You’ll find our blog to be a wealth of information, covering everything from local market statistics and home values to community happenings. That’s because we care about the community and want to help you find your place in it. Please reach out if you have any questions at all. We’d love to talk with you!
When we go to the gas station or the grocery store, it’s easy to notice that inflation is causing prices to increase, but we tend not to think about the fact that inflation affects every part of our lives. That includes investors and their repair costs. Our vendors are experiencing the same thing, as the cost of materials like paint, garbage disposals, and wood have risen.
So what can be done about it? Sadly, there’s not much I can do about inflation, no matter how much I wish I could! However, one of the ways we’re combatting it is through rental increases. Bear in mind that there’s a fine line between increasing the rent and ensuring that our tenants stay in place. We’ve been evaluating every rental to see what we could get away with in terms of increasing the rents so that it could help cover the cost of materials and repairs while also ensuring that the tenants stay.
It has been an interesting balancing act, but many tenants understand what’s going on. We’ve been able to get increases on anywhere between 100 and 250 tenant’s properties without much pushback.
Here at Guardian, we look at the big picture. We’re doing everything that we can to protect your investment and help you deal with this new economy of inflation. If you have questions or need any assistance, feel free to give us a call or send an email. We’d love to hear from you.
Yesterday, Chanel 3 here in Las Vegas reported that mom-and-pop landlords have a 56% delinquency rate since the eviction moratorium ended. Today I want to discuss this report and find out what’s happening.
When this report first appeared, it had a lot of property managers upset because it didn’t seem to reflect their reality. Today I was able to read a study commissioned by the Nevada Association of Realtors on delinquency rates that tracked the stat from March 2020 to February 2021. This time frame is important because most property managers haven’t seen any rental assistance money until the last few months.
The total number of self-managed landlords in this study was 22, while the total number of property managers was 118. The landlords represented 1,144 units while the property managers represented a little under 21,000. These two groups were then broken up into different groups by size. Out of the landlords that qualified as mom-and-pop’s, there were only six units.
These numbers prove that property managers help you run your rentals better.
This means that the 56% delinquency rate number we keep on hearing is coming from only six units. We can see that self-managed landlords with over 100 units only had a 9.7% delinquency rate. The numbers are even lower for property managers.
The takeaway is this: When you have professionals managing your units, you have better tenets, you’re more prepared for changing mandates, you’re more prepared to receive rental assistance, you’re better educated on your properties, and you can get everything organized sooner. These numbers prove it.
So yes, small mom-and-pop landlords have been greatly affected by the pandemic and eviction moratorium. However, the number of evictions since the moratorium was lifted has only been 3.3%. It looks like landlords and property managers have handled the situation well considering the circumstances.
Today’s topic was pretty complicated, so if you have any questions, please reach out to me. I would be happy to answer any of your concerns.
Something interesting happened recently with AB 486, so today I’d like to explain what exactly is going on. In my last video, I talked about how landlords must accept CHAPS and cannot evict tenants for two months after receiving CHAPS money. We’ve filed evictions and asked for mediation to get tenants connected to CHAPS money faster, but we’ve found that many tenants had nearly used all 12 months of their allotted rental assistance. So, some tenants are six months behind and already got 10 months of rental assistance, and now they only qualify for two months.
I’m going to court on August 9 to see if I can get a judge to make a ruling and interpret the law.
So, if landlords must accept CHAPS and cannot evict for two months after receiving it, when does the clock start? I’ve asked several judges, the Department of Social Services, and legal counsel, but nobody knows. I read through the CHAPS guidelines and it appears to state you can evict two months after the last date that rent is covered. However, I’m still not sure whether AB 486 changes this.
It’s an example of how legislators take zero time to understand programs, rules, and guidelines before making laws. Essentially, the federal government offered 12 months of assistance but state legislators extended the eviction moratorium beyond what assistance will cover.
I’m going to court on August 9 to see if I can get a judge to make a ruling and interpret the law. I’m doing this to make sure my landlords and I are protected and won’t have any illegal evictions coming our way. I’ll let you know the results as soon as I do.
If you have any questions or would like more information, feel free to reach out to me. I look forward to hearing from you soon.
We’ve finished the legislative secession here in Nevada, so today I wanted to share an update.
Around 10 days to the end of this legislative session, we thought that we were going to come out pretty well. We knew AB141 was going to pass, which is a piece of legislation that revises provisions relating to the sealing of records for summary evictions. We weren’t too concerned about that because we haven’t been able to evict for more than a year.
AB308 also passed, which requires that late fees could be charged after the third of the month. This also wasn’t an issue, as I charged late fees on the fifth of the month. Additionally, NVR and the National Association of Regional Property managers successfully killed AB218, which was set to be a very bad bill.
So with 10 days before the end of the session, we thought everything was pretty good. Then AB486 dropped.
There are many unanswered questions about AB486 at this stage.
AB486 essentially provides another extension of the eviction moratorium. It’s not stopping the evictions, but it is slow-walking the eviction process even more. For example, if a tenant says that they’re getting rental assistance, then the courts have to stay the eviction. The bill doesn’t really stipulate how long they have to stay the evictions, which is frustrating for the judges involved in these cases since they don’t have a lot of guidance.
Another effect of the bill is that if a landlord does get an eviction and the tenant later finds out that the property owner received rental assistance, the tenant could then sue the landlord for wrongful eviction. Under AB486, landlords could be civilly liable for a judge’s ruling. The bill doesn’t outline how a tenant can pursue such a case, nor whether it’s civil or criminal. There are many unanswered questions about it at this stage, and we hope that the Supreme Court will issue an opinion and provide some guidance.
I can tell you my plan, however. I’ve filed evictions this week, and we’re counseling tenants to file an answer with the courts and request mediation to have the eviction stayed for 30 days. The mediator has a direct line with CHAPS, and they’ll be the one to confirm if CHAPS’ money is coming or if the tenant is ineligible. The mediator will then report that to the judge, who will make a ruling. My hope is that having an impartial third party involved will help circumvent some issues down the road.
If you have any questions about today’s update, don’t hesitate to reach out to me. I’d love to help you.
If you need the services of a Realtor or property manager, you should always be sure to check their license. Otherwise, you could find yourself stuck in a difficult and expensive situation, which is exactly what happened with one of my clients recently.
This client hired us to manage one of his properties, but another company was managing the other ones he owned. He’d been with them for eight years, so he figured he’d just stick with them instead of switching everything over. Well, he called me about a month ago and let me know he wasn’t receiving trust accounting reports or rent from his other property manager; he wasn’t comfortable with this, so he wanted to switch to us.
I can’t stress it enough: Look up a person’s licensing before you sign a contract and check again periodically.
I tried multiple times to contact his previous manager, but I never heard anything back. I finally checked the Nevada Real Estate Division website to look up licensing. As it turns out, their license was revoked a year ago because they were refusing to turn over trust accounting. Now that this person isn’t licensed, though, the division doesn’t have the authority to audit his files, which meant they weren’t able to contact my client.
When the now-unlicensed manager finally got in touch with me, his excuses behind his behavior didn’t quite add up. His accounts were hacked, the money was stolen from his office safe, etc. By the end of it, around $4,000 worth of security deposits disappeared, and it’s the owner (my client) who’s on the hook for it.
I can’t stress it enough: Look up a person’s licensing before you sign a contract and check again periodically. It’s a simple process that can save you a lot of headaches in the long run. If you have any other questions or would like more information, feel free to reach out to me. I look forward to hearing from you soon.
Today I’d like to discuss a recent, important ruling from Federal Judge Dabney Friederich in Washington, D.C. regarding the CDC eviction moratorium. Last week, a case was brought forth by the Alabama and Georgia Realtors Associations, who claimed that the CDC did not have the jurisdiction to impose a nationwide eviction moratorium. Other groups have brought up similar cases, such as the Apartment Association, Builders Association, and others. Every ruling that was made only applied to the people or organizations that brought the cases forward.
Judge Friederich’s case is unique because her ruling, that the CDC didn’t have the authority to impose eviction moratoriums, had nationwide scope. She wrote, “The question for the court is a narrow one: Does the Public Health Service Act grant the CDC the legal authority to impose a nationwide eviction moratorium? It does not.” This was a huge win, and my phone was ringing off the hook from people calling to ask me about what this means.
Once the eviction moratorium is over, we’ll be able to start the process of filing evictions and getting back to business.
Well, the Department of Justice immediately filed an appeal following the ruling, so at this point, Judge Friederich’s ruling is on hold. I have a feeling that her ruling is going to stand but that it will also allow the national eviction moratorium to continue until the end of June to give people at least 45 days to get their affairs in order. I also think this ruling will stop any efforts by the CDC to extend it again.
Nevada’s eviction moratorium is still in place, though it expires at the end of the month. Once it’s over, we’ll be able to start the process of filing evictions and getting back to business.
If you have any questions about this topic, don’t hesitate to reach out to me. In the meantime, keep an eye on my blog for any important updates about this matter.
Today I’m continuing the discussion of the seemingly never-ending eviction moratorium saga. A few weeks ago it was announced that the eviction moratorium in Nevada would finally be coming to an end, and it would not be extended again. It expires at the end of May, so as of June 1, we can begin the eviction filing process. We can again post the seven-day notice, file with the court, have court hearings, and if granted, the courts are instructed to hold the lockout until July 1 because the CDC affidavit for the eviction moratorium will still be in place until then.
Part of the reason the moratorium has been extended another two months is that the rental assistance program has been poorly run, and they haven’t been getting out the rental assistance money. We have over $126 million that’s been sitting with the Department of Social Services since January. We’ve seen one check out of around a dozen, and we’re still waiting for those applications to be processed.
I think we’re finally starting to see the light at the end of the tunnel of eviction moratoriums.
My hunch is that the mediation program is going to kick in as it did in October, which turned out to be a positive thing. The mediators had a direct line with the Department of Social Services and Deters and Unemployment, so by the time the tenant and I got to mediation, the mediator already had confirmation from Rental Assistance that a check was coming, the amount, and that Deters would finally process their unemployment. I believe we’ll start to see much of this in June and July. The best-case scenario is that those tenants are now back to work, they can remain in the property, and their back rent will have been paid.
However, as we saw many times in October when evictions opened for about six weeks, the rental assistance came in, they paid it up to maybe that month, and now I’m seeing that most of those tenants have fallen behind again. If these tenants aren’t being proactive and getting jobs, I foresee that we’ll simply be pushing off the inevitable, and possibly in September we’ll have to go through the eviction process.
I think we’re finally starting to see the light at the end of the tunnel of eviction moratoriums. If you have any questions, contact me via phone at (725) 220-GRIP or by email. I’d be glad to help you navigate through this insane period.
The Nevada Legislature is currently in session and so far, three bills have dropped—two I’m not in favor of, and one I think is great. AB141 did go through a hearing at the judiciary committee, and essentially what that would do is extend the length of time of notice for an eviction from a 30-day vacate to a 60- or possibly 90-day vacate (depending on how long the tenant has resided in the property).
That only applies to month-to-month tenants; if you’re in a year-long lease, the landlord can still issue a 30-day vacate at the end of the lease. We were relieved to hear that last part, because prior to that being clarified, we feared that this bill would deter long-term residency.
The text of another bill has been published but it has yet to be scheduled in committee. (There are a thousand different steps that bills have to go through, and this bill is in the earliest stages). It may not even be heard in committee, but we’re watching it. Essentially, it would get rid of the summary eviction process as a whole and require that all landlords go through a formal eviction process. I spoke to my attorney to find out what exactly that would entail. Here are some of the key differences:
Whereas filing fees for a summary eviction are around $71, they’re around $270 for a formal eviction process. The latter is also a much more complicated process. With all roads leading to formal court, more tenants and landlords would likely need to hire an attorney to shepherd them through that process. It also takes a lot longer.
The legislative atmosphere is interesting right now, but the Nevada Association or Realtors is doing a great job of advocating for us.
Landlords will build attorney fees into their operating costs and yearly profit and loss margin. Here’s my concern: What about the middle-class tenant who doesn’t qualify for legal aid (since they don’t meet the income requirements) but who has nonetheless fallen on hard times and can’t appropriately advocate for themselves in a district court?
I understand the perspective of those who are sponsoring this bill, but I think it risks harming a large portion of tenants who, for whatever reason, can’t afford representation but don’t qualify for legal aid. There are just as many bad landlords as there are bad tenants; we want the good landlords and tenants to have an equal opportunity to be heard. I believe the summary eviction process allows for that.
Again, we don’t know if this bill will even go through committee because we don’t know how serious it is. Nevertheless, we’re staying vigilant.
Finally, there’s a fantastic bill that has been introduced by Heidi Kasama, a Realtor who just got into the Legislature. Essentially, her bill would stop tenants from getting stays. A lot of times when we see a judge grant an eviction, the tenant will wait until right before the lockdown to run down and ask the judge to look at their case again. When this happens, the case is stalled, but then the judge almost always goes ahead and grants the eviction anyway. Stays just buy the tenant a couple of more days before lockdown.
The legislative atmosphere is interesting right now. The Nevada Association of Realtors is doing an amazing job advocating for us, so we’re really grateful for that support. As always, if you have any questions about the latest legal developments or are seeking some property management advice, reach out to me via phone or email. I’d love to connect with you and be a resource.
The day before the recording of this video, I appeared in court for a motion I filed to challenge a COVID addendum that essentially protects tenants from eviction until March 31. There are times when you can contest this addendum, and I felt like this was one of those times.
To give you a little background, we started the eviction process back in November (when we were still allowed to), but then in December we experienced a round of mediation that didn’t go well. A court date was set for January, but the governor extended the COVID eviction moratorium to its present date. Henderson then automatically issued a stay order for the evictions until mid-April.
During my communication with this tenant, I learned that he makes roughly $80,000 per year, which puts him under the income requirement for the COVID addendum. The addendum states that if you make less than $98,000 per year, you’re covered by the CDC COVID affidavit. The governor more or less piggybacked off that verbiage and made it part of the eviction moratorium for Nevada through the end of March.
Anyways, this tenant still has a job and can definitely pay the rent. He could even be making partial payments. Through our December email discussions, it became apparent that he was holding the rent hostage because he wanted a year’s lease signed. At that time, the property’s owner wasn’t able to make any long-term decisions. She has stage 3 lung cancer, but she doesn’t need a reason for not wanting to sign another year’s lease and instead wanting the tenant to revert to monthly payments.
I hope we can all speak to our legislators and explain to them that there needs to be more thought and creativity when it comes to this COVID addendum.
I brought this documentation to court as a way of saying that this particular tenant isn’t affected by COVID. I understand that he makes less than $98,000 per year, but he didn’t lose his job, he doesn’t prove any medical expenses, and I had documentation saying that he wouldn’t pay his rent until he had a year-long lease promised. The judge flat-out said that anyone making less than $98,000 per year with a COVID addendum wouldn’t have their case heard until April. End of story.
I know the judge’s hands are tied and that the supreme court has made this blanket ruling. I understand that the CDC has made a one-size-fits-all ruling for the entire country. I also understand that making under $98,000 per year in, say, New York, Washington DC, or San Francisco can make things tight. However, people who make $80,000 per year in Nevada (or any state in the Midwest) aren’t struggling, so this one-size-fits-all approach to ensure people stay in their homes has created a segment of the population who want to take advantage of this situation. Furthermore, it takes away from the tenants who are really hurting.
I hope we can all speak to our legislators and explain to them that there needs to be more thought and creativity when it comes to this COVID addendum. This will allow the tenants who really do need help to get that help and prevent those who are just trying to take advantage of the situation from being protected.
As always, if you have questions or concerns about this topic, don’t hesitate to reach out to me. I’d love to speak with you.
What’s the latest news regarding the new CHAP money?
As you know, 2020 saw the first disbursement of this money go toward rental assistance for tenants, but there weren’t many stipulations regarding who could qualify for it. Then in December, it was announced that landlords could apply for it on behalf of themselves and their tenants, but they only had about two weeks to send in their applications because that money would run out at the end of the year.
I submitted 15 applications and have been following up with the DSS over the past couple of months, and I didn’t hear anything back until the other day. They informed me via email that there was no more landlord assistance money available and they couldn’t fund my applications. However, they also said that there was more money for 2021, but the renters had to apply for it themselves—landlords can’t apply on their behalf.
They also gave me the stipulations of who can qualify for this rental assistance. A one-person household, for example, can’t make more than $42,000 annually if they want to qualify. A two-person household can't make more than $48,000 if they want to qualify. The scale goes all the way up to an eight-person household, which can’t make more than $79,300 in order to qualify.
The Las Vegas NARPMⓇ chapter (in partnership with Hopelink) is throwing a fundraiser for rental assistance in response, and this fundraising is more important than ever.
If you take this at face value it sounds reasonable. However, we now have a state mandate that mimics the CDC mandate that states that landlords aren’t allowed to take legal action against tenants making less than $99,000 a year. So now we have a group of people who won’t be able to apply for the CHAP money.
What do we do about this situation? I don’t have an answer at this time, but I can tell you that the Las Vegas NARPMⓇ chapter (in partnership with Hopelink) is throwing a fundraiser for rental assistance in response, and this fundraising is more important than ever. There will still be a group of people who can’t qualify for this CHAP money but have increased expenses due to the fact that their kids can’t be in school. In order for them to go to work, they have to pay for full-time childcare. On top of that, they have increased medical expenses due to COVID.
Overall, they’re struggling and need assistance. I can’t stress enough the fact that every little bit counts if you want to be part of the solution,donate to this fundraiser, and help lift this crisis. That way, when all of this is over, we’re not looking at a housing crisis ala 2008. In that economy, everyone was affected by the downturn.
As always, if you have questions about this or any real estate topic, don’t hesitate to reach out to me. I’d love to help you.