General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSF landlord demands proof of $100,000 income from current rent-controlled residents
Source: SFist
Just a few years ago, Haight and Fillmore was derided as "dicey" (or worse). But these days, at least one landlord appears intent on driving the average San Franciscan out of the area, to be replaced by those who generate significantly more than the city's median income.
It's not clear why, as first reported by Hoodline, all the current residents of a rent-controlled building near Haight and Fillmore received the note you see in the image above, which stated that "The building policy/requirement of a current apartment applicant/resident is that they are able to establish that their minimum annual income is at least $100,000 - additionally required is a minimum FICO credit score of 725."
... More confusing, though, is why this note went to the current residents of the property. Tenants rights attorney Joe Tobener is just as flummoxed by the note as we are, telling SFist that in a rent-controlled building, "a tenant can only be evicted for one of fifteen reasons, and cannot be evicted for failing to meet a credit or income threshold."
Emphasizing his point, Tobener tells us that "Once a tenant is in a unit, they are under no obligation to provide any financial information to their landlord, under state or San Francisco law."
Read more: http://sfist.com/2014/05/05/lower_haight_landlord_wont_let_you.php
dionysus
(26,467 posts)lostincalifornia
(3,639 posts)Liberal_in_LA
(44,397 posts)Gormy Cuss
(30,884 posts)arcane1
(38,613 posts)d_r
(6,907 posts)Retrograde
(10,137 posts)There's only so much space in San Francisco and a lot of people who want to live there, hence high prices for what few apartments there are.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)Just what we need. Combine that with the post earlier about auctioning off parking spots, greed is the word of the day
Auggie
(31,173 posts)bullshit like this, for example.
diane in sf
(3,914 posts)okaawhatever
(9,462 posts)openly breaking the law. It only says informational and it's only advice, your honor. No laws broken here.
jmowreader
(50,560 posts)Isn't the idea behind rent control to allow the non-rich to live indoors? And...uhh...evil landlord, if I earn $100k/year and I've got a 725 FICO, I'm going to BUY a place, not rent it from your sorry ass.