Should Squatters Be Allowed to Take People's Homes?

[Real blank]

Waah.


Waah.


Waah.


False.

It’s just rude doing that.

 

[notquiteright]

useless conjecture. I mean TikToc doesn't require one to swear they are telling the truth. Why would you immediately disbelieve ? It's a growing trend- whether this particular influencer is doing it or not.He has 1/4 -1/2 million followers

It's not a stalking horse to misdirect attention from a real problem

Last week, DailyMail.com revealed how entire communities in Los Angeles and Atlanta have been ravaged by criminals turning homes into strip clubs and hosting all night raves.

Residents of Texas and Colorado have also detailed how they are being tormented by a serial squatter who is running rings around the police.

There is a backlog of squatting cases throughout the nation and desperate families are turning to vigilantes who pledge to confront the squatters head on.


virtually all videos are unsubstantiated , unless documentation one has to decide credibility .

No, ya are dodging the MAGA spin you tried to put on your original video. The MAGA role call- squatter, south of the border video maker, all you needed was a gay pride flag in the back to complete the MAGA whine.

You see the forest but not the trees. Back in the olden days we had a saying in Recon- 'Until you've seen the objective from 3 sides you have nothing to key the PRIC over.' It's one thing to see some tween doing the latest craze on TikToc, quite another to accept something a bit more serious. Maturity and taking the long view...
Perhaps waiting a few until a video can be substantiated would go a long way for you...

 

[Absentglare]

Waah.


Waah.


Waah.


False.

You must not understand the situation. The tenants could very well believe they were renting from the landlord, and not some fraudster profiting off an abandoned unit.

 

[LouC]

Have I mentioned how much I dislike squatters?

Guess it comes from an incident in my childhood, where a neighbor to my great grandmother tried to file for ownership possession of a large piece of her property under "squatters rights law" after she had allowed him to yearly plant a garden on it to help feed his family. After X number of years he tried to claim it belonged to him. I remember the trouble it caused in and for our family to fight that.

 

[cpwill]

I was deployed once with a lawyer who also owned a bunch of rentals as his "business" on the side. That was exactly his approach - he would wait on the curb outside the house with a couple thousand dollars in cash and a locksmith. As soon as the people inside and all their stuff were outside and the locks were changed, they could have the money. He said it was the easiest, least costly way to deal with them.

For some people, this is, apparently, a lifestyle. Living off others, and taking advantage of the fact that those others can no longer rely on the protection of the rule of law.*

* this is a real problem, because, when the government refuses to protect people's rights, it discredits the government, and they turn to self-help options.

A follow-up: Queens squatters flee $1 million home after stand-off with homeowner, visit from 'vigilantes'

:-/ That's not a good solution, but, if the good solutions are removed by a government that refused to do the most basic job for which we form it, people will turn to it

 

[choiceone]

Theres lots of abandoned properties that are incredibly old and dilapidated that are just held there.

Some abandoned properties are dangerous. In NY, one had been quickly refurbished and rented to a woman with a new baby. The first week, she noticed that any fly that lit on a wall dropped dead immediately. Fortunately, she got out before the baby got sick. The place had been used as a meth lab and the meth had penetrated the walls, and just painting them could not prevent them or any other surface from being poisoned.

In the end, places like this can't be restored. You just have to tear down the building.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

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.

"even improving the property"
Wow - that is some SERIOUS rose colored glasses you have on.
There is a YouTube channel that some dude makes that works for a company that owns rental housing.
He makes 5-6 videos a month, all of them are kicking out squatters and people who have not paid rent in months.
Almost 100% of the time, the property is absolutely trashed. Holes in walls, piss stained carpets, shatters glass etc. etc. etc.
Over and over and over and over.

 

[Safiel]

Some abandoned properties are dangerous. In NY, one had been quickly refurbished and rented to a woman with a new baby. The first week, she noticed that any fly that lit on a wall dropped dead immediately. Fortunately, she got out before the baby got sick. The place had been used as a meth lab and the meth had penetrated the walls, and just painting them could not prevent them or any other surface from being poisoned.

In the end, places like this can't be restored. You just have to tear down the building.

I buy properties to tear down and build. I have meth residue detection kits if I am suspicious of a particular property. Proper remediation of a contaminated house can be quite expensive, so best just to steer clear of such places.

 

[ralfy]

Thriving how-to squatter internet forums reveal home takeover secrets: ‘You can’t stop it!’

A global squatting surge has fueled web forums dedicated to the dark art of property takeovers, with users trading insights on everything from managing neighbors, turning on utilities and researchi…

nypost.com

 

[Lursa]

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.

Necessary income? Not closing gates and letting dogs out to be hit by cars or lost? Allowing their pets to shit all over and not clean up after them?

 

[Lursa]

I approve of squatting in abandoned areas but said abandonment should be longer than 30 days.

Can building owners be held liable for any injuries, fires, etc? Is it really abandoned, what does that mean? Property owners fall on hard times too.

What about when the owner has enough $ to fix the building up again for occupancy or sale...how do you get rid of the squatters?

 

[Lursa]

You have the right to abandon property and, when and if you do, you may forfeit your “exclusive” access to it. The government can also exercise eminent domain.

I would agree with that but it would have to be a legally-recognized process. The property owner releases all rights to the property and it becomes the property of the jurisdiction.

 

[bomberfox]

Can building owners be held liable for any injuries, fires, etc? Is it really abandoned, what does that mean? Property owners fall on hard times too.

What about when the owner has enough $ to fix the building up again for occupancy or sale...how do you get rid of the squatters?

If you are a large firm that just buys up properties just to hold onto them i kinda dont care. Nah i wouldnt hold the building owner liable, they just wouldnt be able to hold onto it for a certain amount of time.

 

[Lursa]

If you are a large firm that just buys up properties just to hold onto them i kinda dont care.

Not really familiar with that scenario unless it's a company buying up the buildings in a neighborhood/commercial area where they want to accumulate enough land for a large investment, like Costco, an entertainment venue, etc. It takes time...and legal actions...to accumulate the land.

So then how do they get rid of the people when they're ready to develop?

Nah i wouldnt hold the building owner liable, they just wouldnt be able to hold onto it for a certain amount of time.

But...the jurisdiction can, at least some. It's been publicized a few times where kids used them for raves and caused fires. People died, including those that lived in the building. Same with drug houses where they cause fires or some unmaintained infrastructure fails and people die.

 

[bomberfox]

Not really familiar with that scenario unless it's a company buying up the buildings in a neighborhood/commercial area where they want to accumulate enough land for a large investment, like Costco, an entertainment venue, etc. It takes time...and legal actions...to accumulate the land.

So then how do they get rid of the people when they're ready to develop?



But...the jurisdiction can, at least some. It's been publicized a few times where kids used them for raves and caused fires. People died, including those that lived in the building. Same with drug houses where they cause fires or some unmaintained infrastructure fails and people die.

They need to develop instead of just sitting on land then . I would make the time frame a reasonable enough time to do so. If squatters are allowed to take over then the liability falls on them.

 

[Lursa]

Most "people in need" seek out shelters and help from the local community, they don't move into other peoples homes UNINVITED and refuse to leave!

Well it seems to be a new strategy that is being promoted over the Internet, in certain communities, etc.

 

[Absentglare]

I would agree with that but it would have to be a legally-recognized process. The property owner releases all rights to the property and it becomes the property of the jurisdiction.

The property owner doesn’t release all rights, though, they just can’t immediately remove the squatter without going through a formal legal process.

I think these kinds of evictions shouldn’t take long to settle, it should be pretty clear when the property owner never entered into a lease, for example.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Does anybody have a large dataset that shows how bad the squatter situation really is?
This thread makes it sound like "entire ARMIES of squatters are stealing your house right from under you!
And the dirty libs are helping!"

Or is still just a rare kind of thing that grabs headlines for that very reason?

 

[antiquity]

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.

I was working in Algiers a few year back and the company rep lived there with his wife...one night over dinner she told me they had to hire a house sitter because of squatters whenever they had to leave for any extended time. She said once in a home it was almost impossible to get them out.

 

[antiquity]

Does anybody have a large dataset that shows how bad the squatter situation really is?
This thread makes it sound like "entire ARMIES of squatters are stealing your house right from under you!
And the dirty libs are helping!"

Or is still just a rare kind of thing that grabs headlines for that very reason?

With all the homeless and illegal aliens I don't think it is as rare as it once was.

 

[Lursa]

The property owner doesn’t release all rights, though, they just can’t immediately remove the squatter without going through a formal legal process.

I think these kinds of evictions shouldn’t take long to settle, it should be pretty clear when the property owner never entered into a lease, for example.

See the 2nd part of post 164.

 

[Absentglare]

See the 2nd part of post 164.

Do you support the confiscation of such abandoned (and therefore unsafe) property? If the property owner refuses to enforce boundaries, I don’t see how that prevents a rave from occurring.

 

[Lursa]

Do you support the confiscation of such abandoned (and therefore unsafe) property? If the property owner refuses to enforce boundaries, I don’t see how that prevents a rave from occurring.

I am trying to point out the negative issues for property owners that they cant simply just ignore.

 

[Deuce]

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.....​

Should tenants have no rights?

 

[cpwill]

Should tenants have no rights?

Squatters are no more tenants than someone who has broken into, hot-wired, and driven off with your car is renting it from you.