A Man’s Home Is His Castle, Right?

 

Obama’s palatial estate in Martha’s Vineyard.

A new phenomenon has erupted upon the scene. Squatters (i.e., trespassers, thieves) are taking over homes that are temporarily unoccupied, and law enforcement appears not to give a rat’s arse about property rights. A case in Colorado illustrates the issue and problem:

[Link] Homeowners call them “criminals”, but law enforcement refer to them as squatters.

They break into your home, move their stuff in and refuse to leave!

Thankfully, some lawmakers see this as a travesty and seek to restore the Constitutional protection over private property rights:

District 10 Sen. Owen Hill and House District 16 Rep. Larry Liston are also sponsoring this bill they hope will send squatters packing.

Under the proposal, law enforcement would have the authority to immediately remove squatters. The bill also goes a step further by making it a class 1 misdemeanor if the squatters alter or damage the homeowner’s property.

From the Cato Institute:

America’s Founders understood clearly that private property is the foundation not only of prosperity but of freedom itself.

Thus, through the common law, state law, and the Constitution, they protected property rights — the rights of people to acquire, use, and dispose of property freely. With the growth of modern government, however, those rights been seriously compromised.

This seems to be just one more example of a woke culture out of control. Up is down. Right is wrong. Black is white. And property, gender, and everything is fluid. Daily. Good grief. What is next? With this kind of ‘thinking,’ where does it stop? Why not allow a ‘D’ student to sit at an ‘A’ student’s desk and appropriate all of their grades. Is nothing respected and inviolate anymore?  This is simply crazy and chaotic and turns the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness completely on its head!

There needs to be a federal solution to this attack on property rights and freedom and clearly set out their inviolability. Perhaps we need to sic a mob of squatters to the Obama Martha Vineyard estate in order to provide proper motivation to fix this outrage?

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 63 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. OmegaPaladin Moderator
    OmegaPaladin
    @OmegaPaladin

    All of the leases I signed were standardized forms that were signed by the owner, the tenant, and a witness.  You are telling me that squatters can just forge the document, and this cannot be detected?     Do we need to require leases to be notarized?

    Here’s a thought – have a dated and notarized document on file with the county stating that your property is available for rent.  Tenants can request to see this at the lease signing.  You could also draw up the opposite statement.

    • #31
  2. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    I’m not the OP but I did not get the sense that this post was about Davis’ apparently helpless and seemingly illiterate victims of shifty paperwork, but about the malice-afore stealthy home invaders who simply decide to SQUAT on property, which is not the same as getting bamboozeld, and which is called by its rightful name, SQUATTING.

    Different topic.

    • #32
  3. Eugene Kriegsmann Member
    Eugene Kriegsmann
    @EugeneKriegsmann

    I don’t suppose anyone should be surprised at the conspicuous display of accumulated wealth. It is all pretty typical of Communist/Socialist oligarchs. After all, all of the heirarchy of the Soviet Union had their dachas in warmer climes while their subjects froze their pettuties off in Moscow. Some farm animals are more equal than others. Does anyone really expect that a squatter would get anywhere near Obama’s dacha?

    • #33
  4. Columbo Inactive
    Columbo
    @Columbo

    kedavis (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    k

    Let’s hear your solution. And make sure it’s workable in the real world.

    I don’t care about your stalking horse problem. You should write a post on it.

    aka, you don’t have a quick-and-dirty solution either. That’s the point, nobody really does, if they’re serious. If they claim to, they’re dreaming.

    All I get from you is all cops are bad, all squatters are good. We’re not even concerned about the same problem.

    As Columbo says, restore the primacy of property rights, and I don’t care who signed a fraudulent lease. That’s going to be a ridiculously (as in worthy of ridicule) small slice of the real problem, which is hostile entitled bums eating our country from the inside out.

    There is a system for dealing with lease fraudsters, but the system for dealing with squatters is breaking down because it’s being broken down by our marxist termites.

    Nope, totally missing the point.

    Squatters don’t just “squat” any more. They often have real-looking documents etc, sometimes even including deeds, etc. That’s how fraudsters manage to rent out – to other people – or even sell peoples’ houses and pocket the money, while the actual owners are at Disneyland or whatever. Cops are not in a position to know what documents are real and what documents aren’t. They’re already often not very good at what they’re supposed to do, expecting them to do title searches on the street is bananas.

    Making convicted squatters really hurt for it, is likely the only realistic way of bringing it down.

    Right now that process is way too complicated and takes too long. It should not be that hard, including proof that the home has not been validly rented.

    • #34
  5. Columbo Inactive
    Columbo
    @Columbo

    kedavis (View Comment):

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    k

    Let’s hear your solution. And make sure it’s workable in the real world.

    I don’t care about your stalking horse problem. You should write a post on it.

    aka, you don’t have a quick-and-dirty solution either. That’s the point, nobody really does, if they’re serious. If they claim to, they’re dreaming.

    All I get from you is all cops are bad, all squatters are good. We’re not even concerned about the same problem.

    …:

    There is a system for dealing with lease fraudsters, but the system for dealing with squatters is breaking down because it’s being broken down by our marxist termites.

    Nope, totally missing the point.

    Squatters don’t just “squat” any more. They often have real-looking documents etc, sometimes even including deeds, etc. That’s how fraudsters manage to rent out – to other people – or even sell peoples’ houses and pocket the money, while the actual owners are at Disneyland or whatever. Cops are not in a position to know what documents are real and what documents aren’t. They’re already often not very good at what they’re supposed to do, expecting them to do title searches on the street is bananas.

    Making convicted squatters really hurt for it, is likely the only realistic way of bringing it down.

    Even worse, people are often sloppy in the way they handle their business – allowing someone else to stay on properties they own with no written lease, no clear agreement, thinking they’ll get to it later, which just further muddies the water.

    It’s essentially a civil dispute and you can’t put cops in the middle of that. They’re not judges and they can’t hold court. Once the court rules on it, they can issue an order to the sheriff to effect the eviction.

    That’s not to say the court process shouldn’t be streamlined. I’m sure it should in many places. That’s the heart of the matter. It’s not really a property rights issue, (a tenancy is a property right, too) it’s a process issue.

    It seems that many people don’t see – maybe can’t even imagine – being on the other side of it. You have a lease on a house or something, and one day the owner/landlord tells the police to take you away because “I have a DEED!”

    Yeah, that’s why we’re reading about those stories happening every day! /s

    • #35
  6. D.A. Venters Inactive
    D.A. Venters
    @DAVenters

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    All of the leases I signed were standardized forms that were signed by the owner, the tenant, and a witness. You are telling me that squatters can just forge the document, and this cannot be detected? Do we need to require leases to be notarized?

    It can be detected, but a police officer on the scene is not in a good position to do that. Even with a notary’s seal, you may have to check a the notary register to make sure that is valid.  It’s a dispute best suited to a civil court, which is why police pass the buck on to that process. 

    Here’s a thought – have a dated and notarized document on file with the county stating that your property is available for rent. Tenants can request to see this at the lease signing. You could also draw up the opposite statement.

    That would be great, but part of the problem is that people, landlords and tenants both, just aren’t that careful in their daily affairs.  There are a lot of handshake deals out there. “I’ll let you live in the house if you do some work for me. We’ll put it in writing eventually.” Those type things: Cops aren’t in a good position to sort it out on the scene. 

    • #36
  7. The Scarecrow Thatcher
    The Scarecrow
    @TheScarecrow

    Just transport all of the squatters up to Detroit, tell them to take their pick. Nobody will bother them. They can each probably have a second home too!

    Hey, I’m a solutions guy.

    • #37
  8. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    All of the leases I signed were standardized forms that were signed by the owner, the tenant, and a witness. You are telling me that squatters can just forge the document, and this cannot be detected? Do we need to require leases to be notarized?

    Notarizing – assuming that’s actually done correctly and not also forged – doesn’t prove a document is real/true.  It just shows that parties to it legally affirm that it is.  Such accuracy/truthfulness can still be disputed and overcome in court.  And if shown to be false, the parties are subject to legal sanction.

    I could make up a document that says I own your house – hell, I could make up a document that says I own YOU – and get it notarized.

    So what?

     

    Here’s a thought – have a dated and notarized document on file with the county stating that your property is available for rent. Tenants can request to see this at the lease signing. You could also draw up the opposite statement.

    Comment #14.

     

    • #38
  9. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    All of the leases I signed were standardized forms that were signed by the owner, the tenant, and a witness. You are telling me that squatters can just forge the document, and this cannot be detected? Do we need to require leases to be notarized?

    It can be detected, but a police officer on the scene is not in a good position to do that. Even with a notary’s seal, you may have to check a the notary register to make sure that is valid. It’s a dispute best suited to a civil court, which is why police pass the buck on to that process.

    Here’s a thought – have a dated and notarized document on file with the county stating that your property is available for rent. Tenants can request to see this at the lease signing. You could also draw up the opposite statement.

    That would be great, but part of the problem is that people, landlords and tenants both, just aren’t that careful in their daily affairs. There are a lot of handshake deals out there. “I’ll let you live in the house if you do some work for me. We’ll put it in writing eventually.” Those type things: Cops aren’t in a good position to sort it out on the scene.

    Ibid.

    And I’ve covered the timing issues before too.  One court hearing should really be enough to establish whether there was a valid tenancy.

    • #39
  10. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Columbo (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    k

    Let’s hear your solution. And make sure it’s workable in the real world.

    I don’t care about your stalking horse problem. You should write a post on it.

    aka, you don’t have a quick-and-dirty solution either. That’s the point, nobody really does, if they’re serious. If they claim to, they’re dreaming.

    All I get from you is all cops are bad, all squatters are good. We’re not even concerned about the same problem.

    …:

    There is a system for dealing with lease fraudsters, but the system for dealing with squatters is breaking down because it’s being broken down by our marxist termites.

    Nope, totally missing the point.

    Squatters don’t just “squat” any more. They often have real-looking documents etc, sometimes even including deeds, etc. That’s how fraudsters manage to rent out – to other people – or even sell peoples’ houses and pocket the money, while the actual owners are at Disneyland or whatever. Cops are not in a position to know what documents are real and what documents aren’t. They’re already often not very good at what they’re supposed to do, expecting them to do title searches on the street is bananas.

    Making convicted squatters really hurt for it, is likely the only realistic way of bringing it down.

    Even worse, people are often sloppy in the way they handle their business – allowing someone else to stay on properties they own with no written lease, no clear agreement, thinking they’ll get to it later, which just further muddies the water.

    It’s essentially a civil dispute and you can’t put cops in the middle of that. They’re not judges and they can’t hold court. Once the court rules on it, they can issue an order to the sheriff to effect the eviction.

    That’s not to say the court process shouldn’t be streamlined. I’m sure it should in many places. That’s the heart of the matter. It’s not really a property rights issue, (a tenancy is a property right, too) it’s a process issue.

    It seems that many people don’t see – maybe can’t even imagine – being on the other side of it. You have a lease on a house or something, and one day the owner/landlord tells the police to take you away because “I have a DEED!”

    Yeah, that’s why we’re reading about those stories happening every day! /s

    If that kind of situation became recognized, you think it wouldn’t happen?

    • #40
  11. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Notarizing – assuming that’s actually done correctly and not also forged – doesn’t prove a document is real/true.  It just shows that parties to it legally affirm that it is.  Such accuracy/truthfulness can still be disputed and overcome in court.  And if shown to be false, the parties are subject to legal sanction.

    I could make up a document that says I own your house – hell, I could make up a document that says I own YOU – and get it notarized.

    Do you use Firefox?  You could whomp up a GreaseMonkey script to auto-insert this argument everywhere you go.

    This is an existential level of unknowability, and if you lived by these standards, you would burn all of your cash.

    • #41
  12. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    BDB (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Notarizing – assuming that’s actually done correctly and not also forged – doesn’t prove a document is real/true. It just shows that parties to it legally affirm that it is. Such accuracy/truthfulness can still be disputed and overcome in court. And if shown to be false, the parties are subject to legal sanction.

    I could make up a document that says I own your house – hell, I could make up a document that says I own YOU – and get it notarized.

    Do you use Firefox? You could whomp up a GreaseMonkey script to auto-insert this argument everywhere you go.

    This is an existential level of unknowability, and if you lived by these standards, you would burn all of your cash.

    At present, notarized documents tend to be true, because there are penalties if they’re not.

    But if you set up a legal standard that notarized documents Are True, you’d have much bigger problems than exist now.

    • #42
  13. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    kedavis (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Notarizing – assuming that’s actually done correctly and not also forged – doesn’t prove a document is real/true. It just shows that parties to it legally affirm that it is. Such accuracy/truthfulness can still be disputed and overcome in court. And if shown to be false, the parties are subject to legal sanction.

    I could make up a document that says I own your house – hell, I could make up a document that says I own YOU – and get it notarized.

    Do you use Firefox? You could whomp up a GreaseMonkey script to auto-insert this argument everywhere you go.

    This is an existential level of unknowability, and if you lived by these standards, you would burn all of your cash.

    At present, notarized documents tend to be true, because there are penalties if they’re not.

    But if you set up a legal standard that notarized documents Are True, you’d have much bigger problems than exist now.

    Don’t get all reasonable on us now.  That’s not your center of gravity in this argument, and you risk undoing all the hard work you’ve put in so far.  Apply this standard to your previous comments through this thread and see how you do.

    • #43
  14. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Steve Lehto and a few other attorneys on YouTube address these issues occasionally.

    I agree it can be a problem, but what about someone who is actually renting and actually signed a valid lease with an actual property owner? What’s to stop the owner/landlord from claiming they’re just squatters? How are the police supposed to know what lease is valid and what lease isn’t? Just from the owner’s say-so? What if they’re lying?

    Landlords can be greedy too, and they can profit by taking first/last/deposit/etc from someone, then claiming they’re “squatters” to get them removed by police and then do it again. They could get 3 month’s rent per month, or more.

    You can also get the innocent victims who signed a lease with someone who claimed to be the owner, but really wasn’t. How much “due diligence” is someone expected to do? Somehow make sure the person they deal with is who they claim to be, and they’re actually the owner, that they’re not about to be foreclosed by their bank, etc? How do they get the owner’s bank to tell them anything?

    I am more worried about the abuse of property rights. As to the other, produce a lease. And take matters to civil court, if you must. The underlying issue must be address. 

    • #44
  15. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill (View Comment):

    I have heard that this is indeed happening quite lot.

    A friend of a friend bought a mid priced home outside of Reno. Before moving in, she drove out to the house to see if the utilities were up and running, and if she could begin her move.

    Well yes the utilities had been turned on per her agreement with the utility company.

    But a total stranger was camped out in her home.

    The police were indifferent. She finally had the utilities turned off and she hired musicians who set up amplifiers and then blasted heavy metal music at the house for several hours, all equipment powered by generators.

    The “camper” hastily retreated.

     

    Don’t live in blue states. 

    • #45
  16. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Steve Lehto and a few other attorneys on YouTube address these issues occasionally.

    I agree it can be a problem, but what about someone who is actually renting and actually signed a valid lease with an actual property owner? What’s to stop the owner/landlord from claiming they’re just squatters? How are the police supposed to know what lease is valid and what lease isn’t? Just from the owner’s say-so? What if they’re lying?

    Landlords can be greedy too, and they can profit by taking first/last/deposit/etc from someone, then claiming they’re “squatters” to get them removed by police and then do it again. They could get 3 month’s rent per month, or more.

    You can also get the innocent victims who signed a lease with someone who claimed to be the owner, but really wasn’t. How much “due diligence” is someone expected to do? Somehow make sure the person they deal with is who they claim to be, and they’re actually the owner, that they’re not about to be foreclosed by their bank, etc? How do they get the owner’s bank to tell them anything?

    I am more worried about the abuse of property rights. As to the other, produce a lease. And take matters to civil court, if you must. The underlying issue must be address.

    Okay, but, who takes who to court?

    Does the landlord/owner have to go to court to remove those they claim to be “squatters?”

    Or can the landlord/owner get anyone in the property arrested and jailed, just on their say-so, and then people who may actually be legitimate tenants have to sue the landlord/owner?

    Then it gets into who stands to lose more in each situation, etc.  Assuming the “tenants” aren’t damaging anything – and there are other provisions/sanctions available in those situations – the landlord/owner may lose some money.  If the “tenants” are immediately forced out without any examination of evidence, they are homeless, possibly including young children etc.  And in much less of a position to fight it in court.

    Indeed, getting someone arrested/jailed under false pretense could be considered a criminal act, and if landlords faced prison terms for such actions that could help restore some balance.  But that would also require the government to step in since individuals cannot pursue criminal charges.

    • #46
  17. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill (View Comment):

    I have heard that this is indeed happening quite lot.

    A friend of a friend bought a mid priced home outside of Reno. Before moving in, she drove out to the house to see if the utilities were up and running, and if she could begin her move.

    Well yes the utilities had been turned on per her agreement with the utility company.

    But a total stranger was camped out in her home.

    The police were indifferent. She finally had the utilities turned off and she hired musicians who set up amplifiers and then blasted heavy metal music at the house for several hours, all equipment powered by generators.

    The “camper” hastily retreated.

     

    Don’t live in blue states.

    That’s a big part of it too, of course.  And even blue cities within red states.  (Landlord/tenant issues are usually handled in municipal courts.)

    • #47
  18. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    kedavis (View Comment):

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    All of the leases I signed were standardized forms that were signed by the owner, the tenant, and a witness. You are telling me that squatters can just forge the document, and this cannot be detected? Do we need to require leases to be notarized?

    Notarizing – assuming that’s actually done correctly and not also forged – doesn’t prove a document is real/true. It just shows that parties to it legally affirm that it is. Such accuracy/truthfulness can still be disputed and overcome in court. And if shown to be false, the parties are subject to legal sanction.

    I could make up a document that says I own your house – hell, I could make up a document that says I own YOU – and get it notarized.

    So what?

     

    Here’s a thought – have a dated and notarized document on file with the county stating that your property is available for rent. Tenants can request to see this at the lease signing. You could also draw up the opposite statement.

    Comment #14.

     

    Don’t become a landlord, don’t leave your property empty, and be careful with legal agreements if you rent if you are personally objecting to a fix to the squatter problem. 

    • #48
  19. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    All of the leases I signed were standardized forms that were signed by the owner, the tenant, and a witness. You are telling me that squatters can just forge the document, and this cannot be detected? Do we need to require leases to be notarized?

    Notarizing – assuming that’s actually done correctly and not also forged – doesn’t prove a document is real/true. It just shows that parties to it legally affirm that it is. Such accuracy/truthfulness can still be disputed and overcome in court. And if shown to be false, the parties are subject to legal sanction.

    I could make up a document that says I own your house – hell, I could make up a document that says I own YOU – and get it notarized.

    So what?

     

    Here’s a thought – have a dated and notarized document on file with the county stating that your property is available for rent. Tenants can request to see this at the lease signing. You could also draw up the opposite statement.

    Comment #14.

     

    Don’t become a landlord, don’t leave your property empty, and be careful with legal agreements if you rent if you are personally objecting to a fix to the squatter problem.

    Well yes, but objectively rental properties are needed, yet many people aren’t well suited to being landlords themselves.

    • #49
  20. Pagodan Member
    Pagodan
    @MatthewBaylot

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    All of the leases I signed were standardized forms that were signed by the owner, the tenant, and a witness. You are telling me that squatters can just forge the document, and this cannot be detected? Do we need to require leases to be notarized?

    Notarizing – assuming that’s actually done correctly and not also forged – doesn’t prove a document is real/true. It just shows that parties to it legally affirm that it is. Such accuracy/truthfulness can still be disputed and overcome in court. And if shown to be false, the parties are subject to legal sanction.

    I could make up a document that says I own your house – hell, I could make up a document that says I own YOU – and get it notarized.

    So what?

     

    Here’s a thought – have a dated and notarized document on file with the county stating that your property is available for rent. Tenants can request to see this at the lease signing. You could also draw up the opposite statement.

    Comment #14.

     

    Don’t become a landlord, don’t leave your property empty, and be careful with legal agreements if you rent if you are personally objecting to a fix to the squatter problem.

    I didn’t get that kedavis was objecting to a fix of the squatter problem. I think he was objecting to the idea that all you need to do is call the Sheriff who will come right down and throw the bums out on the street their first trip down. 

    But yes, if you own property, don’t leave it empty, be very careful with any rental agreements or leases you enter into, familiarize yourself with state and local landlord/tenant laws. 

    • #50
  21. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Pagodan (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    All of the leases I signed were standardized forms that were signed by the owner, the tenant, and a witness. You are telling me that squatters can just forge the document, and this cannot be detected? Do we need to require leases to be notarized?

    Notarizing – assuming that’s actually done correctly and not also forged – doesn’t prove a document is real/true. It just shows that parties to it legally affirm that it is. Such accuracy/truthfulness can still be disputed and overcome in court. And if shown to be false, the parties are subject to legal sanction.

    I could make up a document that says I own your house – hell, I could make up a document that says I own YOU – and get it notarized.

    So what?

    Here’s a thought – have a dated and notarized document on file with the county stating that your property is available for rent. Tenants can request to see this at the lease signing. You could also draw up the opposite statement.

    Comment #14.

    Don’t become a landlord, don’t leave your property empty, and be careful with legal agreements if you rent if you are personally objecting to a fix to the squatter problem.

    I didn’t get that kedavis was objecting to a fix of the squatter problem. I think he was objecting to the idea that all you need to do is call the Sheriff who will come right down and throw the bums out on the street their first trip down.

    But yes, if you own property, don’t leave it empty, be very careful with any rental agreements or leases you enter into, familiarize yourself with state and local landlord/tenant laws.

     

    That is a lot of/most of it,

    • #51
  22. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Pagodan (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    All of the leases I signed were standardized forms that were signed by the owner, the tenant, and a witness. You are telling me that squatters can just forge the document, and this cannot be detected? Do we need to require leases to be notarized?

    Notarizing – assuming that’s actually done correctly and not also forged – doesn’t prove a document is real/true. It just shows that parties to it legally affirm that it is. Such accuracy/truthfulness can still be disputed and overcome in court. And if shown to be false, the parties are subject to legal sanction.

    I could make up a document that says I own your house – hell, I could make up a document that says I own YOU – and get it notarized.

    So what?

    Here’s a thought – have a dated and notarized document on file with the county stating that your property is available for rent. Tenants can request to see this at the lease signing. You could also draw up the opposite statement.

    Comment #14.

    Don’t become a landlord, don’t leave your property empty, and be careful with legal agreements if you rent if you are personally objecting to a fix to the squatter problem.

    I didn’t get that kedavis was objecting to a fix of the squatter problem. I think he was objecting to the idea that all you need to do is call the Sheriff who will come right down and throw the bums out on the street their first trip down.

    But yes, if you own property, don’t leave it empty, be very careful with any rental agreements or leases you enter into, familiarize yourself with state and local landlord/tenant laws.

     

    That is a lot of/most of it,

    Ok

    • #52
  23. Michael G. Gallagher Coolidge
    Michael G. Gallagher
    @MichaelGallagher

    Randy Weivoda (View Comment):

    Columbo: There needs to be a federal solution to this attack on property rights and freedom and clearly set out their inviolability.

    I think it is crazy that there are localities where the police don’t enforce laws against trespassing. But I disagree with making this a federal issue. This has been a Colorado problem and Coloradans can fix it.

    @randyweivoda 

    But isn’t the Colorado state government dominated by Democrats? That means nothing useful will be done until the Republicans regain control of the state government-whenever that is.

     

    • #53
  24. Michael G. Gallagher Coolidge
    Michael G. Gallagher
    @MichaelGallagher

    @randyweivoda

     

    Concerning Colorado: don’t the Dems control the state government? That means nothing will be done to solve the problem until if and when the Republicans regain control of the state house. The Dems are only interested in sowing chaos to enhance their control.

     

     

    • #54
  25. Randy Weivoda Moderator
    Randy Weivoda
    @RandyWeivoda

    Michael G. Gallagher (View Comment):

    @ randyweivoda

     

    Concerning Colorado: don’t the Dems control the state government? That means nothing will be done to solve the problem until if and when the Republicans regain control of the state house. The Dems are only interested in sowing chaos to enhance their control.

    And Democrats currently control the Senate and the White House at the federal level.  Who knows which party will control which body two years from now?  At least under federalism, states that elect mostly Republicans have a shot at having sensible government.  Asking Washington to fix problems in states is not prudent since we cannot expect that Washington is going to be consistently run by conservatives.  Better to have the federal government only do that which cannot practically be done by the states, in my opinion. 

    • #55
  26. MarciN Member
    MarciN
    @MarciN

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Steve Lehto and a few other attorneys on YouTube address these issues occasionally.

    I agree it can be a problem, but what about someone who is actually renting and actually signed a valid lease with an actual property owner? What’s to stop the owner/landlord from claiming they’re just squatters? How are the police supposed to know what lease is valid and what lease isn’t? Just from the owner’s say-so? What if they’re lying?

    Landlords can be greedy too, and they can profit by taking first/last/deposit/etc from someone, then claiming they’re “squatters” to get them removed by police and then do it again. They could get 3 month’s rent per month, or more.

    You can also get the innocent victims who signed a lease with someone who claimed to be the owner, but really wasn’t. How much “due diligence” is someone expected to do? Somehow make sure the person they deal with is who they claim to be, and they’re actually the owner, that they’re not about to be foreclosed by their bank, etc? How do they get the owner’s bank to tell them anything?

    I am more worried about the abuse of property rights. As to the other, produce a lease. And take matters to civil court, if you must. The underlying issue must be address.

    Okay, but, who takes who to court?

    Does the landlord/owner have to go to court to remove those they claim to be “squatters?”

    Or can the landlord/owner get anyone in the property arrested and jailed, just on their say-so, and then people who may actually be legitimate tenants have to sue the landlord/owner?

    Then it gets into who stands to lose more in each situation, etc. Assuming the “tenants” aren’t damaging anything – and there are other provisions/sanctions available in those situations – the landlord/owner may lose some money. If the “tenants” are immediately forced out without any examination of evidence, they are homeless, possibly including young children etc. And in much less of a position to fight it in court.

    Indeed, getting someone arrested/jailed under false pretense could be considered a criminal act, and if landlords faced prison terms for such actions that could help restore some balance. But that would also require the government to step in since individuals cannot pursue criminal charges.

    This situation is inconceivable to me. A tenant doesn’t get the keys to the apartment or house until he or she signs a lease. I can’t imagine how it would come about. And if someone were in a house illegally, the owner would call the police right away because the only way the person could have gotten into the house would have been to break into it.

    A dispute over the title would go to court and not involve the tenant at all.

     

    • #56
  27. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    MarciN (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Steve Lehto and a few other attorneys on YouTube address these issues occasionally.

    Landlords can be greedy too, and they can profit by taking first/last/deposit/etc from someone, then claiming they’re “squatters” to get them removed by police and then do it again. They could get 3 month’s rent per month, or more.

    You can also get the innocent victims who signed a lease with someone who claimed to be the owner, but really wasn’t. How much “due diligence” is someone expected to do? Somehow make sure the person they deal with is who they claim to be, and they’re actually the owner, that they’re not about to be foreclosed by their bank, etc? How do they get the owner’s bank to tell them anything?

    I am more worried about the abuse of property rights. As to the other, produce a lease. And take matters to civil court, if you must. The underlying issue must be address.

    Okay, but, who takes who to court?

    Does the landlord/owner have to go to court to remove those they claim to be “squatters?”

    Or can the landlord/owner get anyone in the property arrested and jailed, just on their say-so, and then people who may actually be legitimate tenants have to sue the landlord/owner?

    Then it gets into who stands to lose more in each situation, etc. Assuming the “tenants” aren’t damaging anything – and there are other provisions/sanctions available in those situations – the landlord/owner may lose some money. If the “tenants” are immediately forced out without any examination of evidence, they are homeless, possibly including young children etc. And in much less of a position to fight it in court.

    Indeed, getting someone arrested/jailed under false pretense could be considered a criminal act, and if landlords faced prison terms for such actions that could help restore some balance. But that would also require the government to step in since individuals cannot pursue criminal charges.

    This situation is inconceivable to me. A tenant doesn’t get the keys to the apartment or house until he or she signs a lease. I can’t imagine how it would come about. And if someone were in a house illegally, the owner would call the police right away because the only way the person could have gotten into the house would have been to break into it.

    A dispute over the title would go to court and not involve the tenant at all.

    Yes validly that’s all true.  But how would cops – or a court – know that right away, without a hearing, evidence, etc?

    Automatically assuming truth of every claim by a landlord doesn’t make sense either.

    People saying “here’s my lease” and the owner saying “I didn’t sign that” is not something for police to decide.

    • #57
  28. MarciN Member
    MarciN
    @MarciN

    kedavis (View Comment):

    MarciN (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

     

    Okay, but, who takes who to court?

    Does the landlord/owner have to go to court to remove those they claim to be “squatters?”

    Or can the landlord/owner get anyone in the property arrested and jailed, just on their say-so, and then people who may actually be legitimate tenants have to sue the landlord/owner?

    Then it gets into who stands to lose more in each situation, etc. Assuming the “tenants” aren’t damaging anything – and there are other provisions/sanctions available in those situations – the landlord/owner may lose some money. If the “tenants” are immediately forced out without any examination of evidence, they are homeless, possibly including young children etc. And in much less of a position to fight it in court.

    Indeed, getting someone arrested/jailed under false pretense could be considered a criminal act, and if landlords faced prison terms for such actions that could help restore some balance. But that would also require the government to step in since individuals cannot pursue criminal charges.

    This situation is inconceivable to me. A tenant doesn’t get the keys to the apartment or house until he or she signs a lease. I can’t imagine how it would come about. And if someone were in a house illegally, the owner would call the police right away because the only way the person could have gotten into the house would have been to break into it.

    A dispute over the title would go to court and not involve the tenant at all.

    Yes validly that’s all true. But how would cops – or a court – know that right away, without a hearing, evidence, etc?

    Automatically assuming truth of every claim by a landlord doesn’t make sense either.

    People saying “here’s my lease” and the owner saying “I didn’t sign that” is not something for police to decide.

    The person who offered the lease to the tenant needs to go to jail for fraud. 

    If the person has the keys to the house, then the police have to launch an investigation into finding the person guilty of the fraud of giving them the keys and the phony lease. The humane response would be for a victim restitution organization to help the tenants find another home. If they have the keys and a lease, they aren’t guilty of anything. I would hope they could help the police find the guilty party. But they still have to leave. 

    Caveat emptor, I guess. It’s sad. I hope it doesn’t happen often. 

    • #58
  29. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    MarciN (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    MarciN (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

     

    Okay, but, who takes who to court?

    Then it gets into who stands to lose more in each situation, etc. Assuming the “tenants” aren’t damaging anything – and there are other provisions/sanctions available in those situations – the landlord/owner may lose some money. If the “tenants” are immediately forced out without any examination of evidence, they are homeless, possibly including young children etc. And in much less of a position to fight it in court.

    Indeed, getting someone arrested/jailed under false pretense could be considered a criminal act, and if landlords faced prison terms for such actions that could help restore some balance. But that would also require the government to step in since individuals cannot pursue criminal charges.

    This situation is inconceivable to me. A tenant doesn’t get the keys to the apartment or house until he or she signs a lease. I can’t imagine how it would come about. And if someone were in a house illegally, the owner would call the police right away because the only way the person could have gotten into the house would have been to break into it.

    A dispute over the title would go to court and not involve the tenant at all.

    Yes validly that’s all true. But how would cops – or a court – know that right away, without a hearing, evidence, etc?

    Automatically assuming truth of every claim by a landlord doesn’t make sense either.

    People saying “here’s my lease” and the owner saying “I didn’t sign that” is not something for police to decide.

    The person who offered the lease to the tenant needs to go to jail for fraud.

    If the person has the keys to the house, then the police have to launch an investigation into finding the person guilty of the fraud of giving them the keys and the phony lease. The humane response would be for a victim restitution organization to help the tenants find another home. If they have the keys and a lease, they aren’t guilty of anything. I would hope they could help the police find the guilty party. But they still have to leave.

    Caveat emptor, I guess. It’s sad. I hope it doesn’t happen often.

    It really doesn’t happen often, but when it does, the cries of ownership-absolutists for the police to just throw them out, aren’t really helpful.

    The actual squatters, and those who enable them, once discovered, need to be punished, hard.  That’s not as likely to happen in a Democrat-controlled state or city, but that’s actually separate from absolute property rights.

    • #59
  30. Columbo Inactive
    Columbo
    @Columbo

    Randy Weivoda (View Comment):

    Michael G. Gallagher (View Comment):

    @ randyweivoda

     

    Concerning Colorado: don’t the Dems control the state government? That means nothing will be done to solve the problem until if and when the Republicans regain control of the state house. The Dems are only interested in sowing chaos to enhance their control.

    And Democrats currently control the Senate and the White House at the federal level. Who knows which party will control which body two years from now? At least under federalism, states that elect mostly Republicans have a shot at having sensible government. Asking Washington to fix problems in states is not prudent since we cannot expect that Washington is going to be consistently run by conservatives. Better to have the federal government only do that which cannot practically be done by the states, in my opinion.

    My only thought on this was, it would be chaotic if there were 50 different laws regarding this. It should be a relatively simple uniform solution for all. To prove ownership of your asset should not take a multi-tiered process through the courts. This is why deeds and other proofs of ownership already exist.

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.