New rental trend? A $200 'work-from-home fee' tacked on to Bay Area lease(abc7news.com)

14 pointsby randycupertino2 hours ago5 comments

jerhewet2 minutes ago
Is anyone actually reading this article? The rental is an ADU, and the landlord is paying for the electricity and WiFi. The landlord should have just installed a separate meter and let the tenant pay their own power bill and pay for their own internet connection.
Clickbait, and ragebait.
al_borland2 hours ago
Assuming nothing illegal, it isn't the landlord's business what a tenant is doing inside, working or sitting around watching TV... why does it matter? They should just be happy the person has a job and can pay the rent on time.
- crote36 minutes ago
  Landlords and HoAs have been doing this for ages, it has just mostly impacted less well-off people until now.
  Want to do some nails as a side hustle, sell homemade goods via the internet, or make extra cash repairing people's cars in your garage over the weekend? Sorry, contract says no, enjoy your eviction for "operating a business" or "commercial use of the property".
  Banning WFH or charging extra for it is just the logical next step. You're working, so that's commercial use! And you're saving money by not having to rent an office and causing extra wear & tear to the property, so to a landlord it is obvious that you should be paying extra - why should you get to freeload, after all?
  - al_borland25 minutes ago
    Operating a business out of your home is a different story. The issue there is customers coming to the home, which means traffic and a general disturbance for neighbors. That's very different than someone sitting at home on a Zoom meeting.
- Grombobulousan hour ago
  If you really want to do something this dumb, I think it would be less dumb as a landlord to implement this as a discount.
  Submit a pay stub and job offer letter referencing hybrid/in-office/in-person employment and get a $200/month discount.
  The idea of this is not completely crazy. I definitely wear on my home hardware when working from home. However, the rent is supposed to already be covering the typical amount of wear and tear and there’s no need to get this silly about it.
  - al_borland16 minutes ago
    Even as a discount, I don't see the logic behind it. Why should someone get a discount on rent for leaving for work every day? I work from home and there is no way I'm putting an extra $200/month of wear on everything because of it. If anything, being home allows me to catch issues early before they become a bigger problem.
    The one place where I've seen something like this, but not framed this way, was with a reverse commute. Someone in the city, commuting outside of the city for work each day. Leaving during business hours frees up parking during the most in-demand times, and they are only there during off-peak hours. As a result, they got cheaper parking.
    With this being a house, that wouldn't make sense. The reverse commute thing only really makes sense for a large lot or garage shared with the public or monthly pass holders.
  - sitkack42 minutes ago
    what if you are retired? or unemployed? or sick?
    what are the limits for all of those?
    no the idea is stupid and greedy
    crote35 minutes ago
    > no the idea is stupid and greedy
    We're talking about landlords here. What else did you expect?
- guywithahat5 minutes ago
  > it isn't the landlord's business what a tenant is doing inside, working or sitting around watching TV
  Unfortunately the government is extremely interested in what you do in your property, and this makes it the landlord's business. That said in this case, it seems more like homeowners are renting out a small unit behind their home, and want to disincentivize people who will be there more. Personally if you can work from home I'm not sure why you'd live in a bay area suburb, especially not walnut creek, but to each their own I guess.
red-iron-pine2 hours ago
that application fee is a scam man
but one of the pieces that didn't make it to the top of reddit's discussion was that it's a shared-living situation, not your own apartment or isolated basement.
its shitty, but it's not like a landlord trying to regulate how often you're in your own private apartment
- notfromhere2 hours ago
  you're renting a space per month, and they're essentially adding an extra fee if you're doing more than sleeping there. kinda nuts
  - gtowey32 minutes ago
    The expectations of some bay area landlords when renting space in their own home are bonkers I've seen it all: not allowed to use the kitchen, not allowed to have guests, curfews, some are even contingent on not allowing the tenant to be there on the weekend at all.
richwater2 hours ago
Why are we writing articles about some random, single-event rental ad. What are we doing here?
randycupertino2 hours ago
Here is the screenshot of the original rental ad, with an also dubious $500 move-in fee: https://www.reddit.com/r/mildlyinfuriating/comments/1v3n4kw/...