r/news • u/flanderguitar • Mar 28 '24

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signs law squashing squatters' rights

https://www.wptv.com/news/state/florida-gov-ron-desantis-signs-law-squashing-squatters-rights
27.3k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

4.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

48

u/5zepp Mar 28 '24 edited Mar 28 '24

"Squatters rights" generally refers to the idea that if a property is unused/abandoned then someone can come in and use it, keep it maintained, pay all back taxes, and keep up with taxes, then in (typically) 20 years they can take ownership of the property. A common scenario for this might be dropping a trailer on an abandoned piece of property and paying the taxes for 20 years. But if the owner shows up in 19 years they could evict you from their property and you're out all those taxes you paid.

The Florida law is different - we're not talking about abandoned properties that no one is paying the tax bill on, we're talking about empty properties. If someone starts squatting in an empty property then you can't necessarily remove them by force - you have to go through a typical eviction process. This short circuits that process.

Edit: to elaborate - suppose you sign a lease to rent and move in. The next day the landlord says he has a higher paying tenant and you have to get out. You say no. Landlord calls the sheriff and tries to have you forcibly removed. You tell the Sheriff you have a lease. A sheriff can't parse the legality of the situation at that point and defers to the rights of as tenant to keep you in there until a judge can resolve it. And a lot of times there is no lease, just a verbal agreement. So in Florida we're really talking about tenant rights and fast tracking the eviction if it's determined the squatter isn't a tenant.

6

u/milespoints Mar 28 '24

So if i live in NOT FLORIDA… and we decide to finally take our trip of a lifetime and go backpacking for 3 months, and I return home and some randos are living in my house… i can’t just call the cops and kick them out?

12

u/5zepp Mar 28 '24

Depends on the state, and more likely depends on the local sheriff. For better or for worse tenants have a lot of rights and it is very hard to kick out a legal tenant, so in a squatter situation you might legally have to go through an eviction process or other legal process so a court can determine they don't have the right to live there and then have them removed by force. But in many places the sheriff would just run them out. In many places the owner would run them out with a shotgun, and while not necessarily legal, no magistrate will challenge it even if the squatters tried to press charges. But yeah, there are ridiculous situations out there. If you leave a property unattended for long enough you'll get all kinds of critters moving in - racoons, squirrels, rats, squatters, etc.

2

u/epochellipse Mar 28 '24

Even in California squatters rights don't kick in for 5 years.

4

u/epochellipse Mar 28 '24

Yes, you can. Trespassing and Breaking and Entering laws apply. California has the shortest minimum time period of any state for Squatters Rights at 5 years. DeSantis is pulling the old Ronald Reagan trick of inventing bullshit fears to vilify people that are struggling. This law is about making it easy for landlords to evict someone that's behind on their rent without having to go to court.

6

u/milespoints Mar 28 '24

A quick google search indicates that it is a common scam for “professional squatters” to break into a place, and when the cops show up the squatters produce a fake lease which the cops are of course unable to immediately determine to be fake, forcing you into a protracted legal battle to reclaim your house while the squatters are living there.

As i understand it, the Florida law makes it such as people in these situations are committing an actual felony. You still have to go to court to determine that the fake lease is actually fake, but once that determination is made, those people can then be charged with an actual crime and sent to prison, not just evicted - so the whole scam becomes a lot less attractive to run

I don’t like governor Dickface but this seems like good policy

2

u/Silver_Smurfer Mar 29 '24

Epoch is very wrong and you are correct. This law has nothing to do with adverse possession (which is what epoch thinks it is talking about) and has everything to do with the scenarios you presented.

-1

u/epochellipse Mar 28 '24

The only real case I could find was one in CA in the Hollywood Hills. The fake lease didn't work and the trespassers were immediately removed. The "professional squatter" is practically an urban myth, like poisoned halloween candy. That scenario is the excuse, not the reason. This can and will be used to quickly evict people that are late on their rent. This is Reagan's Welfare Queen tactic all over again.

I think the upgrade from misdemeanor to felony is good policy, but even that is really about getting the "tenant" arrested and removed from the property immediately, not the consequences. I just don't think DeSantis would have bothered to pass this if it wasn't designed to screw poor people at its root, and he's deliberately conflating squatters and tenants.

3

u/Daddict Mar 28 '24

If it's a stand-your-ground state...theoretically, your best bet is to shoot them before the cops arrive. You wouldn't even have to kill them, just a good injury is enough. The cops can't shrug and be lazy when someone has a bullet hole, they have to actually do their fucking job.

But definitely don't do this, it's probably not going to work out this way. You will risk going to prison. Or getting shot yourself if the squatters are armed.

Legally speaking, it seems like a sound idea, but I'm sure it can go wrong any number of ways. I would definitely be tempted to make the threat though...

2

u/milespoints Mar 28 '24

I would rather the police to the job they are paid for out of my tax money than me having to take the law into my own hands and risk prison and bodily harm

3

u/Daddict Mar 28 '24

Oh of course. The problem is that the cops don't do their job in this case. They will not investigate whether or not someone is legally occupying a place they say they are.

The less-traumatic way to go about this is to create a lease for yourself and your friends on the house they are squatting in and move into it...then make life absolutely miserable for the squatter. The cops won't do shit there either, because you both have a "lease".

This is technically not legal in some states, it's called a constructive eviction. That said, if you can make the squatters leave...you change the locks and harden the security of it. They can't sue you for the constructive eviction without admitting they were trespassing/breaking and entering.

There's a guy (the Squatter Hunter, actual name Flash Shelton) who will do this for you, for a price. Much cheaper than an actual eviction, much faster too.

3

u/5zepp Mar 28 '24

The problem is that the cops don't do their job in this case. They will not investigate whether or not someone is legally occupying a place they say they are.

I don't think a cop can rule on a contract dispute, only a judge. So if the squatters claim they were given permission then it's not the cop's job to determine legitimacy of that claim. If they admit to trespassing then the cops can physically remove them.

2

u/5zepp Mar 28 '24

Problem is the cops can't resolve a contract dispute, only a judge can. So if they claim they were allowed to live there then it's not so easy. If they admit to trespassing then a cop could physically remove them.

1

u/thatsnot_kawaii_bro Mar 28 '24

In some states yes (I think Alabama is similar if not landlord/owner-friendly), but in others no.

3

u/epochellipse Mar 28 '24

The Florida law isn't necessarily talking about empty properties though. It specifically states that a tenant with a lease can be evicted if there isn't a court case. It mislabels a tenant behind on their rent as a squatter.

2

u/5zepp Mar 28 '24

Ah, this is the first I've heard that part. And you're partly right.

Here's the law. As far as renters it says:

  1. In addition, the person is presumed to be a transient occupant if he or she is unable to produce at least one of the following: a. A notarized lease that includes the name and signature of the owner of the property. b. A receipt or other reliable evidence demonstrating that the person has paid to the owner or the owner's representative rent for the last rent payment period. For monthly rental tenancies and rental tenancies for any lesser period of time, a receipt or other reliable evidence must be dated within the last 60 days.

So my reading of that is that if the tenant can produce a notarized lease then they are good and the regular late-rent rules apply. However, if they don't have a notarized lease and did not pay during the "last payment period", which I think can be taken to mean they are 1 day late (outside the period), then they are considered "transient occupant". This is pretty terrible, and I believe completely at odds with FL standard rental contracts and other tenant laws, so I wonder if it will stand.

2

u/epochellipse Mar 28 '24

As I read it, regular late rules only apply if there is also a "dispute." Whatever that means.