<p>If a parent can afford to provide luxury apartments for their kids and want to do so, that is fine. I know some lucky kids in that situation, I know families who are living in houses that their parents helped them buy too. But if a parent can’t afford to do so, how is s/he going to do this? The same goes for paying for college education.</p>
<p>My kids found their apartments, dumpy and luxurious themselves and managed to pay for them as well. I couldn’t, therefore wouldn’t do it. Their other option was to live here at home and find jobs to which they could commute. They were welcome here, with conditions, of course.</p>
<p>Just told son last week on the trip back to campus town (had one of those magical moments could talk with him) how we parents were displeased 2+ years ago when he added a roommate after H cosigned his lease (in his college town parental cosigning is the norm for typical campus area places). He replied they didn’t know they were going to add X when they signed the lease. He didn’t get the fact that we parents were happy to pay for him to have his own room but not so he could share a smaller than dorm double. Rent was less but that wasn’t the issue. He was gone for that summer or I might have gone to help them clean- they lost some of their security deposit and knowing what the apt looked like days after the first guys moved in I’m not surprised.</p>
<p>Funny thing- we paid the rent and deposit but son got back some of the money- hmmm… Just like how we pay the taxes on funds we invested in his name but he gets any refund checks in his name… It was good for him to have roommates for his first apt experience but so much easier with him living alone. btw- isn’t college for the education, not the great pool/party place???</p>
<p>I do not expect the OP’s son, who is clearly both spoiled and immature, to grasp that concept. I can only imagine what shape this house is going to be in at the end of the year, luckily for the OP it’s no longer her responsibility.</p>
<p>I am not seeing why OP’s son is spoiled. His parents are paying for room and board while he is college, on campus or off campus. It just so happens he thinks it would be more fun to share it with 5 of his frat bros in a house with a pool. As a young adult, he doesn’t see all the possible liabilities that we would with 30+ years of experience. Frankly, at D1’s school, there have been plenty of parents who have signed those one sided lease without having any problem. They have been ignorantly blessed, and I (like many parents on CC) maybe overly worried. </p>
<p>I think it is harsh to say OP’s son feels entitled or spoiled. Wanting to share a house with his 4 favorite friends in college is a perfectly normal thing to do. Sometimes a college is not able to provide housing for 4 years and it creates a situation to allow landlords to take advantage of students.</p>
<p>This is the mom again…and yes, I’m going to be changing my password and getting exclusive access to my account back! :)</p>
<p>One thing that I do want to clarify is that we are not paying for this house for S2. He has a scholarship that is paying for it, though the payments lag a semester, so we will pay his rent and then be reimbursed. He was asking us to be the guarantor but not to pay for the place. Since it’s his money, it was his decision where he would live. We expressed our cautions about the situation, but it is ultimately his call. That doesn’t mean we would have cosigned on whatever he chose, which was why I asked the question in the first place.</p>
<p>You are right that there are other places available near his university. Mostly they are apartments, and I’m sure the affordable ones are dumpy (not that it matters). But, his share of the rent on this house ($550/mo) is equal to the cheapest apartment rent I saw in the area (for one person sharing an apt. with a roommate).</p>
<p>Also in defense of S, I will say that he had to eat some crow and put himself in a bad light with the “head” roommate when he asked to be allowed to sign the lease with no guarantor. The landlord had only asked for 2 guarantors, but (ironically), S had told the head roommate that all roommates should have to provide a guarantor to spread the risk around. So, he had to go back and basically say, “everybody but me”. We didn’t tell him to do that, and were still discussing options involving the roommate contract, when he called the head roommate and asked for the exception. We are relieved.</p>
<p>I did not plan to have S read this thread when I asked the original question. This is MY special place! However, the responses were really good and I felt that they would help him to understand where we were coming from. You guys came through as usual, and I decided to risk it. I was not totally delighted when he told me he had posted to the forum. :rolleyes: But, your answers to him were very helpful as well. Thank you!</p>
<p>I don’t think your son has the right to say, “everyone else, but me.”. If he couldn’t get a guarantor, then he should bow out. If it’s not good for him, then it’s not good for others either. Why should others take more risk than him.</p>
<p>Having more guarantors really doesn’t “spread the risk” – the landlord has the option of going after any one to collect damages or unpaid rent. </p>
<p>The criticism of your son was prompted by his own comments, accusing others of condescension for not buying into the idea that there were no other options – and for his own reference to “dumpy” apartments. I think most of us CC parents have kids who have spent much of their college careers living in dorm rooms or apartments that can most charitably be described as “modest”.</p>
<p>Post 67- he DOES have the right to say “all but me” because this is a negotiation, not a law. They are discussing the terms that potential roommates should have to live by. Others involved may accept, decline or counter-offer his request. No one is forced to accept his request to be excused. He has the right to request it, but not the right to require it.
Post 68- it does help spread the risk as I see it. If there were only one acceptable guarantor for 5 boys then only 1 has the all risk of having to pay all the damages. If there were 4 acceptable guarantors, yes, the LL could choose 1 to target, but he also could choose 2, 3, or all 4. As a landlord myself, I’d choose all 4 to get a higher liklihood that I’d get all due me. That spreads the risk. It may not necessarily mean an exact split of the final cost, but it does spread the risk. There is a difference.</p>
<p>In my personal experience, when I’ve required a guarantor, I had to have a reasonable belief that the willing guarantor was capable of meeting his potential obligation, or I did not accept him as a guarantor. If Dad was out-of-work(for example) then he was not an acceptable guarantor.</p>
<p>someone needs to get a liability insurance policy for this rental. A pool and fraternity boys, in my experience means parties involving at the very least, alcohol. God forbid that there be an accident of any type; however…could happen.</p>
<p>I would not guarantee a rental for my child if others were involved in the living situation. I lived in a dump in grad school, but it was our dump, and our parents were not involved in the legal liabilities.</p>
<p>timely - I’m glad it worked out for you guys, and I second the suggestion to get some very good liability insurance. </p>
<p>I actually think learning the ropes of finding housing and negotiating agreements is an extremely valuable part of a college education. There may some additional lessons learned by timely’s son after hosting the frat for a year, and I wish him the best!</p>
I don’t have any problem at all with the criticisms. I’ve been around this forum for a long time, and I knew when he told me he posted here that the responses would be no holds barred. He might not like criticism (none of us do), but he can take it, and hopefully it gave him food for thought.</p>
<p>
Thanks, younghoss. Those were our thoughts exactly. The head roommate was perfectly free to say “thanks, but no thanks”. There were at least 2 more guys from the fraternity still looking for a place to live, so he could have told our son “no” and replaced him with someone else, but he didn’t. Son did also offer to pay 6 months rent in advance to somewhat compensate for not having a guarantor.</p>
<p>One thing good about all of this is that as we’ve discussed all the “doomsday scenarios”, it has caused S to think about how they can best protect the house. I had told him that if the wood floors were damaged in one room, the owner could very well say that the floors had to be replaced in the whole house so that they’d match, and in a big house like that it could cost $50K to replace them. Later, he said that he was thinking they should get lots of rugs and especially look at the door coming in from the pool and figure out how they can be sure to protect the floors there from water damage. I am hopeful that his awareness is raised as to the potential dangers.</p>
<p>I also found out something interesting about the fraternity in the course of our discussions. At every party, one person is assigned to be the “risk manager” and that person does not drink. His job is to make sure things stay under control. Also, they have some kind of rotation for people to be designated drivers for any party at which there is alcohol. So there will typically be a few people there who are not drinking. I guess all the frats and sororities probably do this kind of thing now, but I had never heard of it before. My concern, which I shared with him, is about the unofficial parties. That could be a whole another story.</p>
<p>I won’t be buying any liability insurance because this place isn’t mine to insure. (Yay!) It’s my S who is signing for it and paying for it, and he’s an adult.</p>
<p>Yesterday, we found out that when the homeowner learned that the potential tenants were 5 male college students, he backed out. So, the house hunt begins again. <sigh!></sigh!></p>
<p>It is against federal fair housing laws to deny a rental because of the sex of the tenants. Your son should consider reporting the landlord to HUD.<br>
"Housing discrimination based on your race, color, national origin, religion, sex, family status, or disability is illegal by federal law. If you have been trying to buy or rent a home or apartment and you believe your rights have been violated, you can file a fair housing complaint. "</p>
<p>LOL… I think its a wise choice by the landlord, for the same reasons that you were concerned about liability. It’s a liability risk for the property owner as well, in addition to the risk of damage to his property.</p>
<p>While some may be quick to jump on this and might like to cry foul!(illegal discrimination), let’s remember this is a financial issue.
The 5 students in question are a financial risk- that is a given.
The landlord though, was willing to consider renting to them anyway, with certain guarantees from the parent(s). He doesn’t have to do so.</p>
<p>This isn’t a case of 5 guys offering cash for the 12 months of rent, yet the landlord refuses. The landlord was willing to consider students who probably weren’t qualified on their own, in exchange for assurances from parents. He doesn’t have to extend such an offer. Maybe he would accept the additional risk if he felt he had additional parental guarantees. Generally students don’t have (enough) income or established credit. So landlord might accept the additional risk, but he doesn’t have to.
I wouldn’t have worded it as declining because they were all guys, but his choice of words doesn’t change that these 5 were likely not qualified on their own financial merit, and that is proper legal reason enough.</p>
<p>10 qualified potential renters- 5 white, 5 black, is a different scenario than 5 potential renters not qualified financially, but with parental assurances.</p>
<p>It is illegal to rent to female students and not to male students if the rental terms are the same.
If a complaint is filed, HUD will most likely mystery shop and then determine if there were any laws broken.</p>