Etiquette Question

Hello Everyone! I was wondering if I could get opinions on how to handle a sticky situation. I have a renter that pays me $2900L per month to stay on a piece of property I control/own. She just paid me for the entire month of August. Well, as it turns out I may have to sell the land she is on *before* her rental period expires.

In order to handle this in an ethical fashion, I thought I would inform her of the situation, refund her $2900L *and* pay her $1000L for her trouble. Do you think that would be fair? Or, should I risk passing on the sale opportunity and wait for her month to expire at the end of August?

In reality... you are being more than fair.

There has been threads on people selling plots with renters still on the plot, where as you are offering to refund the months rent and ad a little compensation on top..which of course you are in no way obligated. I feel that you are being both fair and actually quite beyond.

Either which way it will have to come eventually.#


Marty

Dear Tuesday, you are obviously a considerate person, but I think you already know the answer to your question yourself. When someone rents land on someone elses property, there is always the risk of the land being sold. Your renter knows that too. Of course your renter will be disappointed. But if you explain the situation well, people might be more understanding than you think. Good communication is an asset in rl, and therefore also in this game. The only thing you might want to do is give your renter a few days to find a new place. The refund is obvious, you should do that. The extra 1k isn't necessary I think, but do it if you want to. Good luck.

Thank you both! I appreciate the responses. I will talk to the renter(once I confirm the sale) and give them a few days to move their belongings. I hate to take something away from someone that they enjoy but hopefully they will understand.

My take on it is that you made a deal with another person.
They paid up front and planned their RL/SL lives on having that base for a month at least.

Everybody goes through life trading. Even employees are trading their time for an employers money.
It's not unreasonable to explain the situation to the renter and to offer them an inducement to part on good terms.


You can just boot them out of course, even on day 1 of the month. You don't even have to thank them for the money that they gifted to you.
There are those who would have no problem doing that when it came down to their own advantage.
There are those who would say"No TOS violation" and "ya sucks 'coz LL don't get involved in inter-resident disputes".


Given that you're asking the question, you seem a decent sort of person. Just take decency all the way Don't compromise yourself for any amount of money.
Even if the renter tries to extort a high price for vacating voluntarily - *you* made a deal. If you don't stick to it, you die a little.

Tuesday, I agree with others here that you what you describe does go beyond fair to very, very nice. A question of etiquette indeed!

I think the minimum of fair play is to give your tenant notice as soon as you have confirmed that the sale will take place, and when, and refund the unused portion of the rent.

Refunding the full month is kind and would reflect the tenant's incovenience; giving an additional L$1000 is, in my opinion, above and beyond.

Would that all business owners in SL were as careful about relationships as you! (And the best ones, of course, are.)

Your renter should know your situation. Don't make the decision for them, allow them to participate in what their future for the month will be.

If they decide they want to stay, then hold the property. If they don't mind moving, $1000L is fair. Seriously, we all know setting up a new home and maturing the land around takes a few hours and the $1000L is not much to compensate for that but its an appropriate offer.

Ultimately, I would leave the decision up to the renter.

OK. I have to inject some (more) balance.

"When someone rents land on someone elses property, there is always the risk of the land being sold. Your renter knows that too."
Does the renter know that?
Was this in the agreement when they paid for all of August?
They made a deal.


"I think the minimum of fair play is to give your tenant notice as soon as you have confirmed that the sale will take place, and when, and refund the unused portion of the rent."
Nope, the MINIMUM of fair play is to stick to the deal, unless the renter *agrees* to vacate.


"Refunding the full month is kind"
Kind? It's only August 5th, and they paid for the entire month.

"and would reflect the tenant's incovenience"
Eh? You've discussed this with the tenant? The tenant has agreed that 5 day's rent reflects their inconvenience?
Humbug!


"giving an additional L$1000 is, in my opinion, above and beyond."
Three lousy bucks is above and beyond? When the renter may have gone to unknown time and trouble to find a place and set it up with their belongings??

"Would that all business owners in SL were as careful about relationships as you! (And the best ones, of course, are.)"
I'm horrified at the advice given in this thread.


Anyone who would support booting the tenant with out their agreement, has
- ZERO integrity points to criticise LL for bad service
- ZERO integrity points to criticise land bots
- ZERO integrity points to criticise merchants who short-change customers
The scale of the wrong is not relevant.

"Would that all business owners in SL "
...... would make a deal and stick to it honourably.


IMO, Turfing out the tenant without their agreement is just plain WRONG!!!

The TOS and what one *can* do is irrelevant.
This is a moral choice for the OP.


Your world, use your imagination!

That is a more than fair offer to make.

However, what if they say "no"?

You made an agreement, and you're trying to break it. This is not simply a matter of ettiquette, it's a matter of contractual obligation. If they say "no", then you have no right to sell the property unless the new owner allows the renter to stay though the month. Or you can make a sweeter offer, until they relent.

You've made two contradictory agreements, which is a very bad idea. You're stuck in the middle and your only correct course of action is to make the situation agreeable to the other parties.

Of course, this being SL, you can do whatever you want and get away with it -- you won't wind up in court. But I can tell you're trying to do the right thing here, and good for you.

/me notes never to rent property or do any business with those above who believe it's perfectly OK to violate an agreement.

Where do you people get the idea that it's OK to make promises and not keep them?

Unless the tenant agrees, you're breaking your word, violating a contract. This goes against business ethics and common decency.

Shame on those who encourage you! If they only meant "Sure, that's a fair offer subject to the tenant's approval", then I withdraw my accusation. But some posts clearly do NOT mean that.

here is a thought, sit down and talk with them and see if they would be interested in buying the land, give them some choices

as to what is right or wrong, only you can decide that

My question is this:

If there was a covenant with the rental was any consideration given in the event of termination, ie both parties must give 1 months notice.

I bet the answer as in most covenants that I read was No!, the covenants are only setup by people that consider the worst of the worst when tennants fail to meet commitments..then their belongings are returned.

However in this case, you have a tennant that has lined your pockets for however long and now because you want to sell the land, you offer the rent back and $1,000 linden.

That to me is bad business practice.

My other question is this,

Why can't the new owner take possesion as of 1st September, that would be more practical and fair for all parties.

I can see giving the tenant time to make alternate arrangements, and/or making the sale at the end of the month when the tenant's lease runs out, but SL is not RL. There is no physical effects of them being homeless in SL. There are lots of avatars that are "homeless" in SL and have to resort to making a Linden hot-spot their CTRL-SHIFT-H home.

Given that this is SL and intra-user contracts are not legally binding (as far as I know), the fact that you give the tenant ANY warning is a plus. Giving the tenant a prorated refund of their rent is a plus. Giving the tenant a full refund for the full month, although they used part of the month, is a double plus. Giving the tenant a full refund for the full month AND a "pain and suffering" payment, is a triple plus.

While this may not work in RL, as far as SL goes, IMHO, you are more than fair.

If something in RL is forcing you ("may have to sell" it's a little different from choosing to sell for SL reasons (else "risk passing on the sale opportunity".

The settlement described is a fair *offer*, but not fair treatment of the tenant as a unilateral action on your part. If they agree, that's cool; if not... unless there was some pre-existing agreement that rent payment doesn't correspond to lease duration, it really isn't fair to the tenant.

But as others noted, it's quite possible the new buyer (apparently an identified individual, not just the Anyone in "For Sale to Anyone" would agree to keep the tenant for the duration of the lease, unless they have big plans for building in August, or are a sim neighbor in desperate need of prims.

If, on the other hand, RL is forcing your hand somehow, I think you must just do what you have to do.

The people who are "homeless" is SL are "homeless" because they haven't bought or rented a "home". They log in to a Linden place or to the placce in which they were when they logged out. We've all been there. Did we feel that we "had to resort" to this? Nope!



Look at it this way...
You've bought land and inventory in SL.
LL decide to arbitrarily confiscate it all. The TOS that you explicitly agreed to allows them to do this. They are not obliged to give any reason for their action.
This would be unfair of course, but perfectly within the TOS.

So what if LL were to confiscate your land and inventory - but pay you back in Lindens what you paid for them.
Hey, that would not be as unfair as just taking it.!
Considering the TOS terms, it would be "more than fair" ? You agree? Well you must do, as this is the way you suggest that the OP treats their customer.


Not being as unfair as you could be is not "being fair", nevermind "more than fair".
It's a matter of principle.

A refund of the unused rent, is more than fair. 1000L is a Very nice gesture.

I would however try to avoid having any tenants items auto returned, it can make quite a mess of their inventory, ( you know stuff "sticking" to things, like having a House end up in inventory named "object"

I try to give a least a week or two notice, but that is not always practicle.

The tenant always has the first option to puchase the plot as it is being offered.

there is nothing unethical about selling your land and refunding unused rent with a weeks notice to vacate.

Do I think it's right to boot a tenant without notice? Ideally no.

However RL may intrude at some point - i.e. cannot afford tier.

The fact that you're willing to negotiate with the tenant is a good start. A full refund + 1000 might be a good place to start.

Perhaps refunding plus agreeing with the buyer that the tenant continues to occupy til lease end?

If the OP evicts the tenant against their wishes before the end of August:
- a little fairy will not poof out of existence
- Baby Jesus will not cry
- nobody will have been killed

All that will happen is that
- the tenant will rightly feel victimised, and will probably be less trusting of others than before
- the OP will have seeded a tiny little cancer in some corner of her soul.


There is no law in RL or SL that obliges us to act kindly or honourably.
Your world, Your poison - spread a tiny bit today!

Wow, very different responses--and an interesting discussion. Since the tenant only occupies a section of the total land for sale perhaps what I can do is sell the majority of the parcel now and the balance of the parcel (that the tenant now sits on) when the tenant's agreement expires. I'm not sure the buyer would go for that but if the tenant prefers to stay on their parcel until the end of the month it is a possibility. At any rate, the deal may not happen anyway.

I certainly don't want to "screw over" this person as I remember what it was like to not have a home. I just wanted to get an idea of what everyone thought about this problem and to see if there was a way that both our needs could be met. I guess all we have in SL are these voluntary agreements with no legal backing. I think the way someone gets treated matters even more so than in RL where there are laws to enforce contracts. So, I will try to do whatever makes the tenant happy and doesn't ruin their trust.

I wouldn't do it to my tenants. I tell them up front that when they rent, if I have to sell, I will offer it to them first at a reasonable price. They trust me enuf to set up their home in SL on my land and I respect myself enough to live up to that trust. Money comes and goes, self respect..priceless.

Thank you Tuesday. You've crystallised the thought that was driving me.

The way we treat others does matter enormously - and particularly in SL.
If we need a set of laws to enforce thoughtful behaviour, then we are less than we are capable of being.
My apologies to those who might have been offended by the passionate way in which I express this belief.

In Second Life the stakes are so small, the physical needs nonexistent. Anyone who doesn't take this opportunity to do the good and right thing would certainly not do it in RL, where the demands are much higher.

Look, if the buyer REALLY wants to buy your land, he/she will wait until Sept 1. It's only 3 weeks, for crying out loud.

1. Make an agreement with the buyer; have him/her pay you x% down as a deposit. Hopefully this will cover whatever tier you can't pay now.

2. Inform the tenant that the land will change ownership on Sept 1. It is up to her to renegotiate any rental agreements with the new owner, or vacate the parcel.

This gives the tenant 3 weeks to either find a new place or deal with the new owner, and give the new owner time to figure out if he wants to rent out part of the parcel.

And in the future, I would definitely make sure that I could pay my tier BEFORE I rented land to tenants. It's completely unfair to just boot her now, regardless of any "sob money" you give to her. As a renter in RL, if my landlord told me that he couldn't pay the bills, was selling the land, and gave me my rent back, I'd be furious. He would have breached our contract saying that either party has to give at least one month's notice before ending the contract. Hello, lawyer!

I once sold my land while there were active rentals on it. I made a deal with the buyer to let the renters expire, then they would leave. Some who wanted to leave as soon as ownership transferred, I refunded the unused time, and gave them free copies of the houses they were living in. (they were my builds) They seemed perfectly happy with that

It's not a house, but I just had a landlord tell me he was closing down his mall and refund the rent I had just paid for a shop there. Seemed perfectly fair to me.

If it was a house...I think if you gave me advance notice and a refund, I'd be satisfied with that, even though I'd be sorry to lose a landlady like yourself.