[dailydriver]

Originally Posted by racer_ash

Or do you expect the owner to have a 'Manual of possible damages to the house' handy and include the same in the agreement?

Akin to Sheldon Cooper's 'Roommate Agreement' in the The Big Bang Theory?

On a serious note, this has turned out to be quite an eye opening thread. Both sides are pleading their case with equal vehemence and sufficient justification. Whatever the result of the PIL might be, team-bhp has, as always, provided a balanced analysis of the matter at hand. Will keep watching this space for more updates.

There should also be a PIL filed to protect the 'rights' of landlords who are victims of these extortionate and damage causing tenants.

One thing is for sure. SILVERWOOD won't certainly be filing this PIL .

[Lobogris]

First of all I would like to reiterate my immense respect and admiration for Waseem for the work he has done with Drive Without Borders.

This issue is complex with arguments on both sides. The simple and unfortunate fact in our country is that contracts are hard to enforce due to the extraordinary slow legal process. Hence no matter how well written a tenancy contract might be, if the tenant doesn't abide by it, it means very little in practice. That is why the landlords would want as large a deposit as possible for surety. The way forward is to make the legal process faster as that would fix a lot of problems in our country.

As a personal example, we have been trying to get a tenant evicted for the past 4 years. After 6 months of lies and false promises that he would leave next week, we filed a suit for eviction. This suit has been pending for three and a half years and it would probably take another two years if we are lucky. Then they can appeal in the High Court of course. This is because the tenant is crafty and has secured a crook as a lawyer and they file false pleas, fake documents and create fictional issues to delay the proceedings. No rent is being paid of course. In Delhi, due to the rent control act, most tenants claim that they had a seperate "oral" agreement for just one to three thousand rupees per month as this gives them protection from eviction. They declare the original agreement to be fake or claim that you gave the property orally to them later on or they bring another person who claims to have gotten posession from your orally! There is no option like the one for off the record eviction. The tenant is politically connected and people ready to act against him are demanding anything from 50 lacs to half of the property! I wouldn't engage in such illegal behaviour in any case but I am citing it here to provide a cost perspective.

Now tell me: if I were ever to rent out a property in India, would I be wrong in asking for the highest possible deposit and the most draconian legally possible terms? Otherwise why would I endanger a property worth several cores for say 20k a month? In our country a tenant can easily hang on without paying for years and if I can hold a few lacs in deposit, it might just nudge him to vacate at the end of the rental term. Of course the landlord should promptly and fairly refund the deposit. People have compared home rentals to cars but they are quite different. A person using your car without permission is a thief and can be detained by the police but a tenant has a range of rights even after the expiry of the tenancy agreement and eviction is a very lengthy process. Unless we can have a speedy eviction process of say 6 months maximum along with the ability to sue and collect compensation for damages to the property, landlords are likely to collect as high a deposit as they can hope to get.

[WorkingGuru]

See, at the outset, none of us speak for ALL the landlords or ALL the tenants. Writing "we" in posts should not mean all landlords/tenants opine that.

We're here to discuss a simple path around the problem. NOT argue with each other.

Originally Posted by SILVERWOOD

I will refrain from quoting posts to avoid unnecessary arguments.... Waseem.

Sir, I profusely apologise if my comments hurt your sentiments. I appreciate your abstinence from replying angrily.

I'd be optimistic & hope a reasonable outcome from this thread.

Originally Posted by ashokrajagopal

...never been an owner to a rented apartment...

Doesn't matter, as long as an understanding of perspective of Landlord/Tenant is achieved.

I have a question to the owners here who listed their difficulties.
Children damaging the walls or some sort of stains or scratches etc are granted to be present when you are renting out. Isnt this sort of thing covered in your agreement ? I think the amount required to paint the apartment again after the tenant moves out should be written on to the agreement and that should take care of minor damages like this.

Sure. Painting can be done. Some places it costs more, some places less.

I personally don't mind mild paint scratches on walls. Let your kids draw with crayons all they like if you're living beyond 2 years, my family wouldn't bother bearing the cost of sanding & repainting when vacated. My current tenant came with a white-board for his kid, I've assured him not to worry if his tenure exceeds 2 years.

When you give your apartment for somebody else to live in, I think you should reset your expectations. Sparkling tiles, squeaky clean bathroom ware, clean walls etc may not be expected from every tenant, not particularly because they deliberately want to damage. Some people do not care that much about pristine furnishings.
If you have an italian leather sofa, or a Teak cabinet or some special marble tile, obviously more often than not you will incur a loss. Please remove expensive stuff from your apartment and rent out with reasonable facilities.

This part won't work for all. Existing furniture/infrastructure can't be disposed by all landlords. Oftentimes it being readily done-up, is the main reason why the premises gets rented.

And its subjective, whats pristine for me, may be average for others. Just that it should be maintained normally. Cuts, breakages, stains etc aren't normal. Grant me that,

Originally Posted by ashokrajagopal

... Lets face it, the owner is never going to agree the cleaning/painting was proper if the tenant does it.

Really? Well if it comes to extremes, Branded offerings are available. Like getting the painting professionally done by Asian Paints/similar companies.

Originally Posted by Parth46

...Generally, deduction equaling one month's rent is mentioned in the agreement - this amount is earmarked for cleaning/painting/general maintenance etc at the time the tenant vacates the place. Children scribbling on the walls is obviously covered in this particular amount...

If we're talking extremes, get it mentioned in the agreement with professional specification.

And I agree, this 10 month's deposit is daylight robbery. With rents anyway being sky-high, you need 2.5 lacs advance AND 25k rent for a 2 BHK?

Again, IMO 10 month rent is most reasonable & useful due to various factors. Just my POV.

Still lets take some examples, the opportunity cost of the landlord :

Consider just a citation of the current value of land & building, compared to say FD interest, if you're paying that much as rent you're already winning as you're converting your fixed expenses to variable with the convenience to exit at the time of your choice, unlike the landlord who's probably put down his lifes' savings as investment & can't divest in a fire sale with reasonable returns as immediately as a tenant can vacate the premises.

Then consider the risk of possible cost of managing acts by bad tenants.
Then consider the vacancy period that the property had to go through to become available.
Then consider the usage life of the building, say 5% per annum due to regular wear & tear. (Depreciation)

etc etc

I want to rent it, not make a down payment to buy it, thank you very much!

Given a calculation like the above, you'll probably be paying as much as you pay for just the interest component of a loan & a very small part of the principal. Moreover your biggest advantage is to be able to afford that requires such a high fixed cost at a variable cost, apart from the advantage of being able to exit the premises at will.

Its abit like renting to use a Mercedes but not expecting Maruti-type repair bills if there are damages.

It's purely due to mismatches like these that shady orgs like Nestaway are thriving, making really captive situations for freshers, folks who've recently moved to the city etc. This extortion needs to stop.

I used to believe its a good deal for a tenant as someone pointed out earlier that they they create legal pressure groups with local real estate agents to convince landlords to rent for lower deposits.

So basically owners want to have the best of everything - an asset that stays in shipshape condition forever at the tenant's expense, generates high rent, and is protected by the amazing 10 months deposit that can then be locked to further adjust things to their liking.

As stated in this thread, there are various factors of investments & risks. A tenant may consider the factors relevant & negotiate.

Just like its a tenants prerogative to take or not take a place on rent, its a landlords prerogative to accept or reject an offer.

The advance is kept floating in the banking system till perpetuity, benefiting the landlord, and the tenant loses out on the interest income as well. Double whammy.

Negotiate a better price as you would in a free market. If we earn as a free market, we must pay as a free market.

Originally Posted by aaggoswami

...Considering that damage to property isn't done, in case deposit isn't returned by landlord, tenants should resort to similar activity ? Even tenants would have convenience to avoid legal hassle...

Bad tenants DO! Especially where they're paying lower than market rates. Many consider it better option to pay goons & ensure landlords will is broken down to the extent that the landlord is forced to sell it to the tenant at a near-free rate.

And if that doesn't work, the legal framework is exploited to extend time, oftentimes for decades. Because of courts giving time based on cooked up stories. The lure of litigating a property is very tempting in India.

1) In case landlords feel that tenants are not good/cant take care of property or the property is very vulnerable, why rent it out ? Or have it in agreement that a review would be conducted every 6 months and if the property is affected in a negative way, the tenant would vacate.

Get an assessment done at the start of tenancy & the end of the tenancy. Have the landlord & tenant confirm the same in the lease deed for the start & closure deed in the end.

The solution is Tenancy Insurance with various add-ons as per unique tenant/landlord requirements.

Landlord-Tenant relation is certainly not of charity and an exchange of money is involved as per agreed terms.

Its supposed to be pure business, but due to the laws in India, I have not just personally been through but I've also seen umpteen situations in courts procedures to the heavy detriment of the landlord.

But any firm logic that 10 months deposits would resolve all risk issues or maintenance in case of damage ? Usually, in most of cities its 3 months deposit amount. Also, what about loss of interest on the deposited amount, is that accounted for ?

I'm NOT saying it would, but it definitely seems to help both landlords as well as tenants.

What if RCC Column or Beam or Roof are damaged extensively ? Are there any defined norms or framework for agreement ?

Nope. But its agreed that the tenant would take good & reasonable care not to cause damage in any way (including hammering rock bolts for his furnishings). Unreasonable ?

We didn't want to take risk and believe that our property could be vulnerable to damage. Hence didn't rent it out. As simple as that.

Was that sarcasm? Here we're discussing about finding ways to solve something. Not deny both parties.

2) Its really good to know that you avoided the relatively convenient Goon-Route.
What transpired depicts that how much ahead we as a nation need to move as far as justice is concerned.

I prayed for that this budget session, but someone commented on my facebook post that its not going to be done in the next century.

3) The route taken is a legal one as far as my understanding goes, just like the one you opted and its highly appreciable fact that illegal/convenient methods are avoided.
Is there any other legal recourse ?

Appreciable, but it hurt us. And such situations are a norm for most people who opt for the legal battle. Do read my earlier post about my experience with the system.

4) Why hold up the deposit amount ? In that case, there is always an option to reply with legal notice which the landlords can do. And in case landlords have retained the deposit amount, just reply stating the agreement or damages, and let the tenant go the legal way.

Thats why this whole discussion. People want tenants to pay a minuscule amount as a security deposit thinking it'd cover up the damage.

EoD Tenant/Landlord has to trust to a certain extent. Else both will remain stuck perpetually.

[mvadg]

Originally Posted by SILVERWOOD

Dear Friends,

...

I have helped many people recover their deposits which were otherwise held up with the flat/house owners.Most of them pay up immediately after an receiving an email with these golden words (I will be constrained to seek legal recourse and will file a case against you under section ***** ***** if you fail to return my deposit in next 7 working days.) The remaining guys pay up after they receive a legal notice from a lawyer.Please note that these very people had BLATANTLY refused to return the complete/partial deposit citing frivolous reasons.(Damage/Will pay after getting a new tenant/You owe money to the dhobhi/supermarket/Neighbor etc)

...

Waseem.

Originally Posted by WorkingGuru

The relationship between landlord & tenant has developed a very negative sentiment. I'm not saying the OP is unfairly interfering as unscrupulous people do, but the method admittedly adopted definitely seems to be an unreasonable & biased attitude. Possibly attracting attention asif being a massaiah of sorts.

Eviction Process : Cops & Court "Amin" were unwilling to work on court order (!) & delayed it. After a month of delays & a stern warning by court, we had to spend 15+2k on the cops just to ensure they didn't claim insufficient personnel, we even spent 7k for 2 tempo's (prepaid so the tenant/litigant doesn't face hardship moving to his 3yr old self-owned 3 storey building just 7kms away), further 4k for 5 gutsy women-labourers that day just to carry out the legitimate court order. Took them 9 hours to just move-out the stinking junk that was stored by tenant.

Structure is in tatters - barely liveable. Now after heavily spending on sanitisation & repairs its still only usable as store room and free accommodation for ground staff.

After reading about the hardships faced by tenants and landlords, it seems to me there are just two classes in the world - victims and victimizers.

We should do everything we can to make sure that there is a level playing field, so no one is victimized and no one can victimize.

[dark.knight]

Originally Posted by mvadg

We should do everything we can to make sure that there is a level playing field, so no one is victimized and no one can victimize.

IMPOSSIBLE, while I understand what you mean, it will simply not happen, the mistake is in us that we expect the best of humanity to shine through always, it wont.

What I say is not directed at anyone in particular but is my own take on the matter, and like a few other members here, is an opinion that is coming from experiences of both sides of the fence (tenant and owner).

Bangalore is even now, cheaper to rent compared to the other majorly crowded cities like Chennai, Mumbai and Delhi (Chennai and Mumbai are ridiculously overpriced in key areas). One could get a decent 2BHK in prime areas < 20k Rupees and in non-prime areas at <12k Rupees. Salaries are also high here, obviously anyone who can afford to pay Rs.20k as rent needs to earn about 2.5-3 times (Rs.50-60k) more for it to make financial sense, a fully refundable deposit of Rs.2 lacs doesn't seem so bad in this case. What many do not take into consideration is the fact that overall the demand for rent in the city is so high that people even casually go about asking if anything is for rent, heck I've seen people locking up to go for a vacation and their house caretaker tells them when they return that he got 20 interests from random people about renting the house. There is a range from Rs.10k, all the way to Rs.1,00,000 when it comes to rent, what is not factored in here, is that owners who rent their big houses - Rs.1,00,000 and above, they usually give it to people with a lot of disposable income, such people will come with a big family (obviously to fit the house) and they will also come to stay for long, average being 3 years and sometimes easily double of that.

When they go after 5-6 years, a lot of restorative work needs to be done.. a mansion-esque house painting inside and out itself will cost Rs.1.5-2 lacs including metal and gates/wood polishing etc. Lets also factor in the changing of a few taps, fixing few leakages, switches etc and one is looking at a minimum of 2 lacs. Lets assume that the tenant and landlord, if they've built a good rapport over the years, split in good terms and the owners gives them back the full deposit, he still can defray the cost of the repairs by the interest earned via the security deposit. In case the damages are large and the tenant has shown absolutely no concern towards maintenance and upkeep, the security deposit can be cut if the repairs go into big numbers (4-5 lacs). For the tenant with big disposable income, it'll hardly matter.

A big security deposit lessens the liability of the owner who has to bear with a lot of risks, lets face it, not every tenant is ideal. In my early schooling years my family rented out as well, and because we maintained the two properties so well neither times we had to give anything out of the deposit (10 months). Lets also remind ourselves that many times the owner is either paying EMI's for the property or is losing heavy "potential interest returns" which would've come had he/she not invested the large sum in the property, rent would be fraction of the interest return. Yes a house is about long-term capital gains but not until its sold, if ever, it is.

Its only my view, I don't think a 10x deposit is unfair given the present demand, sure if the owner is willing once can negotiate for it to be lesser (6x or 5x), I don't think it should go below 6x though. In anycase an owner had full right to refuse to rent to anyone where terms are not favourable, and let me tell everyone an automatic reflex reaction IF the law comes into place of a "uniform 3x deposit" restriction, rent will blow through the roof because the owner will want to defray costs and increase income via another means (a 6 year rental agreement would mean 6 years of capital tax which the tenant is enjoying not paying since he doesn't own it and the owner has to pay even for not using the house for himself, and that itself will average to about 50-60k for a big house -Rs.8-10k per annum). Then next would be to fix a rental limit per sq.ft and bring that into reforms and the whole housing industry will collapse like a pack of cards.

In my view, let the existing system go on - i.e each tenant and landlord coming to a mutual understanding, or not.

[deehunk]

Originally Posted by dark.knight

Bangalore is even now, cheaper to rent compared to the other majorly crowded cities like Chennai, Mumbai and Delhi (Chennai and Mumbai are ridiculously overpriced in key areas). One could get a decent 2BHK in prime areas < 20k Rupees and in non-prime areas at <12k Rupees.

When they go after 5-6 years, a lot of restorative work needs to be done.. a mansion-esque house painting inside and out itself will cost Rs.1.5-2 lacs including metal and gates/wood polishing etc. Lets also factor in the changing of a few taps, fixing few leakages, switches etc and one is looking at a minimum of 2 lacs. Lets assume that the tenant and landlord, if they've built a good rapport over the years, split in good terms and the owners gives them back the full deposit, he still can defray the cost of the repairs by the interest earned via the security deposit. In case the damages are large and the tenant has shown absolutely no concern towards maintenance and upkeep, the security deposit can be cut if the repairs go into big numbers (4-5 lacs). For the tenant with big disposable income, it'll hardly matter.

A big security deposit lessens the liability of the owner who has to bear with a lot of risks, let's face it, not every tenant is ideal. In my early schooling years my family rented out as well, and because we maintained the two properties so well neither times we had to give anything out of the deposit (10 months). Let's also remind ourselves that many times the owner is either paying EMI's for the property or is losing heavy "potential interest returns" which would've come had he/she not invested the large sum in the property, rent would be fraction of the interest return. Yes a house is about long-term capital gains but not until its sold, if ever, it is.

In my view, let the existing system go on - i.e each tenant and landlord coming to a mutual understanding, or not.

I appreciate the earlier cause for which this petitioner fought against the RTO and GOK, but this time I feel this PIL is more for a publicity cause. If the petitioner claims the deposit rates are high in Bangalore, what about the prices of the apartments which are sold to buyers from other states. If there is a real concern for the public, fight against the reputed developers and construction companies who are charging exorbitant prices for apartments which are not even worth 50% of the quoted price. This kind of threads with insufficient facts and half-baked information should not be entertained on this forum.

[Parth46]

Based on the vehement support from some folks about the deposit, looks like the landlord mafia is alive and kicking here as well.

Come on guys, if you're not willing to absorb even a modicum of risk for your precious possessions when you rent it out to generate income, DON'T rent it out in the first place, as simple as that.

Folks giving examples of letting out their properties worth crores for 10K a month, are you really that naive? Even for calculation purposes, no one is doing the other party the a favor here.

These agreements come with some risk built in at the core, don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

[keroo1099]

I'm sorry, but I don't see why anyone should have the right to regulate what I want to charge as deposit, or for that matter as rent for what is MY property.

If I have a tenant who agrees to my terms, whatever they are then great for both of us. If not, the property wont rent. Simple.

[Altocumulus]

What I fail to understand how will a 10 month or a years deposit help ?

If the house is not returned in an acceptable way, wouldn't 3 month's rent be sufficient to mend it ? Also it is not that a house which is meant to be let out, will have 'Velvet Touch' distemper used on the walls. Landlords will anyways use the basic paint.

Now speaking of tenants resorting to goons for extracting the deposit, they will do so more when the amount is more.

The huge deposits effect people who have just moved to the city or just got married. There is anyways a huge expense in moving and setting up your home. Imposing a 10 month deposit with no interest on everyone is not fair. The landlords are keeping everything in their favor. Rent amount, deposit amount, interest from deposit, one month's rent forfeit for repainting, 2 month's notice or rent forfeit, maintenance to be paid by tenant directly to save tax, etc. The tenants are giving them income or contributing to their EMI. They cannot be milked for everything. You can't take the risk involved, don't rent out or pay interest. If the landlord receives the house back in good condition, will the landlord let go of one month's rent ?

In Kolkata, the deposit amount is 2 months and they donot forfeit one month's rent for repainting either. In Mumbai, I had taken rent when I was asked for 11 months deposit but no rent for the entire 11 months and was adjusted with the deposit.

[ashokrajagopal]

While we are all discussing rents and owners, I guess a lot of us are simply bringing in anecdotes in here to justify the validity. ( Me included).

If you had been renting your place for 50k or 1L in Bangalore, and taking 10 times that as deposit, you are not the reason why PIL is filed. Obviously you are targetting the very very well off population with a lot of disposable income.
The PIL is for the majority of normal working class in Bangalore, who pays about 10k to 20-25k as rent and are chalking out 10 times that as deposit.

There has also been very clear studies about the value of a living space. I may be way out of limit here, but if you put in the best ever stuff in a place you wanted to rent out, obviously you are taking a high amount of risk and that, IMHO is not good business sense.
If you built up your apartment to live in it, and had to rent it out because of X,Y circumstance, that does not change the fact that it is a poor business choice. You should obviously do your business with minimum risk.

Originally Posted by WorkingGuru

I personally don't mind mild paint scratches on walls. Let your kids draw with crayons all they like if you're living beyond 2 years, my family wouldn't bother bearing the cost of sanding & repainting when vacated. My current tenant came with a white-board for his kid, I've assured him not to worry if his tenure exceeds 2 years.


This part won't work for all. Existing furniture/infrastructure can't be disposed by all landlords. Oftentimes it being readily done-up, is the main reason why the premises gets rented.

And its subjective, whats pristine for me, may be average for others. Just that it should be maintained normally. Cuts, breakages, stains etc aren't normal. Grant me that,

I think you should put that right into the agreement that if vacating before 2 years, the painting cost should be provided from the security deposit. And that it is X amount. Its good that you have clearly communicated that to your tenant. If you have that documented too, you are golden.

On the other thing about pristine being subjective, this is exactly my point. When you say Cuts are not normal, I agree. But an italian leather sofa that costs like half of its price to repair and an indian jugaad that takes Rs 200 to stitch up and repair is the same value to many people. And since they are renting, in most probability, they do not care. Just provide reasonable facilities. You have to find a way to dispose your expensive stuff or be ready to part with its value slowly. Its very very risky.

Just start mentioning the costs of the items you have used to furnish and the amount of money to repair upfront to your tenants; get that clearly communicated when you give away the place.

I myself had one owner remove a nice good sofa, a small cabinet and a Krishna idol before I took possession. " Thats a nice piece sir, but I want to live in a house where my daughter can spill. " He smiled, understood immediately and had that removed in 2 days. I, of course brought in my own sofa.

[Nav-i-gator]

This is a tricky situation. Owners are free to charge whatever they want, to rent out their own property. This is a given.

Point here is how much is too much? not for rent, but for the "interest free" security deposit. I guess, it should be left to the owners to decide on that, with some riders (possibly through laws):

1. Maybe upto x% percent of circle rates where the rented property is located. If more than x%, owners have to pay interest on the deposit above x%

2. The security deposit, after netting off the mutually agreed amount on account of repairs et al, should be given back to tenants within x days of leaving the premises by tenants

3. Maybe an entry in income tax returns as income from property (with tax on security deposits) and then rebate under loss from property when deposit is given back (with full exemption on amount spent on repairs to owners). I an just guessing here.

Point is, one can't enforce arbitrary limits on rents and security deposits, that right lies with the owners. However, to make it a level playing field (and to really leave the setting up of deposit limits on market forces - by making it a bit more regulatory), there need to be a bit more thought out law in order to safeguard interests of both tenants and owners.

P.S. no amount of security deposit is 100% guarantee that the rented out premises will remain spot free and perfectly maintained. And no amount of deposit can guard against rouge tenants who refuse to vacate the premises (in fact, a large deposit with owners will make such tenants more rampant in abusing the property).

[racer_ash]

Originally Posted by Parth46

Based on the vehement support from some folks about the deposit, looks like the landlord mafia is alive and kicking here as well.

Buddy. I think that is taking things too far. We are a forum of well educated and respected people and more than that, we are a group that wants mutual debate. Just because you do not agree with someone's point of view doesn't mean you can use terms like mafia. I urge you to please use restraint and maintain the decorum that this forum expects.

You should understand that there are lot of owners in this forum who have respected and empathised with the tenants and went out of our way to ensure that they did not face hardships just because they slipped up on rent or did not maintain the house to our expectations. I would never take 10 months deposit from anyone just because the landlord next door demands it. I have been a tenant in a Tier-1 city and I know the hardships that come with it.

What I don't agree is that some people are making it look only the tenants are the victims. It is a mutually agreed contract at the end of the day. Renting out a property is a energy-sapping task and in most cases, people don't have enough time in hand to look around in leisure for the house of this choice. If you do not like the advance that you are paying, you are free to walk out and I am sure you will find landlords who accept lesser deposit. Why pay the advance in the first place and sulk about it later?

[Parth46]

Originally Posted by racer_ash

Buddy.

Please read my post in entirety. It's not about you alone. Folks have clearly mentioned in this very thread that the 10 month deposit is not just justified, but even required to safeguard their interests. They've gone so far as to even question the motives behind the PIL and claimed it was being done for publicity. Your thoughts?

PIL has already been filed and is being reviewed, let's see what comes of it rather than debating here endlessly.

[racer_ash]

Originally Posted by Parth46

Please read my post in entirety. Even if you don't take 10 months deposit or get in issues with tenants, others do and have clearly mentioned in this very thread that the 10 month deposit is not just justified, but even required to safeguard their interests.

People have gone so far as to even question the motives behind the PIL and claimed it was being done for publicity. Your thoughts?

PIL has already been filed and is being reviewed, let's see what comes of it rather than debating here endlessly.

That is exactly what I am saying. There is no fixed duration for deposit and tenants and landlords can agree to whatever they deem acceptable. If someone feel 10 month is necessary to safeguard their interest, then I won't say they are entirely wrong. Doesn't mean I will ask too.

If you feel debate is unnecessary here, then why have this thread in the first place. We can request the mods to close this thread and get it done with

[abhishek46]

Originally Posted by racer_ash

What I don't agree is that some people are making it look only the tenants are the victims. It is a mutually agreed contract at the end of the day. Renting out a property is a energy-sapping task and in most cases, people don't have enough time in hand to look around in leisure for the house of this choice. If you do not like the advance that you are paying, you are free to walk out and I am sure you will find landlords who accept lesser deposit. Why pay the advance in the first place and sulk about it later?

Thats the problem.
10 years ago I came to Bangalore penniless (with a job though). Each and every landlord we contacted demanded a 10 month advance!
There were some who acted kind and asked 9months!
With no option left I had to take loan for my employer just to take a house on rent.

10 months of advance is simply loot. Nothing else.