[WSBARP] Landlord Question - Next legislative session

[Gregory L. Ursich]

The proper fix to all of this is temporary rental relief for a set amount per month for a fixed term; payable directly to the landlords bank account for that tenant.  If tenant is eligible, refused to participate, and still did not pay rent, then the moratorium as to eviction is waived for that tenant for non-payment of rent.  They have set up this exact program in B. C. Canada, just north of us.  It is logical and creates economic benefit and stability for both groups.

This would get tenants current on rent, landlords paid, and freeloaders evicted.

[cid:image003.jpg at 01D6D46B.B6A00D60]
Gregory L. Ursich
Shareholder
Skyline Tower, Suite 1500 | 10900 NE 4th Street | Bellevue, WA 98004
P: 425.450.4258 | F: 425.635.7720
vCard<http://www.insleebest.com/uploads/vcards/gursich.vcf> | website<http://www.insleebest.com/> | gursich at insleebest.com<mailto:gursich at insleebest.com>

This electronic mail transmission is privileged and confidential and is intended only for the review of the party to whom it is addressed.  If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately return it to the sender.  Unintended transmission shall not constitute waiver of the attorney-client or any other privilege.

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com [mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of Kary Krismer
Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2020 10:37 AM
To: wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Landlord Question - Next legislative session


You're generalizing.  The moratorium protects an entire class regardless of their need, at the expense of another class, regardless of their need.  If it were based on economics I'd have little problem with it, but it's not.  Beyond that though, I'm worried about the long term adverse effects on those who actually need the protection.  The moratorium may have given them a false sense of security and lead them to make bad decisions.  Back when I practiced law I did primarily debtor bankruptcy and the moratorium is likely causing people to make decisions that no competent financial planner would ever advise them to make.

Also, you can't even assume someone who rents cannot afford to own.  They may just not wish to own for many different reasons.

Kary L. Krismer

206 723-2148
On 12/17/2020 10:20 AM, Andrew Hay wrote:
I will take the pro moratorium position.  Donning my suit of armor at the same time…..

This is a time of great economic pain due to a pandemic unequaled by any health crisis in 100 years.  The moratoriums are a policy protecting the most vulnerable people in the population as a whole – renters.  As a group they are either poor or old or both.  They are people who can’t afford homes due to lack of wealth.


________________________________
[Avast logo]<https://www.avast.com/antivirus>

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com<https://www.avast.com/antivirus>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20201217/fd8908ca/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 5282 bytes
Desc: image003.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20201217/fd8908ca/image003.jpg>