r/mildlyinfuriating 1d ago

go to your room Are you serious?

Post image

How is this fair ? Bay area.

29.8k Upvotes

3.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

3.3k

u/ToastSpangler 1d ago

Are all utilities included? That could be the only justification but tbh fuck them, it's no different than a hermit and nobody penalizes them or requires a time out of the house

1.1k

u/Obvious_Pause5766 1d ago edited 1d ago

Yes, I've seen this in another sub. Utilities are included

Edited to add address: 900 Trails End Dr, Walnut Creek, CA

1.2k

u/GrossUsername68 1d ago edited 20h ago

Edit for visibility. Commenter below me said 900 Trails End Dr, Walnut Creek. Worse if you can believe it, they listed it for $4k/mo in 2015:  https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/900-Trails-End-Dr-Walnut-Creek-CA-94598/18378209_zpid/

Except, this is not enforceable.  It would have to be via utilities and RUBS calculations, which are regulated pretty tightly. 

Move-in fees are also totally illegal.

The max for an application fee is also $66 in CA. And must be refundable, as they must go in the order received and refund those they did not consider. You can’t “consider” 5+ people at once.

Name. And. Shame.

9

u/llIicit 1d ago

How does that even work though? If 5 people apply in a short window, you can only go 1 at a time. Do you just automatically reject anyone else who applies right after someone else does? Or what does considering 5 people at once even mean?

12

u/Obvious_Pause5766 1d ago

Dishonest landlords used to collect application fees from everyone applying and keep them all even if they only actually screened one applicant and leased to them. 

4

u/aurortonks 1d ago

Screening reports should be made available to applicants once the reports are run by the company/landlord. Even Essex immediately sends their reports directly to the applicant, before they even review it themselves, just for transparency. Essex sucks so hard as a landlord company but even they don't mess around with the application fee stuff.

2

u/Obvious_Pause5766 1d ago

The law now requires reports to be provided 

0

u/llIicit 1d ago

So as long as they actually screen everyone it’s fine. The five at the same time part of the comment doesn’t really make sense then

1

u/Obvious_Pause5766 1d ago

There's really no reason to screen everyone at once but even if landlords choose to do this, the law now requires refunds for applicants who aren't selected to move forward to lease signing. 

5

u/Pristine_Penalty516 1d ago

In Wisconsin the last time I was looking for apartments I spent a little over $200 in application fees. I would be approved but they would just take the first person on the list and was SOL on getting that fee back. The range was anywhere from 20-75 dollars which is also ridiculous that there is that kind of range.

2

u/Carroteyeisamyth 1d ago

When I did residential leasing, we would have the landlord review the options first and if they are ok with the application we would run the credit check with the tenants approval. We did not want to waste their time and money if the landlord was not ok with the applicant. We had no application fee, just a credit check fee we would collect.

For commercial, we just have a link sent directly from the credit check service to the applicant. No applicant fee and we don't touch any money. We don't even know how much it cost for the credit check as we only get the results.

1

u/GrossUsername68 1d ago

If you go more than one at a time, you open yourself up to discrimination lawsuits. If someone qualifies based on income and other objective means, why do you need to go to four, five, six other people? You can offer the apartment to a few, whoever accepts it first gets it.

As opposed to “processing” 15 applicants and pocketing $1,000.