About Judy

Property Management Mentor

Nevada Property Managers – Consent to Act

FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailShare

32251852This topic seems to come up very frequently, in my Nevada classes. “When should I present the Consent to Act form?”

 

Although there are varying opinions on this subject, I’ll share mine. And, should your view differ, please don’t hesitate to comment on this post. Sharing information and opinions is a vital component of our success as Nevada Property Management professionals!

 

As a matter of personal/office policy, I never introduce the Consent to Act form.

 

It is my policy to only represent owner/landlords in my property management and leasing business. Therefore, a Consent to Act form is never needed in my practice. I’ve been told by a number of Nevada Property Managers that their broker’s policy is to present both the Duties Owed and the Consent to Act form, at the very beginning of a relationship with a client. Although I’m led to understand that’s often done, it’s not what I would consider to be a “best practice” in our industry.

 

Here’s why –

 

In Nevada, at least in the beginning of the client/agent relationship, we owe the very highest level of care to our owner/clients. That is what they expect from us, and is why they retain our services, in the first place. However, when we begin acting in the interest of two opposing parties in a real estate transaction, we are not acting in a fiduciary capacity for either one, any longer. Our duties/responsibilities to the original client are reduced, when we begin acting for both sides in a transaction. That’s what the Consent to Act form tells both parties (in a ‘softened’ way). Acting for opposing parties in any real estate transaction presents a natural conflict of interest. That’s why we have to seek specific permission of our clients, before we embark down that path.

In my view, when the two forms (Duties Owed and Consent to Act) are presented together, at the beginning of a relationship, it serves to minimize the value of the “Consent.” After all, at that moment, there really isn’t a dual representation situation in existence. So, the client is, intentionally or unintentionally, led to believe that the form is a “just in case” document.

Then, if the Consent to Act, and its meaning, are never discussed again (why would they be?), the implications and true significance of the “Consent” are given much less attention than the client/s deserve. For these reasons, I feel the Consent to Act form should only be introduced when it is actually needed – at the time the agent is seeking permission from his/her client to act as an agent for both parties in the transaction. Lastly, in reviewing the Nevada Real Estate Division’s opinion on Agency Disclosure in our state, I interpret their bulletin on the topic to be in agreement with my view.

 

As always, I encourage you to discuss this with your broker, and/or legal counsel, before changing any of your policies or procedures, as they pertain to Agency matters.

 

Please share your views! Comments are most welcome. Thanks for reading.

 

 

FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailShare

Disparate Impact – Stop with the Panic Bells, Already!

FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailShare

united-states-of-america-signAs you likely are aware, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) handed down its ruling this week, affirming the validity of Disparate Impact Theory in Fair Housing cases. Immediately, some of my colleagues in the property management industry began ringing the panic bells. “This will change everything!” No, it won’t.

This is Nothing New!

HUD and DOJ have been using Disparate Impact Theory to prove fair housing cases for 40 years! All this SCOTUS decision did, was to uphold policies, rules, and practices that were already in place. This changes nothing. It simply affirms what has been the case for decades.

Continue reading

FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailShare

Service Animals, Companion Animals, Assistance Animals…Oh My!

FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailShare

Service_AnimalsAn open letter to the Property Management community…

As a property manager myself, I certainly understand and sympathize with your concerns around the topic of service animals. There still seems to be a great deal of confusion in the industry over which laws apply, in this area. In a blog post a few years back, I discussed the difference between the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Federal Fair Housing Act (FFHA). It’s important to remember that these are two different laws, with entirely different applications. ADA applies to public accommodations only – not housing. The FFHA, however, applies to housing. If you’re not clear on the differences, please take a few moments to read that blog post. It contains links to important HUD documents that explain the differences between the two laws, particularly in the area of service/assistance animals.

 

In very brief summary, ADA holds quite a narrow definition of “Service Animal.” For purposes of ADA, a Service Animal is a trained dog (and, in some cases, a miniature horse) – one that is specifically trained to perform a task to aid a person with a disability. The FFHA, on the other hand, takes a much broader view. The terms “service animal,” “therapy animal,” “comfort animal,” “companion animal,” “assistance animal…” all mean the same thing, under fair housing law. (For purposes of simplicity from this point forward, I’ll collectively refer to these animals as “Service Animals.”) Essentially ANY animal (or animals) who aids a person with a disability, in some way, to cope with the outcomes of that disability is considered a Service Animal under the FFHA. Furthermore, those animals do not have to be trained to perform a specific task. Sometimes, their ‘job’ is simply to exist! There is a great deal of scientific evidence out there to support the fact that animals are beneficial to our health. This concept is embraced by the FFHA.   Continue reading

FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailShare

Nevada’s HOA Super-Priority Lien at Risk

FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailShare
Nevada Legislature

Nevada Legislature

This post is offered as a courtesy to the Community Associations Institute (CAI), and its local Nevada chapters, who are fighting hard to protect the integrity of Nevada’s super-priority lien status. The 2015 Nevada Legislative Session ends in just a few days, and AB359 is being hotly contested right now. The following is quoted verbatim (with permission) from an email received today. I’m posting it here for you, as some of you may not be on CAI’s email list, but may still have interest in this topic: Continue reading

FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailShare

Summer Newsletter for Tenants

FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailShare
Lake Tahoe on the California/Nevada border

Lake Tahoe on the California/Nevada border

Tenant Newsletters are a great way to keep your renters informed, and remind them of the routine maintenance tasks for which they’re responsible.

Yet, year after year, many of us either crank out well-worn repeats of earlier newsletters, or worse, ‘stock’ newsletters written by an outside organization. And, some of us simply postpone the task until it’s a moot point. In talking with property managers all over the country, I hear more and more frequently their frustration over tenants not reading the newsletter, when it finally does reach their in-box.

 

How can we better communicate these important messages?  

Continue reading

FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailShare

Additional Insured vs. Additional Interest

FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailShare

This is a subject near and dear to my heart, as I’ve been chasing insurance companies for the better part of the last two weeks, struggling to get proper evidence of coverage for my owner/clients’ properties. What continues to surprise me, is the fact that the insurance companies often play as though they don’t understand what we want. simple-handshake

In part, our property management agreement (PMA) states,

“LIABILITY INSURANCE – Owner shall obtain and keep in force adequate insurance against damage and against liability for loss, damage, or injury to property or persons which might arise out of the occupancy, management operation, or maintenance of the Premises. Liability insurance shall be adequate to protect the interest of both Owner and Agent.  Owner shall furnish Agent with proof of fire insurance policies in force and shall obtain adequate vandalism coverage for the Premises.  The deductible required under all such insurance policies shall be Owner’s expense. Owner agrees to name Agent as an “additional insured” on its liability and fire insurance policy, and furnish Agent with certificates evidencing such insurance within ten (10) days of the execution of this Agreement. In no event will such liability coverage be less than $500,000 in value. Said policies shall provide that notice of default or cancellation shall be sent to Agent as well as to Owner, and shall require a minimum of ten (10) days’ written notice to Agent before any cancellation of or changes to said policies.”

Continue reading

FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailShare

Converting Rentals to 55+ Status (HOPA)

FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailShare

seniorsThe Reader’s Digest version of this post, for those who prefer that kind of thing, is “No.” Just no. Only in very rare cases, can you convert an existing rental property from a traditional residential rental (welcoming families with children), to a 55+ property, under the exemptions contained in the Housing for Older Persons Act of 1995 (HOPA).

A property manager recently asked me whether her client could declare the client’s duplex a “55+ Community,” ‘since it’s a multifamily property.’

First, I suggested he talk to his lawyer, or Silver State Fair Housing Council. Then, “A duplex isn’t a ‘multifamily’ property. That term generally applies to 4+ units. Since this property is not part of a larger ‘association’ of similar properties who’ve formed an association… and, since there are no governing documents for your client’s property that address any kind of HOPA exemption, no. No, your client can’t do that.”  Continue reading

FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailShare

Updated Class Schedule for Reno NV

FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailShare

Wandbild_eines_SeiltänzersIn response to numerous requests for a CE class in Property Management, I’m pleased to announce we’ve just scheduled “Risk Reduction Strategies for Property Managers” to be held in Reno on November 13th. Ticor Academy, a division of Ticor Title is sponsoring the course. (Thanks Ticor Team!) Please contact Ticor Academy for more information and registration. General details of the class are here.

Hope to see you in November!

Warm regards,

Judy

 

FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailShare

Marketing Property Management Services

FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailShare

FanfareIf you’ve been in this business for a while, you’ve probably noticed how competitive property management has become! It seems that everyone is a Property Manager! It’s a much bigger challenge than it used to be, to attract and keep a good client base. A solid marketing campaign, consistently applied, will set you apart from your competition.

____________________________________________

Here are a few proven tips…

Continue reading

FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailShare

Residential Property Maintenance – Systems and Procedures

FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailShare

HomeRepairAs property managers, one of our most important responsibilities is to oversee the maintenance and repair of the homes we manage. In fact, most states’ laws address this, in one form or another. For example, Nevada law, in its Property Management licensing section, states:

NRS 645.019  “Property management” defined.  “Property management” means the physical, administrative or financial maintenance and management of real property, or the supervision of such activities for a fee, commission or other compensation or valuable consideration, pursuant to a property management agreement.
(Added to NRS by 1997, 954; A 2003, 932)  (Emphasis added)

Despite  guidance of both law and “common sense,” too often, our responsibility for overseeing the physical maintenance of the properties we manage is handled in a reactive, rather than proactive, manner. We wait for something to break, as opposed to thinking ahead and planning for maintenance and repair, before things go wrong. In upcoming posts, we’ll explore residential property maintenance, from the property manager’s perspective.   Continue reading

FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailShare