Should Squatters Be Allowed to Take People's Homes?

[cpwill]

Inspired by this story:

A New York City homeowner was arrested for unlawful eviction after arguing with squatters who, she says, stole her $1 million home last month.

The New York Police Department took Adele Andaloro, 47, into custody after she attempted to change the locks on her Queens property that she inherited following her parents’ deaths, ABC Eyewitness News reported Monday. The standoff between Andaloro and the squatters occurred on February 29.

In New York City, squatters can claim tenant rights after living on a property for 30 days. This tenant-protection law is much more generous than the one in New York’s statewide law, which requires squatters to remain on a property for ten years before gaining such rights. A squatter refers to any person who unlawfully occupies an uninhabited building without the landlord’s permission. Under New York City law, homeowners cannot change the locks, switch off utilities, or remove personal items belonging to their tenants from a property....​

This particular case involved two squatters being eventually removed, and then a third individual creating a roadblock by claiming to be a tenant, at which point the police refused to help, and instead arrested the owner:

She was told that the standoff is a landlord-tenant issue, meaning it has to be resolved in housing court rather than through the police. Andaloro indicated she would pursue an eviction filing in landlord-tenant court.

Brian Rodriguez, the allegedly legal tenant, said that is the only way to settle the dispute. “You got to go to court and send me to court,” he said. “Pay me the money and I’ll leave or send me to court.”

However, that might take longer than anticipated. According to the Rent Stabilization Association, resolving an eviction case filed in New York City takes an average of 20 months.....​

 

[medi]

I sure would be interested in a comparison of that NYC law to other similar laws around the world, not just a comparison to U.S. laws in other cities, counties, states.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

They should have hired this guy: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/squa...WJcTcEiQSaDDX4IkKC5a2mYRNEtypeQzh-w1n5klrSsyA

 

[cpwill]

I sure would be interested in a comparison of that NYC law to other similar laws around the world, not just a comparison to U.S. laws in other cities, counties, states.

an editorial, here that mentions some of that, but not terribly detailed.

 

[medi]

an editorial, here that mentions some of that, but not terribly detailed.

Thank you, I'll look at that a bit later.

BUT, I went back for a second read of your post and that 30 days and that loss of parents is a mix that is nasty. In that case 30 days could very well be not enough time to get all one's affairs in order.

I suppose I mean, I don't like the smell of that situation after getting a second whiff.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Our last tenant at our home in Mansfield Texas was a sovereign citizen who attempted adverse possession.
I was prepared to go pretty far but thankfully sheriffs made it unnecessary.

 

[Jessie C]

Florida just passed a bill to allow police to evict these miserable thieves almost immediately!

EVERY SINGLE STATE should have this law NOW!

Florida homeowner shares squatter eviction success story: 'We went the right way'

Florida Democrat Patti Peeples would have been able to file misdemeanor and felony charges against her property's squatters had House Bill 621 been passed.

www.foxbusiness.com

 

[cpwill]

Thank you, I'll look at that a bit later.

BUT, I went back for a second read of your post and that 30 days and that loss of parents is a mix that is nasty. In that case 30 days could very well be not enough time to get all one's affairs in order.

I suppose I mean, I don't like the smell of that situation after getting a second whiff.

There are "better" stories if you want to highlight the problem (lots of people took advantage of COVID restrictions to basically just live rent free in other people's homes for a couple of years, and there are, apparently, more people who just refuse to pay rent than I anticipated.

It was just the one that caused me to think about the greater issue.

 

[cpwill]

Florida just passed a bill to allow police to evict these miserable thieves almost immediately!

EVERY SINGLE STATE should have this law NOW!

Florida homeowner shares squatter eviction success story: 'We went the right way'

Florida Democrat Patti Peeples would have been able to file misdemeanor and felony charges against her property's squatters had House Bill 621 been passed.

www.foxbusiness.com

Retirees depending on second homes to fund their lives aren't playing.

 

[Ug make hammer]

No. Squatter's rights are why owners who have no other use for a property (other than holding it as an investment) evict squatters who are doing no harm or are even improving the property. "Ethical squatters" are victims of unethical ones, who damage or destroy properties, and the choice of who lives there must remain with the owner.

A major impediment to renting is bond up front. Eviction laws which protect tenants (but not squatters) are why owners have to take a bond: if the tenant stops paying rent, the owner can keep their bond. Also if the tenant does significant damage to the property, bond covers at least some of that. But now imagine the owner discovers squatters in their property. They should be able to enter a different contract with them, allowing eviction with only a week's notice (or even less), and if the squatters haven't damaged the house then there's no need for bond. One week's rent could be taken in installments, as a bond, at the beginning of the contract: this would be much easier to manage for the low income tenant.

Squatting could be a benign way to get low income people into rental agreements, and benefit owners as well. All that's necessary is to recognize that not all squatters are vandals, and some make improvements even when there's no financial incentive for them to do so. As to a 'permanent underclass' of renters with fewer rights, that could be managed by rolling over squatter's lease to a regular lease after 1 year.

 

[phoenix2020]

Florida just passed a bill to allow police to evict these miserable thieves almost immediately!

EVERY SINGLE STATE should have this law NOW!

Florida homeowner shares squatter eviction success story: 'We went the right way'

Florida Democrat Patti Peeples would have been able to file misdemeanor and felony charges against her property's squatters had House Bill 621 been passed.

www.foxbusiness.com

Agreed 100%. I hate how squatters are able to abuse the system or even be shielded by it. This sounds like a great law.

 

[medi]

Actually, this is a very odd thread for me, because of a cultural thing.

I don't want to go into much detail, but I have only just released a residence to be refurbished after two years of remaining empty due to a death in that residence. There are cultural matters in many nations that relate to a residence needing to remain unoccupied for a certain period of time after a death within.

 

[Jessie C]

Retirees depending on second homes to fund their lives aren't playing.

And they shouldn't!!! Most of the time these people aren't renters; they just moved into an unocupied house and refused to leave. They are all criminals!

 

[Ug make hammer]

Living in a property does not necessarily deprive the owner of anything. As I said, some squatters actually improve the property, giving it a lick of paint or caring for the garden.

 

[phoenix2020]

Living in a property does not necessarily deprive the owner of anything. As I said, some squatters actually improve the property, giving it a lick of paint or caring for the garden.

The owner should be the one to make that choice.

Not the squatter.

Not ever.

 

[Ug make hammer]

And they shouldn't!!! Most of the time these people aren't renters; they just moved into an unocupied house and refused to leave. They are all criminals!

It's refusing to leave which is "criminal." That's depriving the owner of other uses for their property (from living in it, to renting it out, to selling it). The act of moving in may be a criminal offense (if they break a lock or a window) but it doesn't deprive the owner of anything.

 

[Real blank]

I sure would be interested in a comparison of that NYC law to other similar laws around the world, not just a comparison to U.S. laws in other cities, counties, states.

In the uk you generally give them 2 months notice through it depends on what contract you have signed.you need a court order to kick them out

 

[Ug make hammer]

The owner should be the one to make that choice.

Not the squatter.

Not ever.

Owners would be more likely to rent out the property (benefiting themselves and harming no-one) if they weren't bound by existing tenancy law.

 

[Jessie C]

Actually, this is a very odd thread for me, because of a cultural thing.

I don't want to go into much detail, but I have only just released a residence to be refurbished after two years of remaining empty due to a death in that residence. There are cultural matters in many nations that relate to a residence needing to remain unoccupied for a certain period of time after a death within.

I don't know where you are, but here peoples property is dealt with legally after death with no time constraints except those that might be specified in a will, there are no religious constraints on the selling of property that I'm aware of.

 

[Integrityrespec]

Inspired by this story:

A New York City homeowner was arrested for unlawful eviction after arguing with squatters who, she says, stole her $1 million home last month.​

​

The New York Police Department took Adele Andaloro, 47, into custody after she attempted to change the locks on her Queens property that she inherited following her parents’ deaths, ABC Eyewitness News reported Monday. The standoff between Andaloro and the squatters occurred on February 29.​

​

In New York City, squatters can claim tenant rights after living on a property for 30 days. This tenant-protection law is much more generous than the one in New York’s statewide law, which requires squatters to remain on a property for ten years before gaining such rights. A squatter refers to any person who unlawfully occupies an uninhabited building without the landlord’s permission. Under New York City law, homeowners cannot change the locks, switch off utilities, or remove personal items belonging to their tenants from a property....​

This particular case involved two squatters being eventually removed, and then a third individual creating a roadblock by claiming to be a tenant, at which point the police refused to help, and instead arrested the owner:

She was told that the standoff is a landlord-tenant issue, meaning it has to be resolved in housing court rather than through the police. Andaloro indicated she would pursue an eviction filing in landlord-tenant court.​

​

Brian Rodriguez, the allegedly legal tenant, said that is the only way to settle the dispute. “You got to go to court and send me to court,” he said. “Pay me the money and I’ll leave or send me to court.”​

​

However, that might take longer than anticipated. According to the Rent Stabilization Association, resolving an eviction case filed in New York City takes an average of 20 months.....​

Sounds like progressive bullshit.

 

[Ug make hammer]

Actually, this is a very odd thread for me, because of a cultural thing.

I don't want to go into much detail, but I have only just released a residence to be refurbished after two years of remaining empty due to a death in that residence. There are cultural matters in many nations that relate to a residence needing to remain unoccupied for a certain period of time after a death within.

Why did you forgo two years of rent? That seems quite irrational.

 

[medi]

There are "better" stories if you want to highlight the problem (lots of people took advantage of COVID restrictions to basically just live rent free in other people's homes for a couple of years, and there are, apparently, more people who just refuse to pay rent than I anticipated.

It was just the one that caused me to think about the greater issue.

Yes, rent refusal and the courts. I have firsthand experience with that. Tough bit of business, unfortunately. But here in Japan courts are lenient only if the renter had been a good paying renter for many years and then something sort of bad happened to the person/family renting the residence. Best to try and settle out of court, but many times that will also happen at the behest of the court. The judge will sort of force all parties off to another room and kind of force a settlement. Judges in this country seem to have a bit more power than in many nations. Best to stay away from the courts here, if possible.

 

[Ug make hammer]

Yes, rent refusal and the courts. I have firsthand experience with that. Tough bit of business, unfortunately. But here in Japan courts are lenient only if the renter had been a good paying renter for many years and then something sort of bad happened to the person/family renting the residence. Best to try and settle out of court, but many times that will also happen at the behest of the court. The judge will sort of force all parties off to another room and kind of force a settlement. Judges in this country seem to have a bit more power than in many nations. Best to stay away from the courts here, if possible.

If a death in the family means they can no longer afford the full rent, then they should move to a cheaper place sooner rather than later.

What's the bond situation in Japan?

 

[medi]

Why did you forgo two years of rent? That seems quite irrational.

Not irrational in some communities. May seem strange, but an older family of many generations in a given community has to play by different rules than some others. It gets a bit complicated, to be frank. Cultural issues can be sort of strange to some folks that don't have a lot of years in such like many Asian communities. Money is not always the key issue.

 

[Real blank]

Would have to read more into it but squatters rights after 30 days seems insane to me