Anyone renting for life?

[2035]

I have rented almost my entire life...with two fairly short stints as a homeowner. I prefer to rent because I can't manage house expenses and repairs on one income (money and time), plus I like smaller spaces. My tiny apt in SF Bay Area going up to $2k per month, so I may mice out of state again.

I'd like to learn to drive then live in RV by my mid/late 50s. [emoji4]

 

[Major Tom]

This guy I know in 2011, he still claimed he lost money on a house he purchased in Palmdale/ Lancaster area for $80k.

He must have made the classic mistake of selling for less than he bought

I have rented almost my entire life...with two fairly short stints as a homeowner. I prefer to rent because I can't manage house expenses and repairs on one income (money and time), plus I like smaller spaces. My tiny apt in SF Bay Area going up to $2k per month, so I may mice out of state again.

I'd like to learn to drive then live in RV by my mid/late 50s. [emoji4]

I'm in a similar situation to you, 2035. Currently living in the East Bay, though am lucky to have very cheap rent (about 1/3 of yours). The owner of my building is in his 80's, and it's the type of place that probably won't stay as a rental if something happens to him. I won't willingly give up my nice place with low rent, but am looking for an excuse to try the RV life for a few years before I get too old. If I get booted out in the next, say, 5 - 10 years, it would be the perfect excuse to live on 4 wheels for a while.

It's kind of fun when you don't know exactly what's going to happen. Flexibility in future plans is key!

 

[2035]

I live in the east bay too now, which doesn't have rent control as you know. I'm also still looking for work so I can't get another place. Man I wish I had learned to drive so I could move into an RV now.

I used to move around a lot in my 20s which was so much fun.

 

[Major Tom]

Not sure where you are, 2035, but I'm in the City of Oakland, which does have rent control for buildings built before 1983. Mine was built in 1908, so I'm included. On top of that, my landlord doesn't take full advantage of the rent control laws. I got my first first rent increase last year, after 6 years in this place. Before that, he'd waited 12 years before increasing the rent. Even so, my increase was a paltry 1.7%. I think he might be raising the rent on a more regular basis from now on but with the rent control laws in place, it will still be affordable.

However, he's 82, and who knows how much longer he's going to want to continue managing and maintaining his properties but then, Sonoma, Mendocino, and Lake counties sound like fun in an RV.

Get that drivers license!

 

[haha]

Last night I ran into a middle aged couple that I knew from my former apartment building during the mid-aughts . I didn't realize that she has lived there for 18 years. He moved in with her maybe 10 years ago, They are now planning to leave, so that they can rent a house and have enough room to take care of her well mother and Dad with Alzheimer's. No clue what their finances are, but she has a good downtown job so has likely earned pretty well for many years. Just no interest at all in home ownership. There is another woman in that building who has been there for 35 years. These are full pay tenants, in an expensive well managed building in a prime neighborhood.

Also, a young couple across the hall from me are now buying a house, but the woman is somewhat unhappy because they have had to go a bit farther out to find something they can afford. Not very far, just maybe 4 miles from city center, but she would prefer staying renters down here.

Here at ER.we tend to be quite focused on money and security but there are many people to whom this would seem bizarre.

Ha

 

[Fedup]

Not sure where you are, 2035, but I'm in the City of Oakland, which does have rent control for buildings built before 1983. Mine was built in 1908, so I'm included. On top of that, my landlord doesn't take full advantage of the rent control laws. I got my first first rent increase last year, after 6 years in this place. Before that, he'd waited 12 years before increasing the rent. Even so, my increase was a paltry 1.7%. I think he might be raising the rent on a more regular basis from now on but with the rent control laws in place, it will still be affordable.

However, he's 82, and who knows how much longer he's going to want to continue managing and maintaining his properties but then, Sonoma, Mendocino, and Lake counties sound like fun in an RV.

Get that drivers license!

You are lucky, hang on to that house. I raise rent every year, some smaller than other, but I learned from my mistake or renting out to a Japanese executive with a 2-year contract. No rent increase. I have been able to raise at least 25% or more since then. If the tenants move I can always get more.

 

[Chuckanut]

This guy I know in 2011, he still claimed he lost money on a house he purchased in Palmdale/ Lancaster area for $80k.

As soon as they build the big new Intercontinental Airport land in that a area will skyrocket! I was told that in 1968. Still waiting for the airport.

 

[Major Tom]

You are lucky, hang on to that house. I raise rent every year, some smaller than other, but I learned from my mistake or renting out to a Japanese executive with a 2-year contract. No rent increase. I have been able to raise at least 25% or more since then. If the tenants move I can always get more.

I only owned my rental properties for a couple of years, but if I were a long-term owner, I would do as you do, and make sure to raise the rent in incremental amounts every year. The gentleman who owns my house also owns a number of other properties, all of which carry rents that are a long way below market. He has many long-term tenants, the majority of whom will most likely never move out of their own volition. When a similar apartment in the area costs twice as much, or more, they have no incentive. Coincidentally, he is often complaining about the cost of everything

 

[2035]

Not sure where you are, 2035, but I'm in the City of Oakland, which does have rent control for buildings built before 1983. Mine was built in 1908, so I'm included. On top of that, my landlord doesn't take full advantage of the rent control laws. I got my first first rent increase last year, after 6 years in this place. Before that, he'd waited 12 years before increasing the rent. Even so, my increase was a paltry 1.7%. I think he might be raising the rent on a more regular basis from now on but with the rent control laws in place, it will still be affordable.

However, he's 82, and who knows how much longer he's going to want to continue managing and maintaining his properties but then, Sonoma, Mendocino, and Lake counties sound like fun in an RV.

Get that drivers license!

I'm almost 44...once I'm working again, driving lessons are priority #2 (after trim down). I'm in Lafayette. [emoji13] too hot this week!!!!

 

[googily]

I have found this discussion interesting, so thanks for all the posts.

DH and I bought in what wasn't then but is now a very HCOL area, and our historic townhouse would probably now sell for about $600k more than it listed for when we bought it.

Except We is now a Me, and I wonder how long I will continue to be interested in maintaining a 100-year-old house (even with a willingness to pay people to do stuff that I can't). I won't sell/move anytime soon, but I do gaze at all of the shiny new luxury apartment buildings, and think it might be nice to take that route for some amount of time. (No kids, no desire to shuffle off leaving a huge unspent stash) I know the notion of spending big on renting is heresy to a lot of folks here, but it does flit across my mind.

But then I also think about having less space, small talk in elevators, upstairs neighbors with lead feet, etc. So I know there are tradeoffs. Maybe I'd rent out my house for a year and test the waters first. (I could probably rent it out for twice my mortgage/tax/insurance payment.)

 

[Sunset]

I have found this discussion interesting, so thanks for all the posts.

......I know the notion of spending big on renting is heresy to a lot of folks here, but it does flit across my mind.

....

I used to think owning a home was the best answer, until 2008
I also have a rental in a rent controlled area, so I raise the rent every year, but even then after expenses I'm earning a measly 3% on the current value, and the property appreciated about 3.5% avg per year.

I could have done better in the stock market S&P.

 

[Surewhitey]

We've done both and do not regret either experience. 99-07 owned in TX, bought for $145k and sold for $178k. I called it a wash after taxes and maintenance. So I thought it didn't cost us anything for living there.

Moved to CA and refused to buy in 07 (thankfully) and rented there for 5 years (avg rent was around $1,700 / mo) I would have lost $200k easily in those 5 years, so I feel like we made the right decision.

In Mexico, rent was super inexpensive ($350 / month) and did that for 2.5 years...no brainer.

Back in TX for almost 2 years and home value has gone bonkers, from $282k purchase to $425k with only $30k in updates...never bought a home for an investment, but this one has become a good return for us. We'll likely sell after 2 years so we don't have to pay cap gains and then get something smaller / half price-ish.