California Retirement Community Hikes Couple's Rent by $1,000 A Month

OneEyedDiva

OneEyedDiva

SF VIP
Location
New Jersey
Their daughter thought it had to be a mistake, but it wasn't. And apparently it's not illegal to do this. The management company is only hiking the rent for single people by $100 but for married couples it will be $1,000. I don't see the logic in that discrepancy. Her parents are in their mid 80's and as she pointed out, it's not like they'll be able to go get a job to pay for the difference. The rents there are already between $2,800 (assisted living) and $3,640 (independent living) a month. The management company for Paradise Village claims this hike is justified. Shame on them for doing this to senior citizens.
https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy...hikes-elderly-couples-rent-1000-month-mistake
 

I don’t think that it’s fair to blame the business or attempt to make it personal, it’s just business.

It is one of my concerns about going into a posh assisted living facility and having inflation outpace my ability to pay.

The fact that we can’t afford things or enjoy a certain standard of living is just a hard cold reality of life.


“Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.” - Theodore Roosevelt
 
Aunt Bea said:
I don’t think that it’s fair to blame the business or attempt to make it personal, it’s just business.

It is one of my concerns about going into a posh assisted living facility and having inflation outpace my ability to pay.

The fact that we can’t afford things or enjoy a certain standard of living is just a hard cold reality of life.


“Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.” - Theodore Roosevelt
Click to expand...
I don't see it that way. When they moved there, they had no idea their rent could increase by that much all at once. And where's the rationale that couples use 10 times more of (whatever) than single people? I would think it would be twice ($200) or three times as much ($300) tops. People living on a fixed incomes have no choice but to take it personal when their lives will be upended. In this case I think it goes beyond "just business", I think it's pure greed.
 

I don’t know the rationale either, but I’m assuming that when they moved in it was advertised that two could live as cheaply as one.

We have a couple of places like that here where the meals, cleaning, laundry for the additional person is included in the base fee.

In effect the single occupants are subsidizing those additional people or paying what amounts to a single supplement.

My thought is that with the pressure of inflation they are now passing on the costs of that second person.

In any case, it’s a business decision.

According to the article rent and basic amenities run $2,800 - $3,640/mo.

That would be beyond the means of millions of average seniors.

I’ll save my sympathies for the millions of seniors that live on modest disability and social security checks.
 
OneEyedDiva said:
I don't see it that way. When they moved there, they had no idea their rent could increase by that much all at once. And where's the rationale that couples use 10 times more of (whatever) than single people? I would think it would be twice ($200) or three times as much ($300) tops. People living on a fixed incomes have no choice but to take it personal when their lives will be upended. In this case I think it goes beyond "just business", I think it's pure greed.
Click to expand...
I don't understand why they think old folks are just made of money so they're gonna get their share by gouging the elderly with expenses. For those that can't afford assisted living what are they supposed to do?
 
I agree 100% that it is greed. Yes, expenses are going up but these companies and corporations just want more more and more. I know this is a lot of money and many Americans could not afford it. I never could. But some of these people may be barely affording it and then this happens. They could have no option but to leave.
 
Reading the article, it says the rent is not increasing but the fee's are. Fees' are described by Paradise Village management as rising cost of labor, food and supplies. Regardless of the reason, $ are $. Most unfortunate for everyone concerned. Renters are at the mercy of their landlords. Best advice is for you yourself to be in control. So, that is be an owner with a fixed mortgage not a rental with someone else in control. I know there are a myriad of reasons not to own, I agree, so if there is a viable solution, what's your advice?
 
Jack Frost said:
Reading through these responses, a thought comes to me. During my career, managements says...Don't bring my problems, bring me solutions! Your solution is .. .. ..
Click to expand...
I assume your question is rhetorical because no way could I provide a solution for a couple I don't even know or anyone else. That would be based on their current financial situation, if there are other places less expensive and readily available that they could move into, are they bound by a lease or contract to stay at their current residence for a remaining number of months/years? Or could they perhaps move in with their daughter temporarily.

I agree that in some cases it is best to be a home owner. I never wanted to be one but inadvertently became one anyway (sort of), when I "rented" an apartment in a brand new development and found out a couple of years later that I was really a stockholder (owner) of the unit when I received the stock certificate. We're not troubled by outrageous increases in housing costs. Read my post #60 here:
https://www.seniorforums.com/thread...-10-september-first.73443/page-3#post-2202173
 
When I asked what is the solution, I was referring to the rent increases for the masses, not for one couple. It would be difficult to solve the problem for one couple only. They do have options but as you say not knowing their specific circumstances it would be a guessing game. I believe the big picture problem is a multifaceted series of many inputs. Consumers always get the increases passed on to them, maybe rightfully so. If the supplier has to eat the increases, their product quality will decrease. I couId go on and on and write volumes about what my theory is but that would require volumes. Let's let it rest at it is sad for those hurt by this and each person should take action to address their specific dilemma.
 
National City is located nearby to Chula Vista and the San Diego Bay. Anyone renting property in California anywhere near the coast in an area that is not rent controlled should expect to see their rents skyrocket, if they haven't already. Its simply the law of supply and demand. Greed has nothing whatsoever to do with it. People with money are simply crowding out those who do not have any. Most of the homeless encampments we see in Calif. are former renters who just couldn't make it and/or don't have family or friends who are willing to take them in. Its all very sad.
 


Back
Top