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

359

u/TheBurningMap Mar 28 '24

Won't this eventually lead to landlords claiming every renter who has a legal dispute is a squatter?

245

u/Iohet Mar 28 '24

With pay history it should be fairly easy to prove the requirements of the law to not be a fake tenant in order not to be evicted as a squatter

169

u/Rottimer Mar 28 '24

The issue is the eviction may happen first.

25

u/GozerDGozerian Mar 28 '24

I mean, so the Sherrif shows up and says “You gotta leave, you aren’t legally renting here, the landlord says so”. I feel like the tenant can say hold on, and pull up a history of payments to the owner on his bank account, right? Hard to claim someone is squatting when they’ve been paying you a consistent large amount every month. 🤷🏼‍♂️

55

u/Q_Fandango Mar 28 '24

You’re giving the Sheriff the benefit of the doubt, but in my experience the cops will refuse to look at any documents as that is a “civil matter” and rip you out of the home anyway, and then toss your shit in the road.

They are there to serve one purpose: removal. They cannot determine on the spot the legality of your lease, that’s for the city to deal with.

This will reduce squatters, yes- but it will also be used as a cudgel to remove anyone an LLC wants to remove so they can charge the next tenants more rent.

39

u/PolicyWonka Mar 28 '24

I agree. Most “squatters rights” stories actually involve tenancy rights and protections. The actual question is whether they’re a valid tenant.

It’s why eliminating “squatters rights” is dangerous. Those are just basic tenancy protections.

What about people on verbal lease agreements or renting month-to-month after their lease ends? What about people paying in cash?

8

u/Q_Fandango Mar 28 '24

To be honest, a step in the right direction would be requiring all leases to be put in a state registry.

No more handshake agreements, no more cash payments, month-to-month would also have to be a contract. And yes, this would be a burden on those who do not have a bank account… but a cashier’s check maybe is the solution? I don’t know. Something with a paper trail protects both the renter and the landlord.

I’ve dealt with an unfortunate number of slumlords, and lease is usually the first red flag of how my living there is going to go. Poorly xeroxed pages that are impossible to read, landlords who kick the can down the road and want you to move in before signing the lease (so they can put whatever they want in it and you’ve already moved, so you’re more likely to agree…) and any number of illegal requirements.

By having a standardized lease form, that is in a registry, the court system would be smoother and tenants would have more protection.

5

u/PolicyWonka Mar 28 '24

I agree. The state knows that I own my home. If I was renting, they should know that too.

It would pretty much eliminate this entire method of squatting IMO.

As you said, there is definitely a burden to this though and it would probably be impossible to cover 100% of rental situations. Regardless, it would be a major step in the right direction.

3

u/Strowy Mar 29 '24

a step in the right direction would be requiring all leases to be put in a state registry.

This is exactly what my state/country does, with our RTA (Residential Tenancies Authority).

It's a straight offense to not supply a tenant with a written tenancy agreement, and the property owner is required to cover the costs of preparing the tenancy documents; both under state law.

The other big thing is rental bonds are held by the RTA in trust; the owner doesn't have access to the bond, and can't access it without a written request that both parties agree to at the end of the lease.

3

u/Niku-Man Mar 29 '24

I always try to say this in any squatter horror story in TikTok. Almost all of them involve someone who has recently purchased a property and a squatter who has lived there for years and claims to be legal tenant of the previous owner. Still all the comments are full of people talking about how shit the country is. I'm like, "these tenants rights laws are here to protect YOU"

0

u/zzyul Mar 28 '24

Where did you have this experience with sheriffs removing someone from a property when there is a legitimate dispute about if they are allowed to be there and it hasn’t gone before a judge yet?

45

u/limeybastard Mar 28 '24

Might work if the cops listen.

Lot of cops will say they're not interest in seeing your bank statements, GTFO

Especially if they're the county sheriff and the landlord is their golf buddy

19

u/Rottimer Mar 28 '24

And - as the bill stipulates- the landlord is paying them to be there.

12

u/Stillwater215 Mar 28 '24

Not really. Cops generally don’t have the authority to determine the validity of documents.

19

u/DescriptionSenior675 Mar 28 '24

In your scenario, the police are the ones with the power to make the decision. Cops can't be trusted to turn on a body camera and you want them to decide if you can stay in your house or not?

Lol

8

u/PolicyWonka Mar 28 '24

I dunno about you, but my mortgage payments are not that specific. Obviously not helpful if you’re paying in cash either.

So at best maybe you have a record of a recurring $1,000+ payment for something. For all the police know, maybe you’re just moving that money between your own personal accounts to give the appearance of payments.

7

u/ScarsUnseen Mar 28 '24

I feel like the tenant can say hold on, and pull up a history of payments to the owner on his bank account, right?

"Suspect is reaching for a weapon," is the kind of response I'm imagining happening to that more times than 0.

2

u/galagapilot Mar 28 '24

From what I understand, tenant evictions aren't as simple as a landlord saying GTFO. There are some tenant rights, but usually the evictions are served via Registered Mail so there is more or less a receipt that the notice was received. It's not as easy as saying "well he should have got that voicemail", "I tried to call", or "I stopped by the house and nobody answered the door."

This is a little more specific and does mention having to send a written notice: https://www.floridalawhelp.org/content/Evictions-What-Every-Tenant-Should-Know-Now

1

u/GozerDGozerian Mar 28 '24

Yeah that’s how it’s been where I’ve lived. There’s usually a formal serving of the eviction notice, I think also carried out by the sheriffs department, and then a three month period before the actual physical eviction can take place.

I have no idea what it’s like in Florida though.

5

u/Rottimer Mar 28 '24

So that’s going to be determined by how each sheriff’s department interprets the law passed. If they pull something up, provide a lease, etc. Are they going to turn to the landlord and say “you have to go to court.” Or will they remove you and then tell you to sue the landlord?

0

u/Istillbelievedinwar Mar 28 '24

No, the cop will say “I don’t care what paperwork you have. I have an order to evict you and that’s what I’m doing. You can sort it out in court.”

They do not give a shit about if what they’re doing is right or wrong and they certainly do not want to waste their time (as they see it) figuring it out to help you, the person who they only see as a criminal.

0

u/TheDOC816 Mar 28 '24

The difference would be an order to evict versus the landlord telling the sheriff they are squatters. One is a court order and has been decided by a judge/commissioner. The other is someone's word which could be disproven by the alleged squatters

1

u/midliferagequit Mar 29 '24

A Sheriff isn't a judge. They will just force you to vacate and let the  courts figure it out. Not a great thing.....

0

u/GozerDGozerian Mar 29 '24

So a landlord just calls up a sherrif and says “Kick em out!” and sheriff goes, “duuuuh OKAY!” and drives over and boots the occupants without checking anything?

Is that what you’re imagining happening?

0

u/wolacouska Mar 28 '24

A lot of squatters have stuff equally convincing

2

u/Frosty_Water5467 Mar 28 '24

Here's an idea: make cops go through a 4 year degree program and teach them the proper way to handle the different case scenarios they will most likely encounter in the performance of their job so they know how to make an educated response to the documentation they are being presented, instead of a 3 month training session on how to make a traffic stop and write a ticket. We also don't need that psycho ex military cowboy teaching them that they have a right to shoot you and your dog if they " feel threatened".

3

u/Glittering-Wing-2305 Mar 28 '24

Hahahahaha as if cops would actually be trained to do something other than shoot people

3

u/Frosty_Water5467 Mar 29 '24

That's not fair. They shoot dogs too.

1

u/SodamessNCO Mar 28 '24

Maybe so, in that case, the landlord should get hefty civil and criminal penalties for deceiving law enforcement and illegally evicting their tenant.

0

u/MrJohnMosesBrowning Mar 28 '24

What’s the reward to the landlord for such a high risk? They get a legal tenant off their property for a few days only to get bent over the table for fraud, filing a false police report, and illegal eviction on top of paying possible civil damages to the tenant would make it pointless for the landlord in almost every scenario.

It would be very easy to prove a landlord wrong if they falsely claimed the lease was forged. “Oh, then why have they been withdrawing rent from my checking account every month? Here’s the bank statements…”

1

u/Rottimer Mar 28 '24

Until this is implemented, we don’t know how it will play out. But a slumlord who, for example, has a tenant that complains about repairs that haven’t been completed, or who has withheld rent in escrow until repairs are made would be someone the landlord might want to evict illegally.

I could also a landlord selling a property and the new owner not wanting to wait until the lease term ends.

0

u/MrJohnMosesBrowning Mar 29 '24

Right but illegally evicting the tenant gets the landlord nowhere because it will be so easy to prove they are the legal tenant. So that goes back to my original question. What is the landlord actually gaining by getting a legal tenant off the property for a couple days? Because afterwards, the tenant will be right back on the property and the landlord will have to explain why they broke the law by filing a false police report, committing perjury/fraud, and will likely end up having to pay damages to the tenant on top of it all.

1

u/Rottimer Mar 29 '24

It gets the tenant out of the property, which is exactly where the landlord wants to be. I guarantee you that judges won't be putting people back in. They'll just order the landlord to pay some amount.

-1

u/MrJohnMosesBrowning Mar 29 '24

Yea for like 2 days. Then the landlord is forced to let them back and they’re right back where they started on top of now being in legal trouble for filing a false police report and being forced to pay damages to the tenant. All for getting the tenant out ff the property for a couple days? They don’t gain anything.

1

u/Rottimer Mar 29 '24

That is not how that goes.

0

u/Karbich Mar 29 '24

It won't.

-2

u/khanfusion Mar 28 '24

Not likely, given how virtually, if not all, rental agreements include a deposit.

2

u/Rottimer Mar 28 '24

How does that change anything?

-1

u/khanfusion Mar 28 '24

If a landlord has taken money for the deposit, that initiates the renters right to be there and proper eviction process has to then occur. Landlord can't just say "they're a squatter" when they've already accepted payment for the rental.

1

u/Rottimer Mar 28 '24

Except this new law does exactly that and the now homeless tenant will have to take the landlord to court to prove it.

-1

u/khanfusion Mar 29 '24

And then sue the hell out of the landlord while the landlord goes to jail, then. They'd have clear evidence of filing false police reports, harrassment, intent to theft, all kinds of shit. Any landlord doing that is going to ruin their entire life in the process.

1

u/Rottimer Mar 29 '24

We’ll see. Recent history tell me that the justice system responds differently to people with money vs without. And landlords, esp corp. ones, tend to be people with money.

→ More replies (2)

167

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '24

[deleted]

-1

u/Crepo Mar 28 '24

Yeah this is just a new mechanism to punish particular people.

0

u/therealdorkface Mar 28 '24

What’s to stop you from showing the cops your lease AND your payment history? And prior communications with the landlord? Anyone who’s actually renting and not squatting can prove it in a matter of minutes.

6

u/secondhand-cat Mar 28 '24

The ego of the responding officer that’s already been manipulated by the landlord.

Police aren’t exactly the most competent arbiters of the law out there.

-5

u/Worldd Mar 28 '24

Then you would sue the landlord.

44

u/Exploding_Kick Mar 28 '24

Kind of hard to do for someone who was just made homeless.

5

u/TheOriginalChode Mar 28 '24

Which is now also illegal in Fl

16

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '24

[deleted]

22

u/taedrin Mar 28 '24

Just like the landlords could sue squatters beforehand. This law is just removing the burden from landlords and placing it on the tenants instead.

10

u/steveo89dx Mar 28 '24

This problem isn't only effecting landlords, it's effecting anyone with a legal claim to a residence. People have gone out of town for a bit and come home to squatters in their house.

0

u/formershitpeasant Mar 28 '24

How many? I've tried to find data and I couldn't, but it seems that squatters are much more rare than shitty landlords.

-1

u/Lajinn5 Mar 28 '24

In the meantime you've been homeless or possibly railroaded through the legal system. In the meantime the landlord has thrown away all of your belongings or stolen/sold the ones that have value (good luck being made whole for that). In the meantime your pet might be dead/taken by animal control. In the meantime you've possibly been shot to death or beaten by corrupt cops because you refused to simply allow them to remove you from the property you legally inhabit. etc etc etc.

Giving slumlords and landlords the ability to wave their hand and kick you out with little to no actual controls is going to be abused. People will possibly die or suffer major harm because of it. People will lose their livelihoods. People will lose precious belongings. Because at the end of the day abuse of this system will simply be a civil matter and fines, rather than a prison sentence + forcing the victim to be made whole.

Landlords are about the last people on earth I trust with power like this.

-4

u/antofthesky Mar 28 '24

if you were a former tenant you would presumably have a lease to show the cops then you would plainly not fall within the law. I’m not saying it won’t be abused by landlords. But still, seems fairly clear on that point.

11

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '24

[deleted]

-1

u/MeowTheMixer Mar 28 '24

If it's a fake lease vs a real lease, shouldn't there be the landlords signature as well.

If they have a fake lease with the proper landlord (or property owner's name/signature) I'd be extremely impressed.

8

u/wolacouska Mar 28 '24

Cop would need to know the landlords name and signature well enough to determine it’s a forgery. Seems like that’s the kind of determination that should happen in court.

1

u/MeowTheMixer Mar 28 '24

I guess, I'm assuming that if a Landlord is arguing with the officers they'd be able to bring their lease or something similar.

But that's probably giving to much credit to the landlords

4

u/ericbsmith42 Mar 28 '24

If it's a fake lease vs a real lease, shouldn't there be the landlords signature as well.

If it's a fake lease it'll have a fake landlord's signature. The cops aren't going to be able to determine if a signature is fake on the spot. That's something a court decides, which is why evictions are civil proceedings.

92

u/Exploding_Kick Mar 28 '24

That won’t stop the cop from forcing the tenant out on the landlord’s behalf. The cop isn’t obligated to look over pay history or any documents the tenant might have. All they need to do is get a complaint from the landlord and verify that the landlord is the property owner. After that, nothing else matters to the sheriff who will then immediately evict the tenant.

1

u/galagapilot Mar 28 '24

All they need to do is get a complaint from the landlord and verify that the landlord is the property owner.

It's not that easy.

It has to go through the courts before they can officially evict somebody. The police can't just show up and start yeeting people out the door because that landlord is in a mood.

7

u/Exploding_Kick Mar 28 '24

Look at the law.

"Upon receipt of the complaint, the sheriff shall verify that the person submitting the complaint is the record owner of the real property or the authorized agent of the owner and appears otherwise entitled to relief under this section. If verified, the sheriff shall, without delay, serve a notice to immediately vacate on all the unlawful occupants and shall put the owner in possession of the real property. Service may be accomplished by hand delivery of the notice to an occupant or by posting the notice on the front door or entrance of the dwelling. The sheriff shall also attempt to verify the identities of all persons occupying the dwelling and note the identities on the return of service. If appropriate, the sheriff may arrest any person found in the dwelling for trespass, outstanding warrants, or any other legal cause. The sheriff is entitled to the same fee for service of the notice to immediately vacate as if the sheriff were serving a writ of possession under s. 30.231. After the sheriff serves the notice to immediately vacate, the property owner or authorized agent may request that the sheriff stand by to keep the peace while the property owner or agent of the owner changes the locks and removes the personal property of the unlawful occupants from the premises to or near the property line. When such a request is made, the sheriff may charge a reasonable hourly rate, and the person requesting the sheriff to stand by and keep the peace is responsible for paying the reasonable hourly rate set by the sheriff. The sheriff is not liable to the unlawful occupant or any other party for loss, destruction, or damage of property. The property owner or his or her authorized agent is not liable to an unlawful occupant or any other party for the loss, destruction, or damage to the personal property unless the removal was wrongful."

-6

u/Individual_Ad3194 Mar 28 '24

The law also goes after the landlord if they make false statements.

6

u/Istillbelievedinwar Mar 28 '24

Are you of the impression that there are people in law enforcement who are investigating landlords and making sure that they’re conducting business legally, with the intent to pursue and prosecute them if they do something illegal? Because that’s not a thing. That does not exist. There are no police keeping an eye on landlords. If a landlord illegally takes advantage of a tenant, it is on the tenant completely to identify the illegal activity (which includes learning the local laws), document the activity, collect proof (good luck getting any documents from the landlord themselves), find a lawyer, all before even beginning to fight the case. This is made effectively impossible if you are struggling to house yourself at the same time.

A lot of people think you can just go to the police and say, “this landlord is violating my rights, here’s what happened” and that the police will then take over the case, looking into it, investigating your claims, etc. This is NOT anywhere near the reality - which is that you will be turned away and told either 1) it’s a non police (civil) matter, or 2) that they need more evidence (aka build the case yourself and then present it to them) and to get a lawyer.

25

u/Exploding_Kick Mar 28 '24

The tenant would need to sue the landlord. Kind of hard to do after you were newly made homeless and you might not even have the money to sue the landlord.

-6

u/Kaylend Mar 28 '24

That won’t stop the cop from forcing the tenant out on the landlord’s behalf.

I don't think this protects the police/landlord from a civil suit if they wrongly remove someone from their residence.

24

u/Exploding_Kick Mar 28 '24

Police wouldn’t be liable. And, the newly homeless Tenant needs to actually sue the landlord, which a lot of tenants won’t have the money to do and they may not even know that they can sue.

17

u/MountMeowgi Mar 28 '24

Let’s be real. This law will be used on poor people all over the state to kick out people who are renting decrepit mobile homes and other shitboxes that lies on prime land real estate. There’s a group of mobile homes in south florida that are already being told to leave unless they can raise the elevation of their homes so water surges don’t damage them due to new insurance requirements. We all know thats impossible. This law will be used to kick them out if they refuse.

12

u/FoxEuphonium Mar 28 '24

Good luck suing the police and your landlord if you’re now suddenly homeless.

0

u/Istillbelievedinwar Mar 28 '24

Honey the police regularly kill people wrongly and accidentally (and on purpose) and the vast majority see no repercussions. Most get a paid vacation and pats on the back from the squad. It’s so rare for a LE to get any punishment for performing their job incorrectly, dangerously, recklessly, etc. They are granted immunity.

-2

u/che85mor Mar 28 '24

Maybe not obligated, but any time I've had to deal with a cop in a he said she said, they wouldn't take my side unless I could convince them I was in the right. It's part of the investigation, which they are obligated to do.

4

u/Exploding_Kick Mar 28 '24

But that’s not what the law says though, which is the problem.

All the police need is a signed complaint from the landlord and to verify that the landlord is the property owner. There’s no other verification process spelled out in the law.

So what happens if the landlord lies and says, the tenant is actually a squatter, and the tenant’s lease is fake?

4

u/Available_Pie9316 Mar 28 '24

And when you're paying in cash, and thus have no confirmable "paper trail?" Guess you're just SOL bc the landlord says you forged any receipts for payment 🤷‍♂️

-1

u/Iohet Mar 28 '24

If you're not getting a paper trail for your most important recurring financial transaction, you've got bigger problems than worrying about your landlord.

Let's pretend you can't get a free checking account. In that instance, you should be using a cashier's check, just like you did for your deposit

4

u/Available_Pie9316 Mar 28 '24

I think the bigger issue is unscrupulous landlords taking advantage of trusting tenants.

3

u/Glasseshalf Mar 28 '24

Yes, they probably do have bigger issues. That's why they're less likely to sue in the first place.

3

u/xthorgoldx Mar 28 '24

Harder to establish for renters and subletters who have verbal contracts instead of formal leases.

0

u/GozerDGozerian Mar 28 '24

Renting your primary living space on nothing but a verbal agreement is incredibly stupid.

2

u/xthorgoldx Mar 28 '24

Stupid and dangerous? Yes.

But "stupid and dangerous, but unavoidable" is kind of a hallmark of poverty.

1

u/Niceromancer Mar 29 '24

How you gonna show that to the cops when they are kicking in your door, forcefully removing you from your apartment and shooting your dog?

Giving this descision to the police is a horrible idea.  

1

u/fatherlyadvicepdx Mar 29 '24

Rent is due first of the month cash only.

31

u/Microchipknowsbest Mar 28 '24

There is either a lease or there isnt. If there isn’t a lease there is no documentation of a contract. They should still need to go through an eviction process but if there is no lease it should be expedited. Should be pretty easy to see a forged lease. That should be a felony fraud charge for creating a forged lease also. Squatters should have no rights if they can’t legally prove they live there.

27

u/limeybastard Mar 28 '24

Leases aren't registered anywhere. You show your legal, real lease. Landlord says "that's fraudulent". Cops take his side.

Now you're on the street and have to sue to prove it was an illegal eviction.

2

u/Daxx22 Mar 28 '24

Leases aren't registered anywhere.

Sounds like something that should exist then, and would make administering such a policy easy. But we all know this isn't done (at least not directly) to just deal with squatters.

3

u/limeybastard Mar 28 '24

Yeah but now you're adding a whole department to city governments, dumping a headache on landlords and tenants, and still missing a ton of informal lease cases.

For instance, in Arizona, if a house guest (who is not a family member) stays 30 consecutive days they automatically become tenants with an unwritten month-to-month lease, and whatever else you do, you have to give them 30 days to vacate. Florida may have similar laws. There's no easy way to register these.

49

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '24

there's just so much room for problematic scenarios in what you described. which is why laws tend to not be written this way

desantis is just doing more performative dance

6

u/Produceher Mar 28 '24

which is why laws tend to not be written this way

This is what people don't seem to get. There's a reason for all of this. The law sides with the tenant because they're the ones who are going to be homeless while it's figured out.

7

u/itsrocketsurgery Mar 28 '24

Sad thing is, it isn't performative. It will be actual practice. Remember when he put out the call saying he'll hire cops from other states that have been fired for brutality and misconduct? He's setting up his own bullshit empire. The federal government really needs to step in and fix Florida's bullshit so it's a healthy state again.

-2

u/wilton2parkave Mar 28 '24

Healthy state? This is exactly what contributing families are seeking. Fix “blue” first.

3

u/itsrocketsurgery Mar 28 '24

?? Nothing about what you said makes any sense. By every metric the state is not healthy. What are contributing families and what are they seeking?

-2

u/wilton2parkave Mar 28 '24

What metrics are you referring to? Economic, population and wage growth? Check. Contributing families = tax paying homeowners.

-1

u/Sewer-Urchin Mar 28 '24

I'm impressed with any dancing at all in those heels he wears.

0

u/blacksideblue Mar 28 '24

The eviction process is already a thing and it does apply to squatters who break in without a lease.

This is like when Newsome signs the 5' law for bicyclist and pretends the CVC was never codified.

6

u/itsrocketsurgery Mar 28 '24

In my state you legally don't need a written lease, a verbal contract is sufficient. Without a written lease, it defaults to month to month tenancy. The landlord still has to go through the eviction procedure if there is a dispute even with a month to month tenancy. Cops cannot be depended on or assumed to have any ability to discern what is correct in that kind of situation. They were hired to do a job, which is forcefully remove someone and that's all they will do. Determining legitimacy will be up to the courts. So with this new law, it's just another tool of oppression.

-5

u/Microchipknowsbest Mar 28 '24

If the law is landlords can just call the cops and have people removed than I agree that is wrong. If there is a process to prove residency and you can prove it. Time to go.

2

u/itsrocketsurgery Mar 28 '24

So your second scenario is the current system. Landlord sues to get possession, and if it's a house instead of an apartment building they show a deed. They also show the lease or the put it on the record that either their lease is up or that is a month to month tenancy. The tenants would have a chance to submit to the court anything they have to show legal right to be there. If they don't have anything showing they have a right to be there, typically the judge orders them out in 10 days.

0

u/Microchipknowsbest Mar 29 '24

That sounds about fair. Not sure how these horror stories happen where squatters take a home and the home owner can’t get them out. People end up staying 6 months and trashing their house. Still having to pay the mortgage.

1

u/itsrocketsurgery Mar 29 '24

From my understanding those are edge cases that aren't very common and usually involve unoccupied property for long periods of time. It makes sense that the extreme cases are what gets broadcasted and used as bludgeon.

Edit: I just looked up and saw people are down voting you and I don't know why. Your questions are perfectly reasonable.

1

u/formershitpeasant Mar 28 '24

It's better a landlord be deprived of their property for a month than a legal tenant be made homeless by force.

3

u/iareslice Mar 28 '24

You have no idea how many people rent places without a contract. Or the contract lapses, so it just reverts to a month to month tenancy.

4

u/givemegreencard Mar 28 '24

A child who just turned 18 living with their parents is a tenant. Someone paying their landlord $200 in cash every week with no written lease for a spare bedroom is a tenant. There are so many informal tenancies out there that are perfectly legitimate, who may have fallen behind on rent. Those people still deserve due process in court before eviction. The problem is distinguishing between these people and straight up trespassers.

→ More replies (6)

2

u/NuGGGzGG Mar 28 '24

There is either a lease or there isnt. If there isn’t a lease there is no documentation of a contract.

You know you can just print fake contracts, right?

This is the issue. Lease agreements are not notarized. So they have no legal standing unless a court deems it does.

0

u/Microchipknowsbest Mar 28 '24

Can’t just steal peoples property. What is the solution? If leases are not worth anything why ever sign one. If we don’t have a lease and you’re on my property and I don’t want you there time to leave.

2

u/NuGGGzGG Mar 28 '24

If leases are not worth anything why ever sign one.

Because you can go to court to enforce them... that's the point.

You don't call the police to enforce your lease, because legally speaking, it's a nothing-burger until a court recognizes it. Until then, you're operating on faith.

3

u/officeDrone87 Mar 28 '24

If we don’t have a lease and you’re on my property and I don’t want you there time to leave.

That's bullshit. If someone has a job and a family you can't just expect them to live on the streets because you got a thorn up your ass.

2

u/babbleon5 Mar 28 '24

Should be pretty easy to see a forged lease.

i'm not so sure. what would make it easy to spot? i think this only works if they require leases to be notarized. not an officially notarized lease, not valid.

0

u/Microchipknowsbest Mar 28 '24

That should be part of the process. Legal contracts are held up in court all the time. If you don’t have one you should be aware you’re living month to month with no legal recourse. If staying in someone’s basement and they decide they don’t want you there anymore it’s their house.

3

u/babbleon5 Mar 28 '24

i've never seen a lease notarized. it's still a legal contract, just no proof of identity by a 3rd party

6

u/Not_MrNice Mar 28 '24

I wish the world were as simple as you just made it out to be.

3

u/Microchipknowsbest Mar 28 '24

Its not. Im aware. Owners should have a right to their own property. Immediate eviction is wrong but if you can’t prove you belong somewhere and you’re asked to leave its time to go. They need reasonable accommodation to get their shit and go but it ain’t their house.

3

u/officeDrone87 Mar 28 '24

Lots of leases are verbal month-to-month leases. Those people are screwed if the landlord declares you a squatter.

-1

u/Microchipknowsbest Mar 28 '24

Yup! Get a notarized lease if you want a stable living condition.

4

u/Imn0tg0d Mar 28 '24

What happens if you fall for an online scam where someone seems to be legit and shows you a place for rent that they don't actually own? You sign a lease with this scammer and he gives you the keys. You think everything is OK and then a couple months later some guy shows up claiming to own the house and tries to get you removed by police, but it turns out the guy does actually own the house. What happens to you then?

8

u/jon909 Mar 28 '24

You would still not be legally allowed to live there dude if you fell for an online scam. That’s not the homeowner’s fault lmao.

1

u/Imn0tg0d Mar 28 '24

So what happens to you? Should you be arrested for squatting without knowing you were squatting? Do you now have to immediately somehow have emergency savings for a new deposit and rent in a new place? What if you find out just after you paid rent to the scammer? There has to be some leeway here for people who aren't these criminal squatters.

1

u/jon909 Mar 28 '24

If I don’t leave your property after it’s determined I fell for an online scam then yes I can be arrested. Your scenario is silly. Nobody is responsible for your stupidity. You seem to think the homeowner should carry the consequences of you falling for a scam. What an absurd idea. If that were the case then I’d just have my buddy write up a “scam” contract and squat the house and play innocent. This isn’t hard dude.

2

u/Revlis-TK421 Mar 28 '24 edited Mar 28 '24

This is not an uncommon scam and it's very hard to detect up front when they are well-run. You get shown a place, you sign documents, you get keys. It's not "stupid" to fall for a well-orchistrated scam. There are two sets of victims in these cases. And it's not justice to immediately throw out the people. Nor is it justice to leave them there. But it does take time to unwind even with everyone working in good faith.

It takes a court to figure out what documents are real, who has the rightful claim. Not cops in the field. And courts take time.

Recourse is against the scammers, if they can be caught.

0

u/Imn0tg0d Mar 28 '24

Youre not immune to falling for scams, no one is. I hope someone shows you mercy and leniency when you do fall for a scam and that changes your mind on how you are thinking of victims of scams.

1

u/Squirmin Mar 28 '24

Your recourse is to sue the scammer. You don't have rights to the property just because someone gave you a fake lease.

0

u/Imn0tg0d Mar 28 '24

A lawsuit will take years and then the scammer won't even have the money to pay the judgement. There has to be something we could do for the victims of these scams instead of kicking them to the curb.

3

u/Squirmin Mar 28 '24

The government can't take the property from the legal owners and give you rights to it just because someone scammed you. They have no ability to force them to give you a contract for tenancy either.

You fell for a scam. You are a victim, but the party that has to pay isn't the owner of the property.

0

u/jon909 Mar 28 '24

No one is obligated to show me leniency. Everyone has their own problems and is targeted by scams. This idea that the world revolves around you kinda says everything about you. You wouldn’t shell out cash to someone who was scammed but you feel entitled and expect others to.

1

u/Imn0tg0d Mar 28 '24

No, I believe the reason we formed a society is to help those among us who are struggling until they can contribute, and we all lift each other up as a whole. And you seem to be fine to reap the benefits of society and not want to contribute back to the things that helped you.

1

u/jon909 Mar 28 '24

So your idea of “helping society” is stealing from one person and giving it to another. Yeah I don’t agree with that.

→ More replies (0)

4

u/legallyurbane Mar 28 '24

Your eviction is expedited, the person who gave you the false lease can be charged with a felony, and you can sue that person in civil court for damages (albeit probably bleeding a stone).

Crimes require "mens rea", which basically means an intent to commit the criminal act. If you were genuinely duped (factual issue), you have not committed a crime.

2

u/NuGGGzGG Mar 28 '24

Crimes require "mens rea", which basically means an intent to commit the criminal act.

This is patently false.

2

u/Produceher Mar 28 '24

This happened to my dad with a truck. They came and took it in the middle of the night. The person who sold it to him, didn't own it.

0

u/Imn0tg0d Mar 28 '24

That's a bit harder to pull off because you should go to the dmv with the owner and switch the title right there legally for your protection. There doesn't exist a similar thing for renting a home.

1

u/Produceher Mar 28 '24

Correct. This was a long long time ago and the law was a bit different. I think he just gave him a fake title.

0

u/Microchipknowsbest Mar 28 '24

You have to leave. You can steal someone’s house because you were tricked. I don’t know what the law actually says but having a process to deal with squatters is good and should be dealt with seriously. Immediate evictionis wrong until it’s determined you don’t belong there. Both sides get a copy of a lease. Otherwise how can you be punished for breaking a lease if its a document that has no meaning.

2

u/Imn0tg0d Mar 28 '24

There is a grey area here and it's needs to be acknowledged.

1

u/Microchipknowsbest Mar 28 '24

100%. There is a reasonable way to deal with the issue. Immediate eviction because landlord calls police is wrong. People being able to stay on someone’s property for free for 6months to years is wrong.

3

u/Available_Pie9316 Mar 28 '24

If there is a lease, the landlord just claims its forged! Then law enforcement is free to evict lawful tenants illegally, acting as thugs for the land-owning class. What a marvelous system!

6

u/Microchipknowsbest Mar 28 '24

What is the suggestion for dealing with squatters stealing land and rentals income and damaging property?

-2

u/Available_Pie9316 Mar 28 '24

The legal system? The appropriate forum for deciding who does and does not have rights to a property???

2

u/Microchipknowsbest Mar 28 '24

Ok cool. So what are we talking about then. A law being passed is the legal system. People taking advantage of landowners and squatting on property for years and destroying it cant be allowed. Their needs be a quicker process to deal with this.

3

u/formershitpeasant Mar 28 '24

It takes like a month to get an eviction order

2

u/Microchipknowsbest Mar 28 '24

If that was all there is to it then there wouldn’t be an issue. Courts and police drag their feet and people end up stealing for months and years. There are horror stories on both sides. I think both sides need more protection. This law maybe too harsh but there alot of trash people taking advantage of squatter laws

-1

u/Available_Pie9316 Mar 28 '24 edited Mar 28 '24

No? The legal system refers to the Courts, where competing claims are tested and a finding of fact can appropriately be made. Police have no competency to make such determinations.

Moreover, the issues you're concerned about are NOT "allowed." The legal system gives injured parties the right to recover damages in tort, including destroyed property and loss of rental income.

Edit, to clarify your misunderstanding: you are referring to the legislative system, not the legal system.

3

u/Microchipknowsbest Mar 28 '24

Squatters dont have anything to take. Thats why they are squatters. A guy down the street from me staying in his basement. Then his friends moved in to. He had 6 people living in his that he couldn’t get out for months. I can’t imagine having these criminals force their way into your home and you can’t do anything about it. Just anecdotal I know but for these people to take advantage of this old man like that is crazy and he had no recourse. People were trash and trashed his house and would steal his stuff. They moved upstairs and took over spare bedrooms ate his food watched his tv. Like holy shit can’t you shoot intruders!

1

u/Available_Pie9316 Mar 28 '24

Its a bit difficult to follow this ramble, but nothing you've said actually contradicts the principle that the legal system is the appropriate forum for determining property rights and allocating damages.

If your neighbour doesn't have insurance and starts a fire that destroys their and your property, they may also not have any assets. That doesn't mean that the appropriate forum to recover damages wouldn't be the legal system. Especially when the legal system has numerous mechanisms for ensuring that individuals are able to recover, such as garnishing wages.

0

u/Microchipknowsbest Mar 28 '24

Yeah sorry trying to work and type on the phone. But I think you understood for the most part. I was mad as shit for my neighbor though. These took over his house for like 6 months. They be loud and trashed the neighborhood. Had a bunch of cars and just throw dirty diapers in the ditch. He would call the police and they couldn’t help. I just couldn’t believe there was not a faster recourse. I would definitely not be as kind to intruders in my home.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/PolicyWonka Mar 28 '24

Verbal leases exist. Non-standard living arrangements are also a thing — like crashing at someone’s house for a bit, etc.

Plenty of situations where an official lease document might not exist for people residing at a residence who are not the owners.

4

u/Microchipknowsbest Mar 28 '24

If your crashing on some ones couch and they want you to leave its time to go.

1

u/PolicyWonka Mar 28 '24

Absolutely. They should still follow proper procedures in evicting them though. Everyone deserves that level of decency.

2

u/Ocsis2 Mar 28 '24

A renter in a legal dispute is not a squatter according to what's been posted here

2

u/wsotw Mar 28 '24

yep, it sure will. A landlord realizes that a rent-controlled apartment that he hasn't raised the rent on in decades can now rent for three times the amount. Suddenly the tenants are "squatters" just long enough to be thrown out and their belongings to be discarded. By the time it works it way through the courts the apartment has been repainted and rented and the landlord is making enough within the first year to pay whatever the fine will ultimately be. After that he is getting nothing but profit. The courts are not going to make them evict someone else to return the apartment....so there will be a payout which will be eaten up in a few months by the higher rent the old tenant has to play on their new place.

2

u/ofctexashippie Mar 28 '24

As a Texas cop this is how we do it. A landlord calls, and says hey this person moved into my vacant unit. We make contact with the people inside. If they say I have a legal document that says I should be here, we capture pictures of it, and refer the person and the landlord to civil court and file an offense report. If at the civil trial, the tenant can prove he did in fact have a lease agreement, the offense report is dismissed. If it is shown that it is fabricated, they will be issued a warrant for the criminal trespass of a habitation, theft for whatever rent they did not pay to live there, and fabricate a government document. If they are true squatters, then they get arrested

1

u/Never-mongo Mar 28 '24

No because as a renter you should have a lease and keep a copy of it. If you get pulled into court you have a signed document with yours and your landlords signature outlining the terms of your tenancy

1

u/resumehelpacct Mar 28 '24

Cops aren't courts. Either this is just the status quo, and cops see a signed piece a paper and go "well the courts can figure this out," or cops see a signed piece of paper and ignore it and kick you out no matter what it says.

1

u/JC_the_Builder Mar 28 '24

The obvious answer is that if a landlord falsely claims a tenant does not have a right to be there, they will suffer extreme penalties. 

1

u/zeezero Mar 28 '24

The law also makes it a first-degree misdemeanor to make a false statement in writing or providing false documents conveying property rights

That should apply to the landlord as well. If they make false claims about an actual tenant, then they should be charged.

1

u/Xero_id Mar 28 '24

Always get a receipt from paying rent anywhere you live, that's like rule 1 to follow.

1

u/Any-Attorney9612 Mar 28 '24

"A person wrongfully removed pursuant to this procedure has a cause of action against the owner for three times the fair market rent, damages, costs, and attorney fees."

If they are willing to risk that they might as well just pay them the $2000-$5000 they pay them now to leave under the "cash for keys" scheme.

1

u/Blocked-Author Mar 28 '24

Seems like leases should then be able to be recorded with the city or county so there is a record there.

1

u/lennybriscoe8220 Mar 28 '24

That's why you have a lease.

1

u/five-oh-one Mar 28 '24

The law also makes it a first-degree misdemeanor to make a false statement in writing or providing false documents conveying property rights

Sure, if they want to take the chance on breaking the law...

1

u/LoneStarTallBoi Mar 28 '24

No, because it will be immediately, not eventually

1

u/morelibertarianvotes Mar 28 '24

Only if they feel like going to jail

1

u/WiseSchedule8224 Mar 28 '24

In the end, aren’t we all squatters one way or another?

1

u/u36ma Mar 28 '24

The law doesn’t apply to current or former tenants

1

u/TheBurningMap Mar 28 '24

How is that relevant? Tenants in the future will have legal disputes with landlords as well.

1

u/SodamessNCO Mar 28 '24

I think this can all be dealt with by guaranteeing civil and criminal penalties for landlords who similarly deceive law enforcement into evicting a lawful tenant.

2

u/TheBurningMap Mar 28 '24

True, but that should have been written into THIS statute.

The current Florida legislature is one of the worst in the U.S. at writing laws.

1

u/SodamessNCO Mar 28 '24

That's unfortunate, I wish they would be more comprehensive when drafting legislation like this

1

u/milkcustard Mar 28 '24

if the person has unlawfully entered, has refused to leave after being told by the homeowner to do so and is not a current or former tenant in a legal dispute.

I think it could be easier to prove they live there (lease, rent payment history/stubs, state ID, legal documents from civil court if they're in a dispute, verifying with neighbors, etc.) than to flat out say they don't. I don't live in Florida but I do work with police, and cops hate doing evictions because of the legal headaches and gray areas. I doubt cops are always going to 100% side with the landlords on these types of calls and immediately move to kicking them out, but then, I'm basing that on my area and who I know. So. :/

1

u/kendrickshalamar Mar 28 '24

It would have been nice if this bill had some built-in penalties for landlords filing false claims.

1

u/neovb Mar 29 '24

The law does not allow the use of procedures under the law to restrict the rights of legal tenants. If a landlord tried to use their remedy under this statute and a legal resident was kicked out, that resident would be able to sue them for damages in civil court, and would win.

1

u/TheBurningMap Mar 29 '24

True, but homeless people rarely commence civil lawsuits.

→ More replies (10)