This story makes no sense. $3700 can get you a nice 1 bedroom anywhere in SF, so it’s unclear why they couldn’t have found another place. If you’re renting, you find mold, and your landlord does nothing then by CA law you have the right to break your lease for unsafe living conditions.
The author’s LinkedIn is filled with executive/founder/CEO roles (and claiming a 7 figure exit) and yet still needing to use GoFundMe for $50k?
Also don’t understand how his existing health insurance through his work would not cover him. He claims he doesn’t have it anymore because they wouldn’t treat him? I’ve never heard of a situation where you get insurance through your work and you are dropped because they won’t treat you for some reason.
Lastly the mold is clearly visible in all the videos and pics he linked! It’s not like they four years later decided to pull out some carpet or something and only then discovered the place was filled with mold. They seriously lived there for 4 years without questioning that at all? If the story is true (questionable, really) then I would have to question their mental capacity if they thought nothing of all the clear as day black mold all over their apartment while getting sick without thinking twice about it.
The doorbell story made me stop and question the article.
You can get a digital door bell on Amazon for $15. It didn’t occur to the author to do so for 9 months?
Edit: I didn’t want to imply that the author is lying. Hopefully he is able to get healthy again. But when someone is asking for money and their story has some odd holes in it, I think it’s only natural to be skeptical.
Shouldn't, yes. But why would you choose nine months of inconvenience over paying $10 for a new doorbell yourself? What kind of rational decision is that? How are they valuing their time here?
Then deduct the cost from your next month's rent. That's certainly a better idea than doing nothing as "at least half a dozen" of your packages are stolen.
Currently paying $4200 for a 3 Bedroom 3 Bath fully detached single family house West of Twin Peaks (Midtown Terrace.) Giving up walkability for completing errands, I gain a private locking front porch where packages are never stolen, and lots of mold from living on fog laden Twin Peaks. On the whole, San Francisco is fairly damp; ensuring good ventilation is key - along with weekly maintenance to alleviate mold and keep things “clean.”
I don’t expect to have everything done for me either; there’s lots of un-fun tasks to complete around here. While deferred maintenance issues are a landlord’s responsibility to correct; the tenants could have taken a more proactive approach to remediation of the mold; or any other nonissue complaint lodged against San Francisco.
As a QA Engineer, I have an unfair advantage when it comes to understanding the need to mitigate risk. Seems this couple makes decisions without any regard to future consequences.
1. Didn’t mention whether or not they discussed the condition of the property with the current tenants in the building or any neighbors prior to signing the lease.
2. Clearly no understanding of tenant rights and responsibilities; would have known that rent can be withheld for fixing things.
3. Didn’t get mold coverage riders on renters insurance; yet has lived in a damp city for much of their lives.
4. Orders packages to an apartment without any way to safely store them; taking into account any/all edge cases
5. Didn’t do homework / ask questions to landlord regarding package delivery best practices for tenants back before lease signed in ‘15.
6. Didn’t see if other alternatives existed for broken doorbell.
7. Cancels health insurance because they couldn’t help with costs from the mold situation; forgets that a multitude of other accidents, trauma, and sickness still occur in the present and future.
All of their complaints seem to come back to being unprepared for handling problems that appear in life.
I bet this is some stupid personal marketing stunt. Waiting for the “I convinced a bunch of purportedly smart people to give me 50k with a fuck SF sob-story” followup. Hired.
Likely. I've yet to find a person who both has their personal site / profile / portfolio written in the 3rd person and is normal / trustworthy / not an egomaniac
That's kind of the point. The mould can cause psychological problems. Initially, you think it's merely unsightly so you develop health problems. And then you don't have the ability to understand it clearly.
(Which is not to say I necessarily believe the story, but it's not completely implausible.)
To be honest i'm not impressed at all, is $3700 per month super expensive? In any major city people pay as much or more.
Here in Limassol (not a major city by any measure), a single bedroom is about 1/3 as much (EUR 1000, i'm paying 1100 for bit nicer one), but tech salaries are 3000-5000 net, and 5000 is very rare. Seems to be about same level of affordability: a mediocre developer pays 1/3 salary for a 1-bdr. And nobody is upset with housing costs here, things look just fine.
In Paris, Frankfurt, and Munich you easily pay same amount (3400 EUR a month) for a 1-bdr an no one complains. And tech salaries are completely nowhere like Valley's, in fact it's pretty common to pay the entirety of a mediocre developer's (net) salary for 1-bdr rent. They can't afford living in cities and commute for hours.
This article is literally nonsense, it’s at the same level of medical rigor as an anti-vax rant, and appears to be crafted intentionally to get people susceptible to this kind of narrative to give them money.
It's really sad that in US you have to ask for donations for your healthcare, this is absurd in a country on this level. I live in EU and I have been to US (and SFO) and I feel like live a more comfortable life here in EU. And I live in the "poorer" Slovakia (compared to west EU). I don't need to think about costs if I get sick or injured (+ I get social support in case I can't work during that time).
In Italy it's, for low urgency, ~6months in public hospitals, 3days - 1week in private public-affiliated clinics paying the same as in the hospital (which are the main used solution to not overcrowd hospitals), <1day in full private clinics paying a bit more (eg ~ 80euros for a low abdomen eco, instead of ~ 15 in the public and affiliated)
If you have an high priority you get served by an hospital the same day.
How long do you wait for medical stuff? In Poland wait is sometimes >1 year
Depends on what you're looking for. A few years back I was told there was a 6-9 month wait at UCSF to see a GP that was willing to accept new patients. Non-urgent stuff like ultrasounds were around a 3 month wait.
> We eventually discovered the apartment building we were living in was built in 1908.
Come to England, we have houses built in 1600. Growing up in one of the wealthiest neighborhoods in the entire country, living in SF and having to wait for a few fixes (fix your own damn doorbell?) to your apartment is not Victorian level penury.
But man if I’m not enjoying the juxtaposition of Mr Crypto Blockchain Free Thinker with ‘why won’t someone fix my doorbell for me’: https://trentlapinski.com/
It is the legal obligation of the landlord to fix the bell, but sometimes you've got to threaten to sue / ruffle a few feathers to get shit done. Or do it yourself.
Guy's allegedly been building and selling since '01.
> We eventually discovered the apartment building we were living in was built in 1908. Yes, we were living in a “sick” building that was over 100 years old, and never knew. We even found photos of our former apartment in historical archives dating back to the 1920’s.
Is being just a hundred years old some kind of inherent problem? Obviously rotting is bad but they talk about discovering that it existed in 1908 like they found out that it’s a time machine, or that people didn’t take photos in the 20s. What’s the big deal about the age?
The best house I've ever lived in was built in 1850. As a sibling comment points out, this is definitely survivorship bias, since only the "good" wooden houses survive this long.
Survival bias in many cases means that a building that is still standing from 1908 is better quality than many built in 2008.
Lead paint and knob and tube wiring are the most common problems you find with houses of that vintage, if they've not been updated. They are largely before asbestos, which is the massive problem with mid-century construction.
American houses are made with cheap wood most of the time. Especially when you live in an older home, these are highly attractive to moulds when the building isn't maintained.
They are highly attractive to molds when plumbing leaks all over. Otherwise they are dry as a bone and sag in places. They're also built like shit so floors are wobbly and uneven and bowled in spots. A ball in the living room will roll to the center from any point in the room.
My mother's house was built in 1927 here in Queens NYC and the place is a shit box. After redoing the living room and fixing up the kitchen I can safely say that once that house is sold it will be knocked over. They're just a cheap rickety mess thrown up by the dozens.
There’s a craftsmanship to a certain kind of old home, that in my opinion — if well maintained — can be superior to a lot of new construction. The trend towards making new homes super “tight” created all sorts of ventilation issues that took a while for the industry to sort out. Nicely designed old homes breath. That’s key to keeping mold away. What often messes up old homes is some crappy renovation work that negatively impacts the building’s envelope.
It depends on where in the city the building was built. 1908 is just a few years after the great quake of 1906. Houses and buildings were built very quickly during an era of non-existent building codes.
I lived in one in the Tenderloin for a few years. It needed a lot of TLC and was horribly maintained. Nobody wanted no spend the money to keep it looking nice. That's one of the downsides to the architecture of the era. The building was gorgeous, but even just properly cleaning it took an extra effort the landlord wasn't willing to pay for.
> after we finally called the city, their inspectors discovered a number of safety, structural, and health violations
They probably should have called the city on day one of moving in. Did they really go years believing this place was inhabitable? Did they never have a friend stop by and see the shitty conditions and insist they should call the city?
There is an inspection department who can haul your landlord into court. You can also withhold rent when your unit is in these conditions and if you show up to court with the photos from these posts, your landlord will be in for a bad time.
They claim the building suffered from lack of oversight from the city; and sure the city didn’t know it was being rented out. But it also suffered from lack of someone actually notifying the city.
> At one point our doorbell stopped working, resulting in at least a half dozen packages being stolen (..) It took us over 9 months of emails and complaints to the landlords to finally get the doorbell replaced
Is this a fucking joke? Remote doorbell costs like 4USD. You should just buy it yourself...
> 3,657 USD per month for an apartment
It is cheaper to go to EU by plane, get a job for like one month, get proper healthcare and come back ;)
I’ve been paranoid about how bad places in SF can be, and have had some issues with mold occasionally. I have a rent controlled apartment I’ve been in for 8 years, but I’ve done the maintenance myself to improve the place and keep health issues down, which largely boils down to making sure surfaces are sealed and cleanable:
Paint the bathroom and use a mold killing primer.
Refinished hardwood floors.
Wash walls with TSP and paint using an oil-based primer (only one room so far, this was more for lead-based paint sealing)
Keep the windows cracked often
Clean the bathroom walls with bleach often (several times a year)
Clean some other room walls with bleach occasionally (once a year)
Clean window sills a few times a year
Bought a dehumidifier (I will actually buy another soon)
I don’t pay $3k+ a month though. One of the reasons I did all that work is precisely because I have been worried about moving to a new place, spending s fortune, only to find the landlord has never maintained it or knows how terrible it is.
The only thing more toxic than the mold in the apartment are the comments here.
Yeah it sounds like Trent could have handled the situation better. It also sounds like he didn't and is now pretty screwed. There's no need to pile on.
In the end I just don't think this post belongs on HN but I guess upvotes don't lie.
Even if they are it's USA, everybody have to pay their lawyer bills. It's not like in UK or many other countries where the side that looses pays up all costs. So if you have to choose between paying for healthcare and paying for the lawyers you'll obviously choose your health.
This is promoting victim culture. Many red flags and many GoFundMe links.
If you can’t afford a lifestyle, move. If you can’t afford the lifestyle, but continue to live there, don’t create a gofundme and craft a sob story highlighting your negligence.
On a positive note, you can get a job, graduate high school, and not have kids out of wedlock (dogs are not cheap either). You have all 3 of those going for you. You are tougher than you think.
You should reject all of those GoFundMe dollars or have a plan to repay people who donated.
"We are both suffering from lingering neurological damage, chronic fungal infections on our skin, GIs, sinuses, and even my ear canals. I’ve even lost some hearing (possibly permanently) in my left ear. Our health and immune systems are still compromised and we need regular access to a low EMF infrared sauna, hyperbaric oxygen chambers, and may even need stem cells to make a full recovery so we can regain our stamina, mental faculties, get married, and hopefully if we still can, have children. The clock is ticking on our recovery so we can try to have children and we simply can’t wait or rely on the possibility of the courts to rule in our favor a year or two from now."
Gonna need to see some peer reviewed medical journal citations regarding effects of mold in humans to take any of these claims seriously.
I’ll echo what other happy SF residents have said - it’s pretty great if you’re able to put yourself in a good part of town. Look I’ll be honest - your experience in SF is going to correlate with your ability to afford living here (I hate to say it but it’s true). If you’re up for spending $3-$5k/month on an apartment, you can live in a nice area (Hayes Valley, Marina, Cow Hollow, Pacific Heights, etc.) and life there is pretty darn good.
There’s access to some of the most spectacularly beautiful cycling on earth (just across the Golden Gate Bridge), the Presidio is a beautiful, Marina Green/Chrissy Field is beautiful, Golden Gate Park is beautiful, the food is amazing and there are wonderful new restaurants popping up all the time, the Mexican food (cheap!) is some of the best you’ll find.
There’s plenty of access to shared bikes and scooters (you don’t need to own a car), the CalTrain makes it reasonably easy to get down to the peninsula, and the competition between Uber and Lyft keeps ridesharing costs relatively low (for now - that’ll change).
It takes only 20-30 minutes to get to SFO, United has pretty good coverage of the whole world from there, so if you like to travel it’s easy to get away.
And, if you’re in tech, there’s plenty of other like-minded people around so there’s always a group of folks to nerd out with. And in general I’ve found people are very welcoming of newcomers (but of course this depends on the social circle you find yourself in - I perhaps got lucky).
I know this isn’t the “popular” opinion because it’s easy to hate on SF for the various PR things you read about (it’s expensive, there really is a bad homelessness/street encampment problem, and the NIMBYism/old coots voting in their own interest can be annoying), but if you happen to fit one of the molds this city is well-suited to handling, it’s quite lovely here.
That ALL being said - there are days where I look at how much I spend in rent and how much it would cost to own an apartment and I do daydream about moving to Vietnam and living like a king....
One of the cliche transplants from SF to NYC: The lack of concrete jungle, and that desire from people both who predated the tech deluge and those who arrived because of it (like you are planning to be) is precisely why it has become as bad as the blogs make it to be.
I think some things are not as bad as the blogs make it be, and many things a lot worse. In the latter category:
- there is now a "fire season". Yes, those precious outdoors, swathes of it gets burned and the beautiful CA air gets filled with smoke from burnt forests, houses and people
- the city is politically paralyzed. Everyone now treats their SF stay as even more temporary (moreso than the natives already complained about before, because now it's crappy to live in for everyone, not just the poor people) = limited investment in political future
- diversity shrinks every year. It gets more white/asian, more male, more single/childless, more tech, and more techie-centric entertainment, and less everything else everyday
- offline businesses are narrowing operation. Not merely "local" and "small" businesses dying, but even chain stores are not able to find staff or attract enough foot traffic because...the city simply doesn't have that many people out and about anymore. Business hours are shrinking, stores are receding to the downtown center streets, and service staff is disappearing. There are hardly 50 stores left in all of SF that are open 24 hours, even my podunk hometown in Oman, Middle East has more.
- the tourist industry is dying. People used to visit and fall in love with SF. Now, they get embarrassed about the state of the city (the more obvious stuff like homelessness, cost of living, filth) and leave trying to forget about this city.
I still love SF, and would love to move back if they can turn the ship around. As a non-US citizen I cannot even vote, and felt utterly helpless in the face of rampant NIMBYism preventing any development, upzoning, housing reform, transit reform, tax reform, homelessness relief, police retraining, non-tech subsidies, etc. But over the course of the 6-7 years I lived there, it went from a "this city is wonderful" love to the kind of love you have for a drug-addled suicidal family member.
It is incredibly relieving to see NYC being run extremely competently in contrast, and while I vaguely miss the weather, imo the summers here are better, the winters perfectly tolerable, seasons are a nice way to keep track of the passage of time, and I can enjoy nature more every time I go out of town.
> - the tourist industry is dying. People used to visit and fall in love with SF. Now, they get embarrassed about the state of the city (the more obvious stuff like homelessness, cost of living, filth) and leave trying to forget about this city.
> San Francisco Travel is reporting a total of 25.8 million visitors to the city in 2018 (with minor adjustments expected as final data is received), up 1.2 percent over 25.5 million in 2017.
Total spending by visitors was $10 billion, up 2.3 percent over $9.8 billion in 2017 (including spending on meetings and conventions).
One can argue conferences and conventions and business travel is still tourism, but not the kind that comes to appreciate the city, people, culture or history. SF will remain a destination for the starry-eyed tech grad and entrepreneur despite everything, that is not what I am commenting to here.
As for total spending, 2.3% is not even inflation in a normal place, let alone the most rapidly inflating city in the world. If you adjust for 2017 vs 2018 dollars, that is definitely a decline. By my estimate the cost of most things a visitor would spend on has gone up by at least 5% on average between those years (as the report you link posted, hotels up by 6%, and airbnbs up by far more than that, and similarly with ticketed entries, transportation and food).
This report paints a far rosier picture than what is actually happening when you account for the rate at which prices of things tourists pay for are going up relative to the tourism revenue numbers themselves.
More viscerally, if you live in SF for 2-3 years and hang around tourist spots often enough, you can just feel this viscerally as the lines outside shops have shrunk, numerous shopkeeps are just dusting their shelves with no customers, and gifts look unpurchased for years.
Inflation for 2018 was 1.9% in the US. So that's still above inflation but also the number of visitors have increased. You should also probably take into account that the city is saturated and thus there isn't any room for growth. (which kinda of the equivalent of the city costs inflating more than the average city in the US).
> you can just feel this viscerally as the lines outside shops have shrunk, numerous shopkeeps are just dusting their shelves with no customers, and gifts look unpurchased for years.
Or maybe consumers are changing their behaviors for lack of a better word. It never made sense to me, why, as a tourist I should go shop through the city stores. The brands are the same back home, the prices are x2 what you pay in Amazon and the logistics are not that great (flight/taxis/trains/bags/etc...)
I don't think tourism is dying in SF or any city in the world (Tourism growth is so strong that even if you are a sucker-city you'll still beat records) but there is little value-added in these shops that tourists will stop and drop $$ at them.
Funny I left NYC after 5 years because I felt like it wasn't being run well after seeing the subway get noticeably worse every year, the homeless population larger, the streets more congested, the rents higher, etc.
But I remember flying to SF for a weekend for an interview and being absolutely shocked at the blatant level of poverty and homelessness I saw. Have never had any desire to live in SF since then.
All the "SF is a dystopian nightmare" posts are referring to a few downtown neighborhoods which represent probably less than 5% of the city by land area. It's a huge problem and it sucks if you have to go to those areas regularly, but most of the city isn't like that. I live in the Inner Richmond and it's one of the nicest neighborhoods I've ever lived in (I've lived in a bunch all over). The combination of natural beauty, urban amenities, walkability, laid back vibe, etc. is amazing. There are dozens of other neighborhoods with similar qualities to choose from.
All the "SF is a dystopian nightmare" posts are referring to a few downtown neighborhoods which represent probably less than 5% of the city by land area.
LOL
Downtown neighborhoods? Like the Haight? Potrero? SOMA? the Tenderloin? the Mission? Western Addition? Fisherman's Wharf / Aquatic Park? Homelessness and grime isn't endemic to "downtown" San Francisco. Most of the tent cities I've seen in San Francisco are in SOMA, but even walking from the inner mission to market at night you'll find plenty of sidewalk dwellers.
Most of those neighborhoods are downtown... the others have some issues but aren't what people are referring to when they say "dystopian nightmare". That's mainly just Tenderloin/Soma/Civic Center, and a bit that radiates into adjoining neighborhoods from there.
Moderate homelessness is sadly an issue in any large Western city, so if you want to avoid it completely, you'll have to go to a smaller city or the suburbs (or somewhere with authoritarian policies). There also aren't any neighborhoods in Manhattan or central London/Paris/Sydney/etc. where you won't find any homeless people or some grime on the streets.
None of those neighborhoods are downtown, check a map. Whoever did the wikipedia box lumps SOMA and TL in with little alleyways in the Financial District (a.k.a. downtown) that they're trying to pass off as neighborhoods.
the others have some issues
Some issues? When I was working in Potrero we had a bike chop shop right behind the building and 3-4 encampments within a 2 minute walk. Unlike when I worked in the Tenderloin the folks out in Potrero weren't junkies. Instead they presented with what seemed like schizophrenia. There was a lot more screaming and fighting than I was used to.
The Haight (which is also not downtown) has been luring street kids for more than half a century. In my time in the city the Haight is consistently one of the least pleasant places to walk around because the homeless folks were dramatically more aggressive than other parts of the city.
SOMA? Go visit Rainbow, and then head down Folsom (which is very much not downtown) at night after all the tents have been deployed and tell me that's a minor problem. There are fewer large encampments in the western neighborhoods but vacant lots and storefronts will find folks to live in them quickly.
Go further up Market to the Castro (also not downtown). Jane Warner Plaza has been a magnet for nudists and homeless folks pretty much since its inception a decade ago.
A few weeks ago I went to see a show in Bernal and there was a morbidly obese guy sprawled out on the sidewalk across the street from the venue. He wasn't yelling at anyone in particular so I just ignored him. Fast forward a week and I was walking around the same stretch of Mission St and came across (among other things) bloody hand prints smeared on the side of a building.
Oh? And downtown? I worked downtown (Embarcadero) for a while. After the whole occupy movement fizzled out there were plenty of people living behind Steuart by the bocce ball courts. Lower Manhattan is far more sanitized, even at night.
There's just a constant level of unmitigated human suffering in San Francisco that you don't see in other cities, and it's not limited to "a few neighborhoods that amount to 5% of San Francisco".
There also aren't any neighborhoods in Manhattan or central London/Paris/Sydney/etc. where you won't find any homeless people or some grime on the streets.
Yeah I've been to all of those cities within the past five years and none are as disgusting as San Francisco. London's pretty grimy, but San Francisco has mechanical street sweepers (and has for years) to clear the fecal matter off the sidewalk. No other city I've visited actually needs that.
Agreed. Though afaik there are plans to build a huge apartment complex where the recently closed CPMC California St hospital is now (despite strenuous NIMBY objections of course). So some progress is being made, but a lot more is definitely needed.
The first thing you'll notice when you get to San Francisco proper is how many homeless people there and how dirty it is (google "sidewalk poop"). My recommendation would be to visit before you move.
I would recommend spending a week or two there first. I was astonished how many crazy and homeless people are on the streets and theft/crime levels (broken windows on cars is now nothing uncommon). Do you want to actually live directly in SF or somewhere in the surrounding cities?
It's not as bad west of Twin Peaks, but there are still homeless folks living there. I'm baffled by the folks who think there aren't any homeless people out west (presumably they never go out at night). You'd be hard pressed to find any city in the Bay Area without a homeless problem.
Not really in the western neighborhoods except in a few select spots. You can live in those neighborhoods without seeing it except when you go to the grocery store, parts of Golden Gate park, or the beach
You're joking, right? Personal experiences with the other neighborhoods you've mentioned aside, the Haight has been a mecca for drug use and homeless youth for more than fifty years now.
It surely depends on what you consider "the outdoors" and what your baseline for proximity is, but speaking as someone whose definition of outdoor recreation skews towards mountain sports in both summer and winter I would not consider SF to be proximate to the outdoors and would recommend looking further north (Portland, Seattle, Vancouver) if you want to live somewhere urban-ish and have quick, regular access to the backcountry.
I wouldn't move without visiting first, I found the place incredibly depressing.
Dire poverty, brutal injustice, and blatant dysfunction at every corner, in one of the most moneyed cities in the world. A human centipede of grift at city scale. Nice bridge tho.
The toxicity in the comments section here is revolting. Seriously disappointed in HN here.
Anyways back to the post, it would seem like the landlord should be liable for all these damages.
San Francisco has a ton of problems that literally just don't exist in other first world countries. From overpriced low quality apartments with toxic mold to so much poverty and financial desperation that one's grocery delivery gets stolen in 10 minutes, SF has never appealed to me in the slightest bit even as a software engineer.
I hope they're able to find the help they need, and I appreciate their bravery in speaking out. Don't let the oddly defensive anonymous keyboard warriors silence you.
You can buy test kits, which either provide a growing medium and you'll see if airborne spores cause something to grow, which you then can get tested for what it is exactly, or let you take air samples that you mail to a lab.
Ideally you’d do air sampling over a period of weeks, multiple times across the entire year. Reliable testing is hundreds of dollars. No, those little test kits don’t count.
When I was self employed I paid for my own health insurance. When I’ve worked for companies they had very affordable health insurance plans.
I think the problem probably exists for people with part time jobs that don’t make enough to pay for private insurance. However, I have family in that situation and they still were able to acquire insurance.
Some medical expenses are not covered by insurance and that is a problem. Even when I had my own insurance, while self employed, I did end up with appendicitis. After insurance paid up the amount I was covered for I was left with a pretty big bill. Nothing compared to what people with longer term issues end up paying though.
I doubt it, but, I have been hit up for Go Fund Me money multiple times by people trying to cover unexpected medical expenses. They included friends, neighbors, and my literal actual boss. So, while I doubt it's an appreciable amount in absolute terms, it definitely seems normal.
I hate to say this seeing what the OP is going through: But this seems largely their responsibility. While the landlord, in theory, should provide these baseline services of cleaning and repair, sometimes you got to take matters with your hands.
I have been in this situation before and there were either one of these two solutions: Fix things yourself if you can't afford a new place; or find a new place and make sure things are fixed. I prefer finding a new place but sometimes you can't afford that and need to take matters with your hands.
Where should I start?
> It took us over 9 months of emails and complaints to the landlords to finally get the doorbell replaced.
Replace the doorbell yourself. Should be easier than the endless contact with your landlord. Should be fixed in 1-2 days. Return the old doorbell when you are leaving the property.
> We ran home, but by the time we got there the box was gone.
I'm not really sure. But if I got a package stolen, I'll probably stop ordering delivery. I thought delivery is mostly useful for those living in suburbs but if you are in the city, just walk to the nearest store? And that would help preserve the community too, right?
> the gold rush mentality of the tech industry, which is mostly a lie.
This is "inside" the house. It'll take months for such a mold to develop. They probably have a problem with water but hell sure they have a problem with cleaning. Mold is easy to remove from my experience. Just clean the damn thing.
Tip: Paint is cheap. Buy a bucket and paint it yourself.
Jesus. Did it ever come up to your mind that this doesn't look healthy? If you didn't see it, do you ever change your bed sheets?
You are paying $3500/month. The repairs could have been done by you in the weekend or the end of the day. Probably costing you less than $1000 for a one year value worth until new repairs.
Here is a tip: If your landlord is non-cooperative, tell him you are fixing it yourself but will invoice him later. He might/might not accept that but at least you get it fixed.
>Mold is easy to remove from my experience. Just clean the damn thing.
External mold is, mold inside the walls is not. And if you have mold inside the walls then no amount of cleaning outside the walls will fix the situation.
The author’s LinkedIn is filled with executive/founder/CEO roles (and claiming a 7 figure exit) and yet still needing to use GoFundMe for $50k?
Also don’t understand how his existing health insurance through his work would not cover him. He claims he doesn’t have it anymore because they wouldn’t treat him? I’ve never heard of a situation where you get insurance through your work and you are dropped because they won’t treat you for some reason.
Lastly the mold is clearly visible in all the videos and pics he linked! It’s not like they four years later decided to pull out some carpet or something and only then discovered the place was filled with mold. They seriously lived there for 4 years without questioning that at all? If the story is true (questionable, really) then I would have to question their mental capacity if they thought nothing of all the clear as day black mold all over their apartment while getting sick without thinking twice about it.