PSO charging me for a deadbeat renter?

[dennishoddy]

Not understanding the law sounds like another reason YOU should not be a landlord.

Landlords have no personal liability for someone else's account.

That's my understanding. I had one rent house for a couple of years. Always had good renters, and a nice $$ every month. Finally sold it to one of the renters and got out.

 

[OKCShooter]

That's my understanding. I had one rent house for a couple of years. Always had good renters, and a nice $$ every month. Finally sold it to one of the renters and got out.

Owning homes isn't for everyone, I just cringe when I see people state reasons not to do things (like they're some sort of financial expert) and don't even have a clue what they are talking about...

 

[CHenry]

Not understanding the law sounds like another reason YOU should not be a landlord.

Landlords have no personal liability for someone else's account.

If I were to aspire to be a landlord, I would make sure I knew all the ins and outs. Its just a further PITA of having rentals. Its not for everyone.

 

[CHenry]

Owning homes isn't for everyone, I just cringe when I see people state reasons not to do things (like they're some sort of financial expert) and don't even have a clue what they are talking about...

I saw what goes on with rentals when I was growing up as my parents had one. Some good renters and some that trashed the place. I was the cheap labor to do repair when the nasty people finally got evicted. Thats as much as I care to know about that business.

 

[drew]

This is why you specify things in the lease along with cutting it off if they get services . Or you could pull the double dip move and pay the monthly, but charge the renter extra to offset it. Just what I've learned from clients, I'm a realtor.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[OKCShooter]

This is why you specify things in the lease along with cutting it off if they get services . Or you could pull the double dip move and pay the monthly, but charge the renter extra to offset it. Just what I've learned from clients, I'm a realtor.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I couldn't imagine any reason why a landlord would take the liability of utilities in their name...

 

[drew]

I couldn't imagine any reason why a landlord would take the liability of utilities in their name...

Not all duplexes are on two meters and it is easier for a landlord to build average utilities in on top of those rents. Some sell it as bundle to renters, less to keep up with, easier to get people with poorer credit in in some cases.

 

[rickm]

Some renters like their rent and utilities bundled into 1 payment so they only have the 1 to worry about.

 

[OKCShooter]

Some renters like their rent and utilities bundled into 1 payment so they only have the 1 to worry about.

I have no doubt the renter can have a benefit (endless showers, AC running 24/7, sprinkler system going daily for an hour, etc) but I still see NO reason for a landlord to do this.

Personally, I would NEVER entertain this idea.

 

[rhodesbe]

This is not true and this comment is nonsense. I had tenants a few years ago who abandoned a property and let the utilities be shut off. I called OG&E and had them turned back on in my name without any penalty or back pay due. Same was true for ONG and the City of Moore water and trash. It is no different than the phone company, cable company or any utility company. Their agreement is with the person who signed up for their service not the person who owns the location.

No, it's not nonsense. You're assuming electrical service was purchased by the renter seperately from rent. This is not always the case (especially if your scumbag renters have terrible finances to begin with) and is still not a point the OP makes clear. I assume one thing, you assume another, we all see where assuming gets us...