Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tenants win right to physical keys over smart locks from landlords

cnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–367 of 367 posts

Re: Tenants win right to physical keys over smart locks from landlords

#361

Post by mehrdadn »

tboxer wrote: post #184
mehrdadn wrote: post #12

What happens to such a smart lock if it loses access to electric power (or internet access if it needs one)? Is there a key backup? Do you get locked out of your home if you don't have said backup key with you?

I was an early user of "unnamed" popular Kickstarter door lock and I took my dog out at 9pm and came back to find that the batteries were dead. I called the customer support and they told me the low battery alert message was sent after I had locked the door and left, which was about a 20 minute trip. They ended up paying for my locksmith, but I haven't felt comfortable using the lock since so it just sits on my door.

Wow, so it predicted its battery was low less than 20 minutes before it died? That's awful.

Re: Tenants win right to physical keys over smart locks from landlords

#362

Post by lovich »

tom_ wrote: post #319
lovich wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know, I think my interpretation was wrong after re-reading, but I dont think I would disagree still. America has a very strong cultural thread of authoritarianism. You see it in places like a cops word being given greater weight in court than a citizens, or how people treat rights as something the government has to give you rather than the government taking rights from you

Policepeople are citizens.

The law as practiced by the state seems to indicate that they are not the same

Re: Tenants win right to physical keys over smart locks from landlords

#363

Post by _cs2017_ »

threezero wrote: post #333
_cs2017_ wrote: post #320

The smart lock had a keypad that could be used to open it with a code. And to clarify, it was a smart lock into the building, not into individual apartments. How is this possibly a privacy concern? Also, the tenants didn't win a right to anything; they settled the case without going to trial.

It’s a privacy concern because it can still track your comings and goings. And even the codes were personalized to each tenant, so they could be tracked.

Ah yeah if it's personalized, then I understand. That said, it seems just asking the landlord to make the codes the same for everyone would have been far simpler than going to court over this.

Re: Tenants win right to physical keys over smart locks from landlords

#364

Post by Twirrim »

setquk wrote: post #134
Twirrim wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but it's a complete waste of Marmite. It ought to be illegal to waste such a heavenly thing as marmite like that.

We'll agree to disagree on that. After 22 years of putting up with marmite in the house I still don't like it ;)

I'm a Brit who has been living in the US for over a decade now. Every now and then I try to introduce American friends and co-workers to the delights of Marmite, but to no avail. Luckily for me, it's relatively easy and affordable to purchase Marmite via Amazon.

Re: Tenants win right to physical keys over smart locks from landlords

#365

Post by romwell »

criley2 wrote: post #358
romwell wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Pro-landlord" is not "pro-ownership", it's the opposite.

Oh sweetie, oh no... The landlord IS the owner. They are inseparable. You cannot be pro-landlord and anti-owner, or pro-owner and anti-landlord. "I'm pro-developers but against programmers!" "I'm anti-programming, but pro-coding!" Come on now.

Oh, come on. Most houseowners aren't landlords (people who own multiple properties and make money by renting it to others).

It is in the interests of landlords that as few people owned property as possible. This being pro-landlord is being anti-ownership, numbers-wise.

I'm pro-owernship of property, I'm anti-getting-rich-off-mere-ownership (that is, quite literally, rent seeking).

Someone who only wants the police to have easy access to guns is anti-gun ownership.

Someone who only wants landlords to own property is anti-property-ownership.

And being pro-landlord is exactly that.

TL;DR: all landlords are owners, most owners aren't landlords. And the rent is too damn high.

Re: Tenants win right to physical keys over smart locks from landlords

#366

Post by balabaster »

nate_meurer wrote: post #351
balabaster wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It never occurred to me not to change the locks. The minute I start paying rent, I always saw it as my home. Upon viewing the place, I make explicitly clear that I expect it to be cleaned and anything that's broken shall be fixed prior to my taking possession and that I will consider the contract null and void if it's not. I ensure this is written into the contract so that if it's not taken care of, the contract is n…

I don't how it works in Canada, but in the U.S., if the lease becomes "null and void", whatever that means, then you lose the contracted right of possession. If you don't leave immediately, you're in material breach, and the landlord will start eviction. I've had applicants who insist on similar changes, and I'll decline their application every time. It sounds like you're a good guest, but without knowing anything mo…

Agreed, if the contract is null and void, then the right to possession is negated. As such, I would expect the return of my deposit, which I usually pay upon signing the contract. I usually negotiate to pay the first month's rent upon acceptance of the property after the move-in inspection, at which point I'm satisfied to accept tenancy. If the contract becomes null and void after this time, I fully expect to be required to vacate the premises in a timely manner.

If a landlord decided to decline me for those requests, I would equally see that as a giant red flag and would likely consider that I'd dodged a bullet.

I'm a great guest. I treat the home I live in - including the landlord and neighbours with the greatest of respect. If the landlord is unwilling to accommodate such changes to the contract, then I would assume that they're unlikely to treat me with the respect I would afford them. All business relationships are a two way street. If that affordance is not forthcoming, I wouldn't consider that any kind of arrangement I wish to pursue or maintain.

Re: Tenants win right to physical keys over smart locks from landlords

#367

Post by thieving_magpie »

lovich wrote: post #217
thieving_magpie wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Feudal and Authoritarian eh? Certainly not being dramatic over differing interpretations of property rights.

A:the poster didn't mention feudalism B: >differing interpretations of property rights The American interpretation is authoritarian. Just because it has a negative connotation doesn't make it untrue. The landlords are renting out a dwelling for someone, and because they are the authority of that land they get to enforce rules on who has access to it. That is authoritarian

A: Yes they did. They edited the post to remove it after my post.
Post reply on HN