Post by High Priestess on May 26, 2018 17:26:21 GMT
The NYT reports that once tenants end up on a "blacklist", often because they were sued by a previous landlord, they find that they are nearly unable to rent a place.
www.nytimes.com/2016/08/17/nyregion/new-york-housing-tenant-blacklist.html
As well, this series of stories shows the enormous and unnecessarily complex and crowded, unpleasant circumstances in housing court...
www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/05/20/nyregion/landlord-tenant-disputes-housing-court.html
While this can be unfortunate or even unfair for some tenants, I'm of the opinion that it's in general a very GOOD thing, because none of us as property owners want to rent to someone that another property owner has had to sue, or had serious problems with.
The threat of being unable to rent again if they get sued, is a powerful force and disincentive to tenants to do anything (such as fail to pay rent while simultaneously refusing to leave, eg engaging in theft of accomodations) which could get them sued.
However, I'm also of the opinion that we should not have to resort to courts in housing cases. This wastes a lot of time and costs a lot for everyone involved. Landlords should be able to evict without having to go to court. It could work easily: landlord gives the tenant a notice, you have to vacate in 3 days since you didn't pay rent. If you aren't out in 3 days, landlord can lock you out. Or, landlord gives you notice that you have to be out in 30 or 60 or 90 days, because though you've been a fine tenant, I just don't want to do business with you any more. At the end of that time period, if you're not out, the landlord can just lock you out.
After all, why should it be permissible that, while a tenant battles an eviction in housing court, they get the right to remain on the premises, while not paying rent? This is lost income the landlord will never see. It amounts to government supported theft.
As well, not using courts for evictions would actually ironically benefit tenants too. Because they would never have evictions on their record. Since they could easily be removed from the premises without going to court, there need be no record of the events, and future landlords, faced with a nonpaying renter, could just as easily remove them from the premises. Tenants would no longer be permanently scarred by a perhaps unfair eviction record, and landlords would not be unfairly burdened with tenants stealing accomodations by engaging in scams and delays in court proceedings.
It's a win-win for all concerned.
www.nytimes.com/2016/08/17/nyregion/new-york-housing-tenant-blacklist.html
As well, this series of stories shows the enormous and unnecessarily complex and crowded, unpleasant circumstances in housing court...
www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/05/20/nyregion/landlord-tenant-disputes-housing-court.html
While this can be unfortunate or even unfair for some tenants, I'm of the opinion that it's in general a very GOOD thing, because none of us as property owners want to rent to someone that another property owner has had to sue, or had serious problems with.
The threat of being unable to rent again if they get sued, is a powerful force and disincentive to tenants to do anything (such as fail to pay rent while simultaneously refusing to leave, eg engaging in theft of accomodations) which could get them sued.
However, I'm also of the opinion that we should not have to resort to courts in housing cases. This wastes a lot of time and costs a lot for everyone involved. Landlords should be able to evict without having to go to court. It could work easily: landlord gives the tenant a notice, you have to vacate in 3 days since you didn't pay rent. If you aren't out in 3 days, landlord can lock you out. Or, landlord gives you notice that you have to be out in 30 or 60 or 90 days, because though you've been a fine tenant, I just don't want to do business with you any more. At the end of that time period, if you're not out, the landlord can just lock you out.
After all, why should it be permissible that, while a tenant battles an eviction in housing court, they get the right to remain on the premises, while not paying rent? This is lost income the landlord will never see. It amounts to government supported theft.
As well, not using courts for evictions would actually ironically benefit tenants too. Because they would never have evictions on their record. Since they could easily be removed from the premises without going to court, there need be no record of the events, and future landlords, faced with a nonpaying renter, could just as easily remove them from the premises. Tenants would no longer be permanently scarred by a perhaps unfair eviction record, and landlords would not be unfairly burdened with tenants stealing accomodations by engaging in scams and delays in court proceedings.
It's a win-win for all concerned.