So, the satellite installation guy showed up this morning at 9am, only to find out that we didn’t have written permission from our landlord yet, who is hemming and hawing over whether or not to allow this.
Landlord: So why do you want this instead of cable?
Me: Well, it’s cheaper, installation is free, and it comes with a free TiVO-like system.
Landlord: How much cheaper?
Me: Installation is free, and it costs $5 less per month.
Landlord: It’s only $5 cheaper?
Me: Well, yes, plus no installation fees, and the TiVO system.
Landlord: Hmm.
So the landlord had to talk to the installer to see what the options were, which the installer explained (very patiently), at the end of which, the landlord decided that he couldn’t decide now, and could we reschedule?
So now my satellite might be installed on Saturday morning, and the landlord is going to swing by the house tomorrow to check out the possible mounting spots.
Appearently, rather than use the existing cable hole which comes in right behind the TV, he wants to mount over the attic and drill through there, or something.
Ugh. I have got to get a house. I’m so tired of having to deal with the landlord every time we want to do anything.
Oh, and before anyone chimes in to defend the landlord by saying “Well, it is his property, and he can make decisions he wants”, You’re absolutely right, and I understand that. But that doesn’t make it any less frustrating when he won’t put gutters on the house, or let us get a cat (without paying more rent), or any of the other problems we’ve had with him.
I’ve said it before: When your landlord is a person who wants to be your friend, it’s a bad situation. You’re better off with a faceless corporation, oddly enough, because at least they enact common-sense rules and stick to them, rather than make decisions on the spot, change their minds later, and deny they ever changed their minds.
if you can put $10,000 down and have a good credit rating, you ought to be able to get into a cheap house with a much lower mortgage payment than you’re currently paying in rent.
that is what i’d like to do early next year.
money
Yeah, it’s the down payment that is the problem. Still, we’re looking at doing this sometime in the next year or two (after we’ve built up a little savings).
But wait, there’s more!
Actually, there are many programs around that will allow you to actually roll the down payment into the rest of the home loan, so that you can get a house without any kind of down payment, and still maintain a mortgage payment less than rent. Check the library. Ours up here are always having classes of something like 3 hours that run you through all the steps in buying a house, and let you know which programs are out there to help you buy a home.
The gub’ment is happy to help you buy a house, because you’ll pay taxes on some part of it for the rest of your life, and that makes wallets happy. (Theirs, not yours.)
And
To second what urn said, you don’t need a down payment. Friend of mine just got a house for about 158k with decent credit, no down payment, low taxes and a low payment near 50th & Holgate. The rule to remember for buying a house is that everyone in the deal wants you to do it, because essentially everyone wins. There are lots of ways to get down payments, closing costs, even taxes and inspection rolled into your cost that benefit everyone. In the end just make sure your payment is something you are comfortable with. Down payments won’t hurt but are by no means needed.
Sasha
you really don’t want to do those things, though, because you totally eat it in interest. try running the numbers through a mortgage calculator – most major realtor websites (like [http://www.johnlscott.com/) have one. it makes sense intuitively that having a bigger down payment is a good thing, but once you see the figures, you can see what a substantial difference it makes.
there’s also a lot to be said for making double-payments as early and often as possible to cut the term of your loan.
if by “everyone wins” you mean “the buyer pays a lot more to the lenders over the life of the loan” then yes…
The total lifetime adjusted difference of my friends loan, with no down vs 10k down was about 1300 dollars more. And the ‘everyone wins’ statement is based on the fact that I am asuming the buyer WANTS the house. Indeed if you are shrewd about it you could probably turn your zero down loan into a profitable rent or sale in very short order. Sure you “lose” by paying money, but we’re already talking many tens of thousands of dollars, for something that will most likely appreciate over time. This isn’t like buying a car.
Scott…
Turn the tables! Another home owning friend of mine highly recommends doing the duplex thing. She says her rented out section pays for the loan completely. Dunno if you would want to, but it is a lot easier to pay off. If ya can’t beat em…
Sasha
yes, having a higher initial principle, which leads to substantially increase interest payments over the life of the loan, that is “many tens of thousands of dollars” that you are paying out for no reason at all. that is my point exactly. it isn’t like buying a car.
“everyone wins! hooray!”
What I actually meant is that it is a good investment no matter which way you cut it, whereas no one really says “Invest in cars!” for good reason. Bigger down payments are always better, but by no means a barrier is all I’m saying.
I’m surprised you didn’t ask him before you made the appointment. When I worked at Radio Shack years ago, we were told to always advise people to do that, so as to cut down on returns.
I can kind of see good reasons behind the other issues, admittedly without knowing all the details. Gutters are either annoying or expensive to clean, and the big “faceless corporation” apartment buildings often want pet deposits too. I don’t mean to waltz in and berate you on your own blog, but planning ahead is usually a good idea, as well as a skill you’ll want to have before you go house-buying.
he did ask him…
but the landlord wouldn’t make a decision until he’d talked to the satellite people on his own. which ended up being when they showed up, apparently.
steve, you’re missing something here…
the inherent(ly wrong) assumption on your part is that you’re going to buy ONE house and live there forever, or at least longer than it would take to pay off the loan. thus, the increased interest payments on the place will haunt you forever and you’ll never get out from under that burden.
that doesn’t happen much; what’s far more common is that you move on to another house or three over time and use the increased value of the previous house to help you along. trading it in for a better one, as it were.
the payments on the house may get larger over time, but what also happens is that the house accrues value, and becomes worth more. so if/when you decide to sell it, you can get more than you bought it for. this makes up for any increased cost of living in the house.
ultimately, unless you never move, you’ll get ahead of the game at some point.
if that wasn’t possible, nobody would bother to live in houses, it simply wouldn’t be worth the trouble.
a high down payment is only really necessary if you don’t ever plan to leave the house, so you’ll be cutting your later payments down by a lot.
but the odds of any 20-something college graduate having enough cashflow to do a huge downpayment is slim at best.
you have a point
What I failed to mention was that the satellite company didn’t tell me I needed my landlord’s permission before they could install. In hindsight, this seems obvious, but it didn’t even occur to me, and you would think this would be something the satellite company would want clients to know, so they don’t have to waste time going to people’s houses, only to find out they haven’t gotten permission yet.
wait…
“Gutters are either annoying or expensive to clean…”? I feel that statement is akin to saying because windows on a house get dirty, you shouldn’t bother putting them in. A building should be approachable in the rain without having to walk through a wall of water. Also, a pet deposit is much different than raising the rent.
For many reasons I side with Scott on this one. Their landlord’s a dick.
If it’s raining outside, you are going to encounter water even if it’s not sloughing off the roof, cascading majestically, each torrent more stunning in its beauty than the last. Indeed, the power of nature, the cycle of weather systems, the mysterious behavior of water, which, did you know, is unique in that it expands when it solidifies… it’s almost sexual.
Anyway, I’m not saying gutters aren’t convenient for people who don’t want to open their umbrellas indoors or take other, more drastic measures, such as firing a gun at the sky. I’m just saying, I can understand a landlord, dick or not, deciding not to install them.
well…
I don’t understand, myself, but it’s just a difference of opinion.
And I’ve read that it actually starts expanding at 4°C, and solidifies sometime after that. Fabulous stuff.
expanding water
Gutters are a class-a bitch, and the maintainance cost comes out of the landlords pocket. It’s perfectly understandable to try and avoid that cost.
However, that does not invalidate Einstein’s Special Theory of Landlord Negativity, the resulting equations for which (when properly calculated), clearly state that simply by virtue of renting a property and through no other fault of their own, all landlords are and always have been dicks.
It’s a scientifically proven fact.
to clarify
I want to avoid a misunderstanding and point out that my above reply was aimed at Urn.