two trashed homes and a whole litany of blog fodder.
Now that I scoured e-bay for a reinforced crash helmet, I am pleased to say this summer hasn't been like that. In fact, it has been just the opposite. My friend in Prescott gave me some kind words about how it is an attribute to the management of what we do that things have stabilized. I thought about that as I drove home from Prescott, into the searing heat of Phoenix, and teared up. I would like to think I am doing some things right.
On Thursday Candy called me. She left me a message asking if I would mind if she could deposit the rent (due on June 15) and late fees directly into my bank account instead of mailing a check. Seriously? Would I mind??! I have to tell you, I never expected to see Candy's last month's rent. For whatever reason tenants in Alabama think the last month's rent is optional.
When I called her back, she also asked what it would cost to stay until Aug. 1? How much would I charge them?
Why? I asked.
Because they are having a hard time finding a new place to rent. Another beautiful sentiment. I love that there are few rental homes in Birmingham. It makes my nice, spacious home in Fultondale more desirable. For those of you familiar with the basics of economics, less homes means higher rent. I am good with that. Especially now that I am employing Kirby to manage this home.
I agreed, as long as she would allow for Kirby to show the home this month while they looked. Would that be a problem? No, it would not.
I haven't taken off my crash helmet--not just yet. But it looks like--maybe--I won't need it after all.
Though the summer is (thankfully) 1/3 over, I am still gun shy about all hell breaking loose the way it did for the past two summers. By now, two years ago, I was in shock as things were crashing down and I just wasn't able to put on a safety helmet in time. Last summer, a similar story, but I thought I was somewhat ready, so I ditched the helmet early on, only to replace three air conditioners, get two trashed homes and a whole litany of blog fodder.
Now that I scoured e-bay for a reinforced crash helmet, I am pleased to say this summer hasn't been like that. In fact, it has been just the opposite. My friend in Prescott gave me some kind words about how it is an attribute to the management of what we do that things have stabilized. I thought about that as I drove home from Prescott, into the searing heat of Phoenix, and teared up. I would like to think I am doing some things right.
On Thursday Candy called me. She left me a message asking if I would mind if she could deposit the rent (due on June 15) and late fees directly into my bank account instead of mailing a check. Seriously? Would I mind??! I have to tell you, I never expected to see Candy's last month's rent. For whatever reason tenants in Alabama think the last month's rent is optional.
When I called her back, she also asked what it would cost to stay until Aug. 1? How much would I charge them?
Why? I asked.
Because they are having a hard time finding a new place to rent. Another beautiful sentiment. I love that there are few rental homes in Birmingham. It makes my nice, spacious home in Fultondale more desirable. For those of you familiar with the basics of economics, less homes means higher rent. I am good with that. Especially now that I am employing Kirby to manage this home.
I agreed, as long as she would allow for Kirby to show the home this month while they looked. Would that be a problem? No, it would not.
I haven't taken off my crash helmet--not just yet. But it looks like--maybe--I won't need it after all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)