Are landlords saying that or are existing tenants saying that? Wouldn’t be a big deal for most landlords unless they also lived there.
Is it not odd that they didn’t link to any of the listings from their “research”? You sometimes come across oddballs with mad rules who aren’t necessarily the landlord.
I don’t follow the reasoning they give in the article. Surely it’s to do with energy consumption?
I’m guessing most of these are owner occupiers setting house rules which is perfectly fair or sitting tenants looking to replace a housemate.
Presumably owner occupiers or subletting. Seems fair enough to me, they are being upfront in the advert. Working from home doesn’t suit all housing arrangements.
It purposely avoids the stating the fact that these are pretty much exclusively room rentals with existing tenants. That sort of shitting agenda driven reporting is rage bait at best.
District Magazine is filled with badly written, poorly researched articles. This one is no exception. Not sure why a music website is covering this in any case.
Eh. I had a housemate who worked part time from home during the lockdown. Bills started skyrocketing once winter set in and suddenly she needed the heating on for several hours a day as well as the space heater she kept in her room.
Just wasn’t fair to the rest of us tbh, and it’s very difficult to calculate a fair way to split the bills when one person is responsible for a much larger cut of the cost.
I don’t get it?
Why no wfh? What’s the problem?
Article doesn’t say.
I wfh, have a spare room that I’ll be letting out and it’ll have the same clause because it’s just too small a place to have 2 strangers there 24/7 so no WFH for whomever wants it, really dunno what the big deal is.
10 comments
Are landlords saying that or are existing tenants saying that? Wouldn’t be a big deal for most landlords unless they also lived there.
Is it not odd that they didn’t link to any of the listings from their “research”? You sometimes come across oddballs with mad rules who aren’t necessarily the landlord.
I don’t follow the reasoning they give in the article. Surely it’s to do with energy consumption?
I’m guessing most of these are owner occupiers setting house rules which is perfectly fair or sitting tenants looking to replace a housemate.
Presumably owner occupiers or subletting. Seems fair enough to me, they are being upfront in the advert. Working from home doesn’t suit all housing arrangements.
It purposely avoids the stating the fact that these are pretty much exclusively room rentals with existing tenants. That sort of shitting agenda driven reporting is rage bait at best.
District Magazine is filled with badly written, poorly researched articles. This one is no exception. Not sure why a music website is covering this in any case.
Eh. I had a housemate who worked part time from home during the lockdown. Bills started skyrocketing once winter set in and suddenly she needed the heating on for several hours a day as well as the space heater she kept in her room.
Just wasn’t fair to the rest of us tbh, and it’s very difficult to calculate a fair way to split the bills when one person is responsible for a much larger cut of the cost.
I don’t get it?
Why no wfh? What’s the problem?
Article doesn’t say.
I wfh, have a spare room that I’ll be letting out and it’ll have the same clause because it’s just too small a place to have 2 strangers there 24/7 so no WFH for whomever wants it, really dunno what the big deal is.