I’m with ya Jimmy… the folks talking about diplomacy lessening drama clearly operate in a different market than I do. All extended diplomacy does is make the final forced seperation all that more of a powder keg in my experience.
Since implimenting a no quarter policy, the drama in my portfolio has reduced exponentially. Tenants are better off squatting than leaving and know it. The longer you give them before you file the paperwork the more time they get to live free… So they will happily sign your paper agreeing to be out by Friday… only to still be there with no intent of leaving and putting you off until monday when you can file your eviction.
They usually too are better off staying than accepting being bought out… since they can squat for 30 or 45 days saving two months of rent (the defaulted month, plus at least part of the next one) before having to spend any money on living… so why setting for a payout to get out?
The diplomacy stuff probably works well with higher parts of the socioeconomic strata, where you are talking about a professional who may indeed temporarily have a setback… but that isn’t life for most of the lower tiers.
I have tried to be diplomatic, and nice, and lenient. I get burned and don’t feel good about it. I want the approach that creates the best bottom line results. Period. I want to maximize my net income. For me, it involves a completely automatic process. no discretion. no leniency. no excuses.
The demographics of tenant base are as follows: (a) 100% are low income, (b) a third receive some part of their rent from housing vouchers, (c) not one of my tenants will have a good credit report, so I do not bother pulling them. (d) A decent house can be purchased in my areas for 30K to 60K, depending on the neighboirhood. This should tell you right away that I am dealing with the bottom of the economic ladder. Those few quality tenants I have enjoyed have purchased their own homes now, and are out of the tenant pool. I helped some of them do it, mind you. and I carry paper.
I do biz in Texas. Teas has two outstandnig features in its law, which are relevant to landlording. (A). I can get a tenant out in 30 days or less, because of the expedited procedures, and (B) I cannot garnish wages. Because of (B), I have no recourse against deadbeats. These people have no assets to speak of, and going after them is fruitless.
Tenants can and will stretch out the inevitable, and do it every time I let them. So I Don’t.
In more upscale areas, I might be less automatic. If I was dealing with tenants who cared about their credit ratings or their eviction records, I might be less automatic. But I am not.
I provide quality housing to poor and very poor people. People against whom I have no recourse. Responsibility is a foreign concept to these folks. I NEVER let this kind of tenant get behind. They will never catch up. And I am the one who pays.