"stan" <***@nf.sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:firstname.lastname@example.org...
Still don't think it is necessarily a 'racket' (although that was,
hopefully, just a figure of speech)?
Rent to own seems to be something like a lease; on say a vehicle.
No comparison whatsoever.
Hello Mr. apple meet Mr. Orange!
Although homes/house will tend to last a lot longer than anything
automobile, both being used in a normal manner in this province; and
so will have worth at end of each rental contract?
Don't compare leasing a vehicle to RTO.
A leased vehicle comes w/ warranty/coverage for the full leased term, then
at the end of 3/4 years you get X amount of dollars towards your new
vehicle. There is no risk to the buyer.
With RTO you pay for ALL maintenance of house ie, replacing a caved roof,
eaves, windows, toilets, flooring,etc. Then if (hypothetically speaking) the
owner goes bankrupt (I have seen it happen) the tenant is out on the path
and get absolutely NOTHING in return for the thousands he/she has paid out
in rent, nor for the thousands he/she has paid out in repair.
And a contract is a contract is contract; is it not?
Sure it is, but in a RTO its at the disadvantage of the tenant.
I know several houses rent to own, and know how it works.
If I were foolish enough to RTO, I would seek a lawyer immediately and draw
up a contract that would protect me. The problem is 1) the individuals that
I know that are RTO could not afford that cost, they just jumped into an RTO
aggreement between landlord and themselves. 2) The landlord would most
likely not be up for a contract that protects the tenant ie, if house burns
down 15 years down the road, the landlord is obligated to fork out a good
portion of the rent they have paid in to the contract.
Some checks that have been made indicate that some RTO contracts g
have a buyout clause that allow the renter to acquire full possession
of the item for, for example, the cost of several payments as la ump
I personally don't know of any. I have heard that in leasing contracts. For
example, working couple leasing a home that is for sale to determine if that
is the house for them, then after 2 years they get a bank loan to buy the
house. Again I emphasize those who rent to own have bad/no credit and unable
to get a mortgage.
If I rent the appliance for 5 years I may then find that I have paid
several times what it could have cost me to actually buy (or finance)
the same type of appliance.
But that's what the renter and I agreed to and contracted.
Yes, that is why only those with poor credit jump into rent to own because
they have no other option.
Ask yourself this........do you have good credit? If so, would you go to
easyhome to RTO a 60"LCD tv at lets say 50 percent interest (just a number)
or to Cohens/Leons/Sears who oftentimes offer no interest for the first 12
months, the interest thereafter?
Maybe a lawyer can comment on this; "A fair contract is one agreeable
to both parties arrived at NOT UNDER DURESS".
Its not under duress, they are fully aware what they are doing, but just
what a house they can hypothetically call their own.