u/hornyzygote

I have medical grade (CCL1) thigh-high open toe compression garments. And I have stage 1 lipedema.

I have started compression about 2 months ago- my garments are surprisingly comfortable as I usually haaaaate tight fitting clothes (it’s some kind of sensory thing, idk). But yeah, surprisingly comfy compression, so I’ve been pretty diligent with wearing it. But, if I wear my compression all day for several days in a row (taking them off at night, of course), my toes get purple and a little sore and blistery. They calm down again if I take a break from compression for 3-5 days.

My compression was fit by a medical professional who thoroughly took my measurements, so I’d be surprised if ill-fitting garments were the issue. They are comfortable, and I have no other symptoms (such as numbness, tingling, pain in my legs, etc). They’re also graduated compression, so I thought they’d be moving fluid up my legs, rather than messing up circulation in my toes. For reference, I’m Australian so it’s winter at the moment (days are about 11 degrees celsius on average)- just noting in case that’s a factor.

Anyway, just wondering if anyone’s had the same issue?

Hi,

My fiancé and I are looking to move out of his parents' home, and into a rental. As we want to save as much money as possible (money is tight), we want to move into a 3-4 bedroom rental, and sub-let the other 2-3 bedrooms out. While I know the threshold for a landlord's ability to reject a sub-let request is high, an easy way for landlords to get around it is to make the maximum occupants number on the lease, the same as the number of people entering the lease.

I was wondering how easy it is to arrange for the lease to be signed with a higher maximum occupants number to reflect the number of rooms in the house. I assume our odds of securing a rental would go down drastically if we were upfront about an intention to apply to sub-let after signing a lease. I imagine it's also not easy to re-negotiate the maximum occupancy after the lease is signed... it is a binding contract after all. Could we justify to the REAs/landlord a way to have a higher maximum occupants on the lease prior to signing without jeopardising getting the rental?

I was wondering if there is a way around this? If it helps, I have lived in one rental previously, which I could probably get a good reference from. My partner has no rental history. We are good, responsible people who wouldn't sub-let to scumbags (not that I would expect an REA to take my word for that, understandably).

Thank you in advance!

Hi,

My fiancé and I are looking to move out of his parents' home, and into a rental. As we want to save as much money as possible (money is tight), we want to move into a 3-4 bedroom rental, and sub-let the other 2-3 bedrooms out. While I know the threshold for a landlord's ability to reject a sub-let request is high, an easy way for landlords to get around it is to make the maximum occupants number on the lease, the same as the number of people entering the lease.

I was wondering how easy it is to arrange for the lease to be signed with a higher maximum occupants number to reflect the number of rooms in the house. I assume our odds of securing a rental would go down drastically if we were upfront about an intention to apply to sub-let after signing a lease. I imagine it's also not easy to re-negotiate the maximum occupancy after the lease is signed... it is a binding contract after all. Could we justify to the REAs/landlord a way to have a higher maximum occupants on the lease prior to signing without jeopardising getting the rental?

I was wondering if there is a way around this? If it helps, I have lived in one rental previously, which I could probably get a good reference from. My partner has no rental history. We are good, responsible people who wouldn't sub-let to scumbags (not that I would expect an REA to take my word for that, understandably).

Thank you in advance!