Forum
« Highly Recommended Contractor Modern Steam Radiators »
November 2, 2009
Tenant Compensation?
I am a landlord who recently got a new tenant. When showing him the apartment initially, he asked if we would install a new rainshower shower head in the bathroom, and I agreed to do it, as I like to improve my properties. I informed him of how the renovation would proceed, and he assured me that it was no problem, he could shower at his cousins or the gym and kept assuring me throughout the job that it was no problem. The plumber that I hired took longer than he first said he would (so what else is new??), so the tenant was without water for 1 day, and without a shower for 2 weeks. The cost of the job was essentially 2 1/2 months worth of rent, as I installed a very good waterworks system and it looks fantastic. Now that the job is over, he wants rent reductions for the days without use (even when the water was off, there was a toilet he had access to in the building), and basically, he could use everything except the shower. The job did not have to be done, and this feels so ungrateful to me after doing a major (unnecessary improvement). I have not made a cent off of this tenant since he moved in in July; it has all gone in to the shower renovation. What percentage should he be compensated, if at all, for something that didn’t even need to be done, and is basically an upgrade for him to enjoy?
Comments
no good deed goes unpunished. I'm sure the tenant advocates will scream free rent for life!! But I'm with you on this one. Tenant asked for this additional extra and should have to accept certain inconveniences while you had to shoulder all the financial costs. Landlords are not responsible for all the stuff that happens in this world, contrary to some peoples opinions.
I would not offer any reduction since the tenant requested the addition and assured you he was fine with it all. If he continues to complain then offer a small reduction and then offset it with a huge increase next year. Hopefully he will move and you can get somebody more reasonable.
Posted by: tsarina at November 1, 2009 4:32 PM
I think you said it yourself. "The job did not have to be done..."
Rain shower heads are not to everyone's liking. They are more for a second bathroom providing an alternative experience (read luxury) and not a rental.
Providing upgrades like this should be done for economic reasons and you should not expect a thank you when it comes to a rental.
As for your new tenant wanting a reduction, there is nothing wrong with him asking. There is nothing wrong with you saying no either. Don't make it personal. Just say no.
Posted by: IMBY at November 1, 2009 6:00 PM
A strange tale of naivety and irresponsibility. Most landlords would install low-flow fixtures to save water instead of spending thousands on a exorbitantly wasteful feature.
Posted by: cmu at November 1, 2009 6:04 PM
Two weeks to put in a new showerhead? Heck you could have transported Niagra Falls into your apartment piece by piece for that amount of time!
Posted by: hannible at November 1, 2009 8:33 PM
tsrina, maybe LL's aren't responsible for all the "stuff" in the world but they are for a working shower. IMBY said it best. You could've, should've said no but you agreed to it and it took, by your own account - "longer than expected." I understand that you tried to do the right thing but that two week delay is on you. The tenant has a right to ask, you can always say no - hopefully, there's some middle ground.
Posted by: Crownlfc at November 1, 2009 8:56 PM
Just an update on what I posted: I had a whole thermostatic system installed, not just a showerhead, as long as I updated the shower. The tenant knew that the job would take 2 weeks, but never realized that it would affect him as much as it did, especially since he told me that it was okay to shower at his cousins or at friends, and kept insisting he could easily stay at friends as well. He is in his 20s and I am his 2nd landlord, so he has no experience that would lead him to believe that I did something unusually nice for him. He just seems to be trying to get more, more, more out of the deal. Also, maybe I installed a very good system, but I always consider what will help resale value; as long as I am doing a job on an apartment, I try to upgrade it as well.
Posted by: guesting at November 1, 2009 10:20 PM
He could ask for a temporary rent reduction (after the fact), and you too could ask for a rent increase for said installation/upgrade. Sometimes you have to mention these type of things back to greedy people so that they can realize that they are being ridiculous.
Posted by: townhouser at November 2, 2009 6:57 AM
Do you have an agreement in writing that states what each of you agreed to? i.e. that he'd be w/o certain amenities?
Posted by: Arkady at November 2, 2009 9:24 AM
This tenant has some nerve!!!! Rent back now b/c he was inconvenienced for something he asked for that clearly didn't have to be done! Oh pls.. I like townhouser idea of a rent increase for the upgrades... Is this person on a year lease b/c if not.. if this is any indication of what's to come..cut ur loses.
Posted by: scarter at November 2, 2009 9:50 AM
Tell him. In fact an upgrade like that should come with a rent increase (and I speak as a tenant here, not a LL). It's ridiculous- he asked for the upgrade, you did it. Even the most construction naive human being has to know these things take a little time. Write it all out in a letter- how he asked, what you said. At the end tell him the inconvenience was at his request and he should count himself lucky you were nice enough to do it and NOT increase his rent for the upgrade.
Posted by: bxgrl at November 2, 2009 10:00 AM
I like that this person is in his 20s and can rent a place with a "rain shower" shower head... I did something wrong I think. :-s
Posted by: tybur6 at November 2, 2009 10:01 AM
first thing you need to assess when picking and choosing a tenant, is are they high maintenance. look at their shoes and what kind of cell phone they use. those are two indicators of whether they are high maintenance and you dont want them as tenants. a rain shower head? c'mon. what a princess.
*rob*
Posted by: Butterfly at November 2, 2009 10:02 AM
It took longer than expected. Compromise. Meet half way. Move on with your life. Half off tenant's claim (if in ballpark of reasonability).
***Bill Thompson for Mayor (TOMORROW!!!)***
Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at November 2, 2009 10:14 AM
The key information among all the OP said is this:
The tenant requested the showerhead. The tenant WAS told it would be two weeks. The tenant said that would be okay because he could shower elsewhere. LATER after making the request and agreeing to the installation even if it meant being without a shower for two weeks he decided it had been enough of an inconvenience that he deserves a rent reduction.
Huh?? Just tell the guy no. Remind him he agreed to everything. I bet he won't bother to take it to court. Sounds like a spoiled entitled 20-something brat with no context or experience renting apartments, as you say. Don't let him take advantage of you any more than he already has.
Posted by: traditionalmod at November 2, 2009 10:16 AM
WOW! This is America - It never hurts to ask.
So I would say No.
Nothing gained, nothing loss...
I want to put a new tile floor and vanity in my tenants bathroom, I was thinking of asking them to give me advance notice as to when they are planing on going on vacation, and doing it then. Then hope it is done when they get back!
Posted by: Absolute Beginner at November 2, 2009 10:20 AM
Just say no.
Posted by: spqrxxi at November 2, 2009 10:23 AM
Maybe you should have bought one of these and been done with it for 30 bucks.
http://www.target.com/Rainshower-Chrome-Showerhead/dp/B0003WN19W
I'm assuming it's not a rent regulated apt but if it was you could raise the monthly rent 1/40 of the cost of MCI's. Tell the tenant the rent is increased 6% starting Nov (and you need 6% more for security deposit) and he can take a 25% credit against Oct rent for the inconvenience.
Posted by: Bklnite at November 2, 2009 10:25 AM
So now with the very expensive Waterworks rain shower cascading a waterfull on his head, the memories of the horror of showering in the gym or at his cousin's house for two weeks are so traumatic that he wants a rent reduction? How entitled can you get? I would do as some have suggested, remind him that this is an extra perk he is not being charged for, was at HIS request, and that he was told how long it would take, and that he had no problem with that at the time, and because of all that, NO!
Posted by: Montrose Morris at November 2, 2009 10:35 AM
the little princess could have just taken a french shower! his sink still worked right?
*rob*
Posted by: Butterfly at November 2, 2009 10:50 AM
Normally I'd side with the landlord except...
He asked for a shower head. You took the opportunity to upgrade the entire works. I'd probably have done the same (do it once, do it right) BUT, screwing on a new shower head would have taken a day. This was 2 weeks with no shower. You made the decision to do it and he can't take it with him when he leaves.
I'd just remind him that perhaps he's being a little greedy and concede to a small reduction.
Posted by: TownhouseLady at November 2, 2009 11:00 AM
The whole post is ridiculous...the OP as much as the tenant. The fixture was not specced by the tenant, it was selected by the LL. As Bklnite pointed out, a rainshower head is available for as little as $30. Screw off old, screw on new, add teflon tape if necessary, no need for a plumber. LL claims to have spent the equivalent of 2-1/2 months rent for the upgrade ($2,500-$7500 or more!?#*?!). The tenant’s been there since July (4 months) but OP claims he still hasn’t made a dime. What’s wrong with this math? The tenant’s not responsible for LL’s choice of upgrades to improve resale value. OP either made a wise business decision or s/he didn’t. I vote for the latter. As far as the tenant goes, if s/he made the request as OP described, and fully understood and agreed to the temporary inconvenience, then end of report. There was a temporary agreed-to inconvenience, it’s over, the tenant is reaping the benefit. BTW, don’t know how long OP’s been a LL, but there’s no inherent “gratefulness” quotient in the LL/tenant relationship.
Posted by: vinca at November 2, 2009 11:03 AM
I think a little common sense should prevail- the LL did a good thing- the tenant is benefiting. 2 weeks having to shower somewhere else? Please. The fact that you did it is damn nice- and it isn't unreasonable to do the job the right way- its your property. He had a minor inconvenience- one which he was willing to take on because he wanted the rainhead. Tell him no deal. Unless he's willing to pay extra rent for now having an upgraded shower-
Posted by: bxgrl at November 2, 2009 11:52 AM
without sounding like a total rube. what is a rainhead shower anyway?
*rob*
Posted by: Butterfly at November 2, 2009 11:59 AM
Tell him you've given him a reduction for the "pain & suffering" but that you've raised the rent to pay for extra water usage. Make it a wash (no pun intended...)
Posted by: Arkady at November 2, 2009 12:18 PM
2 weeks if showeing somewhere else is a major inconvenience, IMO. The renter asked for a showerhead, and probably did not understand all the work you were going to do. Remember people, we are only hearing one side of the story here. He probably figured installing a rain shower head take a half hour....which it does!
I would probably ask for compensation as well. If you refused I would just send a short rent check the next month and let you make the next move. If he shorts you $500 you probably have little recourse that is worth your time.
If this was work that needed to be done you should have done it before he moved in.
Posted by: Brokedeveloper at November 2, 2009 12:28 PM
Brokedeveloper- you try that short rent trick and you will lose in housing court. You cannot with hold rent because of a dispute- you have to go to housing court and do it the right way.
You obviously didn't read the post- it wasn't necessary. the tenant asked for it. In addition he kept assuring the landlord- who did keep him apprised of the situation- that it was no problem. rainhead showers need the proper plumbing. Tenant is greedy and inconsiderate.
Posted by: bxgrl at November 2, 2009 12:51 PM
I'm totally with Vinca and Townhouselady. The whole thing is redic.
Posted by: noodlemanias at November 2, 2009 12:52 PM
bxgrl,
My points were that:
1) it was a major inconvenience
2) we are only hearing one side of the story ("he assured me it was no problem" is soft information. these things are often not the understanding of both parties)
3) the LL would have little recourse "worth your time". I doubt the housing court would be worth his/her time over $500. Maybe I'm wrong here. I admit I know little of housing court.
I don't think you can make the insinuation that the renter is greedy or inconsiderate based on a kind of fishy story told by one side. It sounds like things got out of hand for the LL and he/she made some bad decisions with good intentions.
Posted by: Brokedeveloper at November 2, 2009 1:21 PM
brokedeveloper you cant just withhold rent without going through the steps stated in lease.
Op the tenant is ungrateful and smells your "newbieness" I would say no to reduction and I would make an appointment to swap the fancy water works head with a cheaper shower head from Target.
Posted by: jack slade at November 2, 2009 1:42 PM
wow, jack. See- we can agree on something :-)
Posted by: bxgrl at November 2, 2009 1:56 PM
broke- true, it's only one side of the story but the main point is the tenant asked for the upgrade. He was inconvenienced for 2 weeks by having to shower somewhere else- we're not talking the loss of a leg or having to sleep in his car. For him to ask the landlord to do something that wasn't really necessary and then expect to be compensated when the landlord did it, is really a stretch. He now has the use of a rainhead- which cmu points out uses more water.
Posted by: bxgrl at November 2, 2009 2:04 PM
virtual fist bump Bx;) We actually do agree on a lot of things.
Posted by: jack slade at November 2, 2009 2:17 PM
come back to the OT, jack!
Posted by: bxgrl at November 2, 2009 2:25 PM
I have two bathrooms and when I moved into my apartment one of my showers wasnt working...my rent was deducted for the 15 days my ONE shower was not operating. Why? Because I was renting an apartment with TWO showers, not one. That's why you give the tenant a contract that you ask them to sign. You ask them to abide by it and you are to do the same. It's business, not personal...when money is involved.
And let's be honest...you like the upgrades. Your story sounds romanticized and you sound proud of the work that was done. If you were without a shower, would you have asked for your rent to be deducted? Times are hard, money is tight. If it's not on paper it doesn't exist.
My question is...WHAT'S THE REAL STORY with the shower? What made you replace it? I just believe you replaced it out of the GOODNESS OF YOUR HEART...sounds FISHY.
Posted by: cillmylandlord_again at November 2, 2009 2:47 PM
rob, a true rain shower head system (not just a shower head) is an unconscionable waste of water as it delivers much more than the statutory 2.5gals/min of a loflow head. It is probably illegal; faucets for example are limited to 2-2.5gpm. And it needs larger valves and plumbing, hence OP's tale of woe. I think he should give 2 weeks rent to tenant for inhabitability.
bxgrl, so tenant is responsible? how? he just asked. LL did not have to do it.
Posted by: cmu at November 2, 2009 2:50 PM
I'd like to know if he's go another apartment available and if he'd upgrade the appliance to an Aga Range and Traulsen fridge and freezer.
Posted by: TownhouseLady at November 2, 2009 3:03 PM
Hmmm...the initial posting said:
" I am a landlord who recently got a new tenant. When showing him the apartment initially, he asked if we would install a new rainshower shower head in the bathroom, and I agreed to do it, as I like to improve my properties.
..followed later by...
"Just an update on what I posted: I had a whole thermostatic system installed, not just a showerhead, as long as I updated the shower."
This is a classic case of a one sided story. I have no idea what really is going on here, but "guesting" is undoubtedly holding back on some relevant details. The first post said the tenant-to-be asked for a shower head. In the 2nd post it's upgraded to a thermostatic shower system.
If I had to completely guess, I'd say that the tenant asked for a shower head and you took it upon yourself to do a major plumbing overhaul, and the tenant is reasonably upset. This is only a guess but it seems to fit the facts better than what was presented here.
P.S. Showering at someone else's place for two weeks isn't quite a minor inconvenient. Go ahead, try it yourselves for the next two weeks. I'll wait :-) If someone did agree to this they are a 1st class idiot or have lots of free time on their hands.
Posted by: northridger at November 2, 2009 3:08 PM
northridger summed it up much better than I did.
Posted by: Brokedeveloper at November 2, 2009 4:12 PM
CMU- only in that he asked for the showerhead. IMHO the LL wanted to put it in the right way but trying to accommodate the tenant's request. You know- sometimes people do try to do a nice thing. Go figure.
I don't see why the OP is being taken to task for that. He didn't ask for an increase in rent, he tried to do what the tenant specifically asked for, it cost him money, and now he's the bad guy? I guess I just don't have that sense of entitlement.
northridger- in fact I have done that. When my old bathroom had to be redone and it took a week longer than they thought it would. I just went and showered at a friend's house- no big deal. I wound up with a bathroom that was beautiful, and wasn't charged more rent. I was happy to put up with a little inconvenience. IT takes time to do reno work. This "everyone must pay for my inconvenience" bs is just that- bs.
Posted by: bxgrl at November 2, 2009 5:04 PM
You renovate on your time not when the tenant is paying you. What yours is yours and what is his is yours also!
Posted by: hannible at November 2, 2009 5:16 PM
At renewal time give this guy the boot!
Posted by: starfish1948 at November 2, 2009 5:47 PM
"I informed him of how the renovation would proceed, and he assured me that it was no problem, he could shower at his cousins or the gym and kept assuring me throughout the job that it was no problem."
there's 3 sides to every story lets put away our gavels and comment on the one presented.
Op I really dont see an issue if he kept assuring you that it's not a problem. The guy sees that you don't have a problem with spending, so he stuck out his hand around the first of the month. Slap him some skin.
Bx, BOT is like full time job. I really do have a hard time lurking. I'll stop by :)
You should come to AHOT too its not bad. Plus there's like 50 different ways to flip up the bird if someone pisses you off.
Posted by: jack slade at November 2, 2009 5:57 PM
Well, there are three sides to every story, and we are only hearing one... the whole enterprise is something op should've just said no to.....or at least told the tenant that he/she would not be liable for any inconvenience on the tenant's part and that the only way he would consider the upgrade would be to do it his/her way, complete with thermostatic rain element or whatever you call this kind of water wasting thingamabob. If I were the tenant, I'd think, ok, the landlord did what I asked, but he's a little nutty and goes overboard so I'll have to remember that in the future; if I were the landlord, I would have said NO in the first place, and now I'd give the tenant a choice: 1) cut the nonsense, 2) pay the cost of the rainforest system, 3) get ready to take showers at your friend's house for another two weeks while I put the old shower head back. Else move.
Posted by: raphael9 at November 2, 2009 6:03 PM
Were you discounted rent for your inconvenience? If not, that's too bad. Entitlement is not in the contract. A shower is. Even homeless people that check into shelters are "entitled" to a shower and a bed once signed in! Prisoners get shower...three hots, and a cot! What the hell! LOL.
This story is bogus. The landlord did this for his own benefit, it doesn't add up.
As I stated...my rent was DEDUCTED FOR MY SHOWER. Not discounted. I did not pay rent for 15 days, not questions...it was offered. That is business, not a favor or entitlement. And I had another shower, but that was not what I was paying for. I was paying for 2 showers, not one. You guys act like rent is a gift when you use words like "entitlement".
Plus, the whole story isn't being told here. What's missing...why was the shower replaced?
Posted by: cillmylandlord_again at November 2, 2009 6:04 PM
wow- I'm all for tenants rights and property is theft and whatever else, but the LL seems 110% in the clear on this one. The tenant wanted the shower, they knew how long it was going to take, they were okay with it...
...and then they started bitching afterwards? Sure, they can ask for free money, but I'd say no, and I probably wouldn't renew their lease at renewal time. Or at least jack their rent.
Posted by: bfarwell at November 2, 2009 7:11 PM
I guess people here see "rainshower shower head" and immediately assume the tenant is some sort of pathological problem person.
As I said, the whole story definitely isn't here. And the LL's story is full of holes. I already mentioned him going from showerhead to some complicated water system. He also fudged a bit on the timing as well. In the original post, OP said:
"I informed him of how the renovation would proceed, and he assured me that it was no problem, he could shower at his cousins or the gym and kept assuring me throughout the job that it was no problem. The plumber that I hired took longer than he first said he would (so what else is new??), so the tenant was without water for 1 day, and without a shower for 2 weeks."
Note that 2 weeks was not agreed to. "guesting" in fact uses a clever arguing technique here to imply the tenant agreed to two weeks, but he actually didn't. Instead he blames it on the plumber "The plumber that I hired took longer than he first said he would".
If "guesting" was being honest he would've said what was _agreed_ to up front, and how much the time overage was. But instead what he did was use a bunch of misleading and slippery language to describe the situation.
If that's how he acts posting on Brownstoner, how do you think he's interacting with his tenant? Completely on the up and up? Or is he using the same slippery approach in dealing with them.
bxgirl...glad you see showering at a friend's as not an inconvenience. I think, however, you are in the minority. This is a basic habitation issue...2 weeks with no way to shower or bathe means the apartment wasn't habitable.
Posted by: northridger at November 3, 2009 9:41 AM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.