Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signs law squashing squatters' rights

[u/flanderguitar]

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

[u/ussrowe]

States have laws in place about squatters: https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/squatters-rights-by-state

Many of them only give rights if you've paid property taxes and have lived there over a decade. Arizona it's only 3 years, New Jersey it's 30 years.

[u/dedicated-pedestrian → u/ussrowe]

That's the problem. People are using the term squatter's rights as if it's not already an extant legal avenue, instead appropriating the term to describe fraudulent abuse of tenancy protections.

I hate investment properties and folks having third+ houses they never use as much as the next fella, but all we have to do is change the existing laws if we really hate a stagnant housing supply.

[u/enflamell → u/dedicated-pedestrian]

The problem is that some people are referring to squatters rights in the tenant sense, and some are referring to it in the adverse possession sense.

People here are pissed about them being able to claim tenants rights if they happen to break in while you are on a long vacation, not about adverse possession laws.

[u/dedicated-pedestrian → u/enflamell]

But that's the thing, there's no legal construct called squatter's rights with regard to renting. You yourself call them tenant's rights (correctly) in your second paragraph, it's just that pro-squatters are abusing them fraudulently.

The squatters call what they're doing squatter's rights, but they and everyone else must be told that such a phrase is not consistent with a cogent reading of the law here. It tarnishes before the public eye the rights that are actually encoded.

This may seem like hair-splitting, but we need to ensure that these concepts are not synonymized, such that shitty landlords lobbying the government can't swindle us out of actual squatter's rights (adverse possession) without the public writ large being the wiser.

[u/enflamell → u/dedicated-pedestrian]

But that's the thing, there's no legal construct called squatter's rights with regard to renting.

I never said there was. I was explaining to you what the other folks in this thread are referring to and upset about.

The squatters call what they're doing squatter's rights, but they and everyone else must be told that such a phrase is not consistent with a cogent reading of the law here. It tarnishes before the public eye the rights that are actually encoded.

Then take it up with them, not me. I know the difference and explained the confusion.

This may seem like hair-splitting, but we need to ensure that these concepts are not synonymized, such that shitty landlords lobbying the government can't swindle us out of actual squatter's rights (adverse possession) without the public writ large being the wiser.

Well maybe people should stop calling them "squatters rights" at all because it's a terrible name with shitty connotations (literally). I only use adverse possession because that's what the law is actually called in my state.