Should landlords be held responsible for tenant actions?

[bleedingheart]

I just saw a piece on the Pittsburgh news that was discussing a proposal to make landlords responsible for tenant actions.

Apparently there is a group of people in the city who are tired of nuisance properties whose residents have frequent police visits and other problems...

I didn't catch all of the info but apparently the landlord would get some sort of warning after three police visits and then if a fourth police visit occurred there would be an escalation.

I feel really funny about this kind of law. On one hand I can understand the plight of the neighbors but I also think that this could be abused.

If anyone who lives in the city knows more please chime in... I live in da 'burbs...and just saw this report on the news.

[ScreamingMeemie]

1. No, the nicest acting people with the best credit can be

terrors. There would be no way for the landlord to be totally sure of who he/she was renting to. Maybe a court ordered eviction after a certain number of infractions, but surely one can not be held accountable for the actions of a tenant. :shrug:

[LittleApple81]

2. When you live in a college town you can understand why people

want a regulation like this. Slumlords rent to students but never take care of the houses and then you find the couches on the lawn, 5 cars parked in the driveway, beer cans and trash everywhere, etc.

[Norcom]

6. Hey now

your not just describing college student housing. I live in NC and several towns around me passed laws banning "indoor furniture outdoors" and banned appliances outdoors and cars on blocks.

You could not imagine the uproar this proposed ban caused during debate before being passed.

[WeirdSceneGoldmine]

11. Why blame them all of punish them all?

There are good, bad and ugly in all houses of cards.

[Zephyrbird]

30. Nobody said punish them all,

just punish the ones guilty of it.

For some reason my landlord decided to rent to an overwhelming number of college students this year. (I've been at the same place for 17 years, and it's NEVER been as bad as this year)

EVERY NIGHT for EIGHT MONTHS I was awakened at 2:00 a.m. by their EXTREMELY loud stereo, drunken yelling and screaming outside, filthy language. The police were called four times for unbelievably loud parties lasting until 6 a.m. on weeknights.

I had complained for six months. Finally I called the owner and got some action; they kept telling me I had to call the police, which I and other neighbors kept doing. They finally contacted the sheriff department and there were 7 police reports about this group of kids. Finally, just last week, they were thrown out after throwing trash all over the grounds, kicking holes in the walls, etc.

Hell yes, the landlord is responsible for what goes on in the apartments when so many complaints are made. In eight months I got to sleep with my window open only 3 times. I fail to see any reason why my job should be affected in that manner.

[JM]

3. No, and here is why...

...How many of these nuisance tenants are under a lease that the landlord is unable to terminate? I have heard it is an absolute nightmare to try and evict a tenant. Perhaps making it easier for a landlord to terminate the lease of problem tenants is a more appropriate answer.

It seems to me making landlords responsible for the behavior of people they can't evict is just as much a conundrum as the soldier threatened to be court martialed versus being thrown in jail for neglect.

Solve the damn problem, don't heap more legislation on the problem.

Later,
JM

[bleedingheart]

5. Did you see this on the local news?

Some group in Highland park has formed and is pushing for these new regulations...

My father in law is an attorney in Michigan who owns property... he doesn't make his tenants sign a year lease... He just makes them sign an agreement that tells them what they are obligated to pay him in rent. He then has more leverage to kick out crappy tenants.. For example he had a tenant who installed some tremendously heavy fishtank in this apartment and it cracked the ceilings below it. Then they left a leak unattended...my FIL kicked them out within a month...

[Demobrat]

8. I am a small time landlord.

I work and live in San Francisco, where I rent, and own a condo in Phoenix, which I rent out. I don't ask for a lease, or want one. The way I look at it, if somebody skips you can't get blood out of a stone, and if somebody's trouble I want to be able to get rid of them. It's a small condo complex and who lives there affects other people.

[bleedingheart]

10. that is my father in laws thoughts...the time spent

trying to get money is wasted. Might as well look for a new tenant, plus you want to avoid having any animosity which will result in property damage.

[Demobrat]

14. Yep. People can be really vindictive.

Better to just let them go.

[Demobrat]

4. There are times when the landlord should be responsible.

Viscious dogs are one example. If a tenant has a dog and it hurts or threatens someone, and the landlord is informed, and doesn't make the tenant either get rid of the dog or leave, and somebody gets hurt, the landlord should be held responsible. In fact, here in SF there was a terrible dog mauling case. The building landlord will have to pay damages, and should. A woman was horribly killed. In the case of nuisance properties, I think the landlord should be held responsible also. Of course if somebody has an arsenal in the basement, lives quietly and nobody knows about it, that's different. But people who are interfering with other's quiet enjoyment of their homes are the landlord's problem, like it or not.

[Norcom]

7. What about as another poster commented

in some places it takes a very long time to evict a tennent. What if local laws prevent a landlord from being able to immediatly evict someone and the eviction process takes several months?

Landlord starts eviction process and in the time frame it takes to complete the tennent continues to cause problems. How can, and why should the landlord then be held responsible? Either he breaks law A or law B. The landlord is in an absolutly impossible situation.

[NJCher]

9. they could take the eviction timeframe into account

All the landlord would have to do is show papers to the municipal representative who is doing the citation.

At any rate, I think it's a workable idea. Yes, a pain for the landlord. I grew up in a family that made their income from rentals and I do so now myself. The fact is that you can tell a lot about who you're renting to by checking references and credit ratings. I think the law's a fairly good idea, with certain allowances for circumstances such as the one norcom brings up.


Cher

[Norcom]

13. JM brought it up first

and deserves proper credit.

There are obviously work arounds and ways to do it properly to protect the landlord in situations like that and others. But unfortunatly, legislatures do not always think this stuff through before passing a law.

[bleedingheart]

16. the place they were talking about in particular had bullet holes

in the windows....now those are neighbors I really wouldn't want around. The area in question also has some gorgeous old homes (late 1800 to early 1900's)... they are coal and steel robber baron homes...the area had been in decline for years but is slowly over the past fifteen years being rediscovered as more trendy areas become too expensive.

[Beaker]

20. In cases like that- the building owner can be cited for for lack of upkeep

or unsafe conditions, or something to that effect. Here in Chicago they passed some laws to deal with abandoned buildings that landlords just let decay into rat-infested crack dens and shooting galleries, so that the city could seize them and tear them down. I'm all for that kind of thing.

[Beaker]

18. It could cause the availablelow-income housing to drop a little-

people who rent out a room, or the upstairs or basement apartment...for some of them, they may decide it's too much of a risk for what they get in rent, and decide not to rent at all.

While I think that parents should be held liable for any and all actions by their minor children, I don't see any reason to hold a landlord liable for the actions of a tenant, unless they are complicit in whatever the criminal offence is.

BTW- does this law only apply to residential landlords, or are commercial landlords held to the same accountability?

[bleedingheart]

23. it is a proposal right now... so it hasn't been made into a law

according to what I saw...

[Demobrat]

12. Yes, it's tough.

But as long as steps are being taken the landlord should of course not be help responsible for what the tenant does. An eviction in process would fulfill the landlord's responsibility. If my tenant picks fights with the other tenants, threatens them, etc., and they complain to me that they're afraid, and I give him 30 days to leave, I'm not responsible for what he does in that 30 days. But if I don't do anything and the cops come over and over and eventually he really hurts somebody and I get sued...well...I don't know that I would blame them for trying.

[Lars39]

15. So what happens to the landlord after so many visits?

Is he fined? Does he face jail time? Does it matter if it's police visits to many different tenants just once or twice, or is it one tenant many times? I see this situation aggravating domestic crises. I see this situation possibly forcing a landlord to evict folks that shouldn't be evicted. I see a landlord going to bat for a tenant and facing fines, jail time. Could this be a way to ultimately confiscate property, or at the least scare up some revenue for the city/county? Lots of questions, but this just seems pretty heavy-handed.

[bleedingheart]

17. I am looking for a link on the newscast website...it was just

aired tonight...

If I recall the landlord gets a fine...and then there is further action...

[democratreformed]

19. Laws like this,

in my opinion, only perpetuate the idea that an individual does not have to be responsible for his or her own actions. The more we hold one person accountable for another's actions, the more the second person will know that he or she can get away with whatever.

[Beaker]

21. The only exception that I support-

Are laws that make parents responsible for actions of their minor children(while at the same time, I definitely believe in laws to prtect kids from abuse by parents). If people are going to be parents, they ought to be parents.

[democratreformed]

24. I agree

with this too.

[bleedingheart]

22. very good point

[Feanorcurufinwe]

25. Absolutely not. Everyone should be responsible for their own actions.

If the tenants are breaking some law, that law should be enforced against the people breaking it.


And, I have to point out something else screwy about this proposal. It is based on 'police visits'? In other words, if a neighbor keeps complaining and calling the police, but the facts show no law has been broken, the landlord is punished anyway? That makes no sense whatsoever.

[Yupster]

26. Nope because

if you're going to hold the landlord responsible, you're going to have to give him some powers to know what's going on.

If there are crimes being committed in the home, are you going to allow the landlord to come in and check the house anytime he wants to and violate the privacy of the tennants?

It just seems like this would create more problems than it would solve.

Currently the law pretty much says the apartment is the castle of the tennant for privacy issues. If it's his castle, it needs to be his responsibility.

[LisaM]

27. Is anyone here besides me a TENANT?

I agree that landlords should be able to evict problem tenants. We, however, are not problem tenants at all, yet I am in constant fear that our rent will be raised, that we will suddenly not be allowed to have dogs (our original landlord died and his wife and daughter now run the property), etc. The same people own the house next door and raised the rent 50% with almost no notice. The nice, friendly cool tenants were forced to leave, and now we have, instead of a couple, at least four guys (because of the high rent, no couple can now afford to rent the house) who are simply obnoxious. There is nothing really wrong that I can pinpoint, but they are just not as nice as the previous people, and they don't take as good care of the property.

Our house needs a lot of work, but I am afraid to ask them to do it, because we cannot afford much more in rent than we pay now.

[grasswire]

28. the downside for renters

In this economy, the rule seems nuts. It will be exponentially harder for families to find housing if they've lost work or had back-breaking medical bills or some other catastrophe. Where are these people to live? Are they to squat somewhere? What? Where?

Rather than take this rather silly step forcing housing issues on the backs of landlords and poor people, it would be better to advocate affordable housing as a national priority. Waiting lists for housing assistance are years long in most areas, even for handicapped and seniors.

Consider the larger problem -- the need for people to have a home before they can address other issues in their lives.

[Logansquare]

29. In Chicago, a landlord can lose his/her building

if they run a "disorderly house," but it takes a long time, and many visits to Housing Court for that to happen. Our neighborhood group successfully shut down a crack house by taking the owner to court repeatedly. We had three ODs there in as many years, and a prostitute taking johns on in the alley. We also pushed another absentee landlord who was renting his basement to gang members into selling. His tenants, including a changing cast of underage girls, sold drugs, shouted obscenities and threats at us, and on a couple of occasions, shot guns up in the air for the hell of it.

Don't cry any tears for these people--both owners lived in the suburbs. The crack house owner was using it as his personal drug and whorehouse, and the second guy was a yuppy lawyer who owns over 30 buildings in Chicago and holds them until the property values shoot up. He doesn't maintain them or screen the tenants. Actually, we wondered if he rented to the gang intentionally in order to mess with our property values and get some more cheap real estate.

[mmonk]

31. Landlords should be reponsible only

for leasing a "habital" space.

[MadHound]

32. Actually I've used the threat of this law to good effect

I used to live in Columbia Mo, where we have such laws regarding landlords, and I for one were glad they were on the books. I used to live in a "border" neighborhood, with about fifty percent owners and the rest renters. The trouble was with two landlords who would rent to anybody with money or Section 8. Low income neighbors don't bother me, I've been one myself. But crack houses next door were a problem. These two landlords would rent without any kind of background checks, nothing. And if we as neighbors complained, well, it was TS. Didn't matter how much we complained, how many police came by the place, so long as the renter had money in one way or the other, they wouldn't be kicked out.

About five years ago, these two landlords rented out two places to dueling crack houses. It was the usual scene, lots of traffic at all hours, fights, loud music, etc. Until Labor Day, when matters boiled over between the two houses, which ended in a running gun battle up and down the street. People were diving for cover, getting the hell out of the line of fire. This involved somebody with a .45, a 9mm, and a shotgun. When all was said and done, my windshield had to be replaced, my neighbor's car was shot to hell with seven hits, another neighbor's house had to be repaired from four bullet hole and a shotgun blast through a window, and another neighbor's dog had to take a trip to the ER from a gunshot wound.

That was it. Using the law, we threatened the landlord with dire consequences unless they started cleaning up their places, screening their renters, and paying attention to the neighbors when we complained. And you know what? It worked. The neighborhood has been peaceful and quiet ever since. So yes, I favor laws like this. It has to have controls and constraints, but if the choice is a law like this, or landlords renting out to crack houses and meth labs, give me the law.

[Heddi]

33. Yes they should, in some cases

I've lived in apartment buildings where I've had to call the police EVERY NIGHT for MONTHS regarding outrageous amounts of noise, physical fighting, people jumping off the balcony, etc, coming from ONE apartment.

I'd call the police, they'd come out, tell them to be quiet, and 30 minutes later, the noise would start up again, call the police again, they'd come out, tell them to be quiet, ad nauseum.

THe next day, I'd call the landlord, tell them I called the police 3x's on one apartment, they'd say "okay" and do nothing about it.

At that particular apartment complex, the lease included a statement that said if excessive noise or disturbances were reported to the police and/or landlord, the landlord WOULD evict due to excessive complaints.

I don't know about anyone else, but I consider it 'excessive' when at least 45 police calls were made in a 2 month period on ONE apartment.
(and those were just the complaints from ME. Other neighbors, not even in the building, had complained just as much, if not more, on the same apartment)

At what point does the LANDLORD have to uphold THEIR end of the lease that both tenants AND landlords signed?

If I didn't pay my rent for months and months, you better BELIEVE they'd hold me to that lease and evict me if payment wasn't made.

Yet they're not held to the same standards--there is the clause re: excessive noise and that eviction WOULD occur should excessive noise/complaints be made.

Recently, a law was passed there that should an apartment get 3 noise violations in 1 month, the landlord would be fined in addition to the tenant being fined.

I totally agree with this.

My landlord did NOTHING to stop the noise. NO letters were sent out, no eviction, nothing.

So these yahoos were partying EVERY NIGHT From 11pm until 6am, when their highs wore off and they passed out.

So EVERY NIGHT from 11pm until 6am, my husband and I got NO sleep. NONE. And I was a F/T student AND had a F/T job which I had to be to at 7am.

REAL nice.

I don't really see how this could be abused, because with the new law in Chas, the landlord is only 'fined' if there are three, VERIFIABLE noise violations in 1 month. Meaning, that if the noise could be heard outside the apartment, then that was a violation. Someone walking too hard on the ceiling, or shutting their doors too hard was NOT a violation.

GOOD tenants (the sad minority of us) have been behelden to BAD neighbors for far too long. And bad neighbors are enabled by complacent Landlords who look at NOTHING but whether a steady rent check is coming in.

The noisy people who lived above us finally, one day, just left---left the apartment a TOTAL mess---and the landlord had to spend quite a bit of $$ replacing doors that had been beaten in, or torn off their hinges, and floors that had been ripped up, and holes that had been knocked in the walls, and windows that had been broken out, and sinks that had been ripped from the wall.

OF course, they wouldn't have had to spend thousands fixing up the apartment if they'd listened to our numerous complaints when we called to TELL THEM about the sound of windows being broken at 4am, or the sounds of massive fights occuring above us and actually HEARING holes being knocked in the walls (you could hear the plaster falling down the walls that we shared), or the sounds of general distruction taking place above us.


On Edit:

Also, I believe that landlords should also be held responsible for the simple reason that by them NOT doing anything about noisy/disturbing tennants, THEY (the landlords) are contributing to the problem. EVERYONE in the neighborhood, whether you're a tenant of the landlord, or just happen to live next-door, or down the street, has a right to a quiet evening, no rowdy parties, decent neighbors, etc.

By landlords NOT doing anything about the problem, they're not just enraging their OWN tenants, but people who live in the area as well. They're CONTRIBUTING to the public disturbance as much as the tenants themselves are.