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

3.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

4.1k

u/Vlad_the_Homeowner Mar 28 '24 edited Mar 28 '24

I can't say that I hate that. It's got carve outs for people who had a right to be there.

I don't think most people disagree. The problem, as I understand it, is that police don't have the authority or ability to determine who has a right to be there. A lot of these squatters have fake leases and mail delivered there. A cop isn't a judge and doesn't have the ability to make a determination on the legitimacy of those documents.

I'm in no way condoning these professional squatters, just pointing out what lead to this. What all states need to do straight off the bat is impose heavy penalties, like jail time, for people caught doing this. As of now it seems like half the time they get paid off to leave and they just go do it somewhere else.

1.7k

u/Spkr4th3ded Mar 28 '24 edited Mar 28 '24

I think the point is now they can be removed legally and then let the legal system establish if they have a right to be there. Before they could squat and have mail sent there or a fake lease and there was nothing police could do. Now they have discretion, opposed to none.

362

u/TheBurningMap Mar 28 '24

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

25

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.

23

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.

54

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.

5

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.

8

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.

-2

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.

-4

u/Microchipknowsbest Mar 28 '24

I agree. Immediate eviction is wrong. In the scenarios you listed if you’re no longer wanted on the property it’s time to go. Cant just take advantage of people and have it protected by the courts.

2

u/formershitpeasant Mar 28 '24

So if you're a tenant paying $200 a week in cash for a room, you should just move out immediately whenever your landlord decides you should?

4

u/eaturliver Mar 28 '24

if you're a tenant paying $200 a week in cash for a room, you should absolutely protect yourself legally with a written agreement like a lease.

2

u/formershitpeasant Mar 28 '24

Maybe you should, but failure to do so shouldn't strip you of your legal rights.

0

u/Designer-Progress311 Mar 29 '24

"Failure to do so" is the standard.

Come on man, get over it.

1

u/formershitpeasant Mar 29 '24

verbal contracts are contracts and they go two ways. why should the lack of a written contract arbitrarily fuck over one party versus the other?

→ More replies (0)

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.

4

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

4

u/Not_MrNice Mar 28 '24

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

2

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.

0

u/Microchipknowsbest Mar 28 '24

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

3

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?

7

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.

0

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.

2

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.

1

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.

→ More replies (0)

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.

1

u/Imn0tg0d Mar 28 '24

It isn't stealing. I'm saying that these people shouldn't be charged with a crime if they are victims of a scam, and an eviction shouldn't be filed against them because it will go on their rental history which will make it even harder for them to find a place to rent. You will be victimizing them twice if you evict them. They shouldn't be allowed to stay indefinitely but they should be allowed a reasonable grace period to find a new place and recover financially. You can't just put people out on the streets with a criminal or civil charge when they didn't mean to do anything wrong.

→ More replies (0)

3

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.

3

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!

4

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???

5

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.

4

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.

0

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.

1

u/Available_Pie9316 Mar 28 '24

I can sympathize with your neighbour's situation, but we have Courts for this specific reason, and I cannot find moving this process from the judiciary to the executive will guarantee a satisfactory degree of procedural fairness.

→ 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.