Or just the main charges that make sense, like the elevator and small number of big-ticket items? If charging separately for the elevator means everyone pays a reduced rent (or building costs if you own the unit), and then pays their elevator charge separately, I don’t see why this is so bad. It would only be a bait and switch if you are using the elevator more, and if so, it also provides some financial incentive to change behaviour to the extent you can.
Exactly. People bought condos or signed leases with the agreement that the elevator costs would be shared. Now folks want to renege on that agreement after-the-fact. It’s a classic bait-and-switch.
Or just the main charges that make sense, like the elevator and small number of big-ticket items? If charging separately for the elevator means everyone pays a reduced rent (or building costs if you own the unit), and then pays their elevator charge separately, I don’t see why this is so bad. It would only be a bait and switch if you are using the elevator more, and if so, it also provides some financial incentive to change behaviour to the extent you can.
Do you know the definition of a bait and switch?
Please enlighten me. Isn’t a bait and switch a thing only if you wind up paying more, unexpectedly and by fraudulent design?
Exactly. People bought condos or signed leases with the agreement that the elevator costs would be shared. Now folks want to renege on that agreement after-the-fact. It’s a classic bait-and-switch.