Its seems like you dont like the us supreme court laws and ruling. That's why we need sharia laws. We need Islamic Emirate states of America with sharia constitution now.
Some landlords live in duplexes or owner occupied buildings. They don't want to landlord, they just want to stay in the homes that they and their families have lived in for decades. For some landlords, it isn't a market, it is just their home. I wish it was as easy as just selling a liquid asset.
@@Dc-sl3up When I heard that the Nazis used to put commies in concentration camps, I thought that was quite harsh just for having a difference of opinion on how to govern the country. Then I began to understand that communists are parasites that live off of others' wealth and hard fought gains. Then I realized that the communists terrorize cities with false flag operations and destroy property to get their way. They are vandals that have no regard for property because they have no property. They hold property for ransom and hijack the property of others. They turn neighborhoods into slums. They are an enemy to society; worse than any foreign army could destroy. Now I fully support free room and board in concentration camps for all commies.
I suppose landlords should look at condoizing their properties and selling them off, unit by unit, rather than renting them. Of course government will just look at the critical shortage of rental housing and expect to pass big bond issues to build government owned rental housing.
This was blackmail by the supreme court. Shameful! Landlords should only rent to family and friends from now on! Screw tenents and the government. Good luck finding an apartment
That sounds crazy to me' having landlords pay relocation fees for tenants renting their properties. I would think as long as landlords give tenants enough time to find another apartment, whatever that would look like, landlords should NOT be forced to pay relocation fees. The U.S. has gone crazy!! BTW, I am not a landlord. I have only one property with a mortgage, that I live in.
@@truther001 riiiiiighhhhtttt. Not in New York either but I managed to get rid of non bill paying ass tenants quick fast. Came at them with a different angle you see. Once I noticed they weren’t paying that rent I instantly knew there was an issue. In my case I was currently getting a bathroom done in a different unit. These people were extremely ghetto so I really needed a good plan, not the typical one but a plan indeed. I offered to pay for a hotel for a few weeks while I turn “their bathroom” into a dream. Didn’t come at them aggressive or upset. Little did they know I was extremely aggressive and upset. But was absolutely conscious of the temperature with these folks and had to control their mind. Once I convinced them well enough to the point where we were all smiling about the “soon to be changes” they ass was kicked out and they had no clue. Paid for their hotel for about two weeks all the while I was changing things around. In their minds it was a free vacation but in reality they ass was grass. Put all their stuff in storage during that time. They came with the cops a couple of weeks later once they noticed the new locks and it turned into a shouting match. Not with myself and tenants but the tenants and the cops. They saw what I’ve done and swore up and down to the cops that I had done foul play. Knowing the actual people I completely knew they wouldn’t be able to properly articulate themselves to the officers. They were offensive to the point where the officers were disgusted and started to side with me. In this whole process I denied everything they were saying from them currently residing there and even changing the locks.I used them against themselves and turned the system on its head. Everyone is thinking courts or violence while I simply use my mind. Best thing everyone has going for them is their minds, Use it!
Now it’s gonna be,….first month, last month, security, application fees, and whatever the city decides to charge the landlord for moving expenses. That’s what tenants will need to come up with in order to get a place. And if I just gave landlords an idea where they didn’t have one, that’s fine by me.
No one would rent if they needed to pay that much to secure a rental. You do realize that most could probably put a down payment on a house with that kind of money. Why would any fool rent at that steep of price? Use your damn head.
@Talking Crypto It's just foolishness to pay a large lumpsum amount to move into a rental. If a landlord can con some poor sap into doing it I suppose more power to them at that point.
Already illegal to charge over a set amount to move into a rental in most states. California is 3X the rent amount total for an unfurnished rental. 4X if its furnished. Landlords are NOT going to win this war between Landlords and tenants. Because it's a war between Landlords and their government. The tenants are merely spectators.
This is unbelievable! I was sure the Supreme Court would throw that out. This does not look well for the CHIPS lawsuit making it way to the Supreme Court. Landlords should ask for security, 1st month rent, and $6500 for future moving expenses
@@IslamicAmerica550 Define “wrongful eviction.” It’s not wrong to evict for repairs. It’s not wrong to evict to move back into the property. It’s not wrong to evict if the tenant is a nuisance. It’s not wrong to evict to sell the property. It’s not wrong to evict for lack of payment. And you don’t have any valid argument as to why any of those would be wrong,
I guess people will not be satisfied until there are no more properties to rent. Every landlord is not greedy. Many of them are struggling right now but no one ever seems to want the landlord’s side of the story. When all of the so-called “greedy landlords” disappear and take their properties with them, I don’t want to hear any complaining because that’s what the people making the accusations wanted.
I appreciate your comments. And as a landlord I stopped renting out b/c of these laws making us responsible for the many bad. I now see high rents & scarce availability. Now I just hold my ground. It's too risky
In the communist state of Maryland, we have new rules such as delaying by 10 days when a landlord can file a failure to pay rent. Legal assistance is always available to the tenant. The new pro-tenant laws go on and on. As a result, the number of rental units available to rent continues to drop. The monthly rents continue to rise sharply. We have a crisis when it comes to finding available affordable rental housing in Baltimore. In some areas of the state, Landlords can not "discriminate" based on income (read you must take Section 8). Over-regulation and pro-tenant laws are having the opposite effect the politicians expected. It will get a lot worse for the tenant in this woke environment...
The landlord should NOT have to pay a cent IF the tenant is evicted due to a violation in the lease or Failure to pay the rent within legal grace periods which should be at least 14 days (because people only get paid bi-weekly). Or if the tenant moves out voluntarily. However if the tenant is forced to move out due to no fault of their own, Then the landlord should have to pay for reasonable moving expenses. Not tens of thousands of dollars. But enough for a U-haul. (and labor to help with the move if the tenant is elderly) It's not that the tenant is getting paid to move, They are just being reimbursed for an "unexpected" and unnecessary expense! Except it is necessary because the landlord wants them out.
Thankfully I am in Houston! Small landlords need to sell out of these tenant friendly states and cities. Let the big corporate landlords handle the market with super high prices. Let the rental market dry up. Perhaps selling with HIGH INTEREST owner financing and big down payment would be the way to go.
The title is misleading. The Supreme Court has "denied review"; i.e., it has not heard this particular case. Only 1% of cases requesting review by the Supreme Court make it. There are very strict rules to adhere to in order for a case to be heard at the Supreme Court. It is unknown whether the case was denied review because it did not meet that restriction.
Completely unjust. I don’t understand why a landlord should have to pay for relocation fees for their tenant. This is going to force small landlords out leaving most of the property to be owned by large investment firms. Either way the rents are going to go up, how is that a win for tenants rights?
Politicians will never admit their laws have created a shortage of rentals. Politicians will spin it that they have created more single family homes to buy. Shortages, raise rent, and once again the landlord gets blamed.
@@johnniebeavers having empty houses in the UK now attracts 3x the local taxes on those dwellings to leaving them empty is no longer attractive, best to sell up.
It means rents are going to go up, that’s what it means. I’m going to treat this like another capital expenditure and force the tenants to pay their own eventual relocation fee.
What exactly does the government and tenant advocates want from housing providers? More and more restrictions/laws are forcing housing providers to just say F it. What do they want?
Does anyone know if a lease was in effect at the time of the eviction, or not? It seems unlikely that an out-of-state property owner would allow a month to month agreement, but if that's true, then it seems as if the owners returned and asked the tenants to leave despite a lease being in effect. So in that case, the tenant has some rights. But if it was a month to month, then yes of course the owners should simply be able to give the tenant 30 days notice and that's it (the agreement is only for one month at a time). In which case, the tenant should have know that was always a possibility. More details about this case would be very helpful.
Does anyone realize that, without rent control, CA landlords would simply evict tenants at-will, just to make a few upgrades, then just raise the rent on the new tenant? The month-rent fee is to de-incentivize landlords to buck the new rent control system. I'm a landlord and hate the state's rent control (tenant welfare), but I understand this issue and don't think it's totally unfair. I don't know how it would be thousands. I have unit in Orange County that needs rehab. I only lose one-month rent (currently $1750) to evict for rehab purposes. Sounds like a fair exchange for me, to make more future rent while uprooting a 30-year tenant who probably doesn't want to move. Since I am in no hurry, I could just raise the rent each year until it exceeds the market value and makes no sense for the tenant to remain. He's none-too-bright and would probably just pay above-market rent, year after year.
If the rental market in Oakland gets bad enough, maybe it will stop other cities from thinking that they should implement similar laws (like St. Paul, MN)
No, the politicans and city councils are not going to figure this stuff out. Well, maybe a few individuals will. If they had any kind of clue they would be acting differently by now. What will happen is that they will just sit around and invent more rules that will just compound this mess. I bet more than a few landlords are happy. I paid the relocation fee and tenants are now gone. Thank god. I can sell, take my capitol gains and get the hell out.
Just add $6k as a housing stability fund in order to get a lease. Give it some bs woke name and it will be cool. If they move out at endwithout problem the Refund the tenant.
The military should had backed them up where they didn't have to pay. The Supreme Court is not as RESPECTABLE as one would think this shows. The people of these cities and states should fight these laws but DON'T!!!!
There was no new private sector residential rental market at all in the UK from the 1960's to mid 1980's owing to rent control and security of tenure. Those who had regulated tenancies could stay in increasingly worn out dwellings and only left when they died or won the lottery. The tenancy is personal and does not tie to the dwelling. Consequently those renting could not move around for work etc without losing that tenancy. As for new tenants they had to take terrible accommodation on the sly before they could afford to buy. Thatcher freed up the market in the mid 1980's and rentals increased to a normal level in the following 10 years. Legislation is now headed back towards increased regulation until it strangles the rental market once again. My advice is out of residential and into small commercial letting space in stead as it only lightly regulated by laws from the 1950's. While the communists are in power this nonsense will jut get worse.
Tony, you say politicians put out policies that discourage landlords from renting their units. You are correct. Now SF is introducing a law to tax vacant units. Modeling a law in Vancouver. I don't know how SF will enforce those policy. The landlord game isn't fun anymore.
It is just worth it to be a landlord in liberal cities. Here in Miami with our new tenant bill of rights law realtors are aggressively pushing landlords to sell and these units are all being bought by owner occupiers. There will soon be no single family rentals available here. Most landlords are purchasing multi=unit properties in conservative areas of Florida.
Your in the 9TH CIRCUIT and that will work there in the 9th wow Montana is in the 9th there screwed . So these big movies stars that rent there home out to any one will have to pay moving expenses even in Montana. Wyoming is in the tenth there laughing right now .
Maybe there a kind of insurance that would cover it. Otherwise it would be pointless to be a landlord. Too much stacked against the land lord right now. Its like going to a poker game when the other side has all the aces and kings. Probably time to bail. Real estate is getting ready to tank really hard. I wouldn't be surprised if investors are selling short on real estate right now.
stop u whinning in my state u cant just inlegally envict people for no reason if the tenate diddnt do anything clean house all the time n no bother n pays rent on time u lucky u can pay 6 grand to get them out my state u cant do that n useing u service to stop on tennate rights isnt right ethier
I just wanted to tell you that I think you are so right about about everything that you talk about. And I'm not a landlord. I'm a tenant who pays his rent. Even when those moritoriums in place. The reason I'm writing you is the town were talking about Chehalis is pronounced She Hail Us. Chehalis Washington. I live in Spokane WA about 75-80 miles east of the said town and tourist town. I wouldn't live there for anything because of the carelessness of the tourist that doesn't pay attention to the fire laws my belief is that the landlord should exempt from paying for a lazy ass tenant! I feel sorry for them.
I am a little lost here. Was there a lease.. I see no evidence of a lease and apparently the law says "The Ballingers are disappointed that the court failed to recognize that the Oakland law forcing them to pay their software industry tenants $6,500 before they could re-occupy their own home, in accordance with the terms of lease executed before the law was even enacted, is unconstitutional," the foundation said in a comment after the Ninth Circuit ruling four months ago." The people pay an expense to move into a place they have the right to stay there that long. Just because the owner suddenly wants that there is a lease and rules in place. The landlord just can't do things at their convience. Or if they want to they SHOULD have to pay to displace the current tenant because they are making it a burden on the tenant. I don't care how much the tenant earns or makes that is not the issue here. Just because a lease was signed before a law takes effect does not always grandfather in the past conditions. Just like when say marijauna becomes legal in a state they don't let all the pot heads that were convicted in the past go. It doesn't matter a house was built in 1950 before x safety laws apply your insurance company or safety inspector will eventually come around and be like you have to update that for this to sell or be insured. This is no different then a tenant breaking the lease and having to pay the costs of doing so. Hey if you want the house back NOW.. well it is only right that you pay to move the tenant out. If its month to month lease.. Give them their 30 days notice and stay in short term housing ... You signed a contract as a Landlord. YOU ALSO HAVE TO FOLLOW THE RULES.
SCOTUS didn't even take this case, they just lost in all the lower courts. You're forcing someone out of their home instead of extending the lease for your convenience. You absolutely SHOULD be paying a fee for that. Everyone knows that law is on the books. Don't like it, don't be a landlord.
@@RealEstateAndLandlordNews That's not what I said at all. Of course owners have rights to their property. After all, they got it back didn't they? All I'm saying is that they knew this law was in place. Even if they didn't, that's still their fault. A Tennant can't trash a place, then show up in court saying saying they didn't know they'd be liable for damages as a defense. Only police officers get to use ignorance of the law as an excuse lol. Laws exist. There's plenty I don't like myself. I still follow them.
It's not the tenants house hunn, Do you need to be reeducated? The greedy city officials will take the landlords house when the bill stops. Think a little Einstein! Forever renter
Nobody should rents. Let's them greedy property owners get fines for vacant or abandoned properties. If those greedy property owners vacant more than 24 hours, the new dwellers can use adverse possession with quick deeds titles claim for becoming new property owners. When greedy property owed any money to fines or fees, they shall foreclosures properties to new property owners. Nobody shall rents and everyone will have a home. Rent is slave. Abolished all rents and slave. Everyone shall lives freely and enjoy their freedom.
@@Dc-sl3up Since you care so much about homeless people and want to stick it to greedy property owners, why don't you buy properties and let people live in them for free?
We need to bring greedy property owners to justices and force greedy property owners to pay tenant to watch their property. We love abandoned and vacant property with fast track adverse possession with quick deeds titles claim. We need Islamic Emirate states of America with sharia constitution now.
@@kpackard1 why I need to leave. I'm native Americans. Yes I love God and want to live in God ways. All you criminals hates God so you dont want Islamic Emirate states of America with sharia constitution.
I just relocated a tenant yesterday afternoon....their shit was set out to the curb at my expense!!
Ridiculous, get out of that market and sell. Get out!!!
Its seems like you dont like the us supreme court laws and ruling. That's why we need sharia laws.
We need Islamic Emirate states of America with sharia constitution now.
Some landlords live in duplexes or owner occupied buildings. They don't want to landlord, they just want to stay in the homes that they and their families have lived in for decades. For some landlords, it isn't a market, it is just their home. I wish it was as easy as just selling a liquid asset.
@@WhistlesToAnimals they dont need more house. I will make laws living in or lose it. Stop those greedy criminals property owners and save lives.
@@Dc-sl3up When I heard that the Nazis used to put commies in concentration camps, I thought that was quite harsh just for having a difference of opinion on how to govern the country. Then I began to understand that communists are parasites that live off of others' wealth and hard fought gains. Then I realized that the communists terrorize cities with false flag operations and destroy property to get their way. They are vandals that have no regard for property because they have no property. They hold property for ransom and hijack the property of others. They turn neighborhoods into slums. They are an enemy to society; worse than any foreign army could destroy. Now I fully support free room and board in concentration camps for all commies.
@@WhistlesToAnimals I wish them the best. But when tenants are paying rent, it creates a problem of taxes not being paid.
Great content keep up the good work
Holy moo, That’s insane!
Beware landlords! Get rid of those many bad tenants & if you can afford it, don't rent out.
I suppose landlords should look at condoizing their properties and selling them off, unit by unit, rather than renting them.
Of course government will just look at the critical shortage of rental housing and expect to pass big bond issues to build government owned rental housing.
America is truly falling apart, I'm listening to this article, n I'm amazed...Landlords paying the tenants
Do you bosd paid u be at work. Property watcher is a job
And it's being done deliberately too crash this economy
You voted for it.
Extortion... Extortion... Extortion..
This was blackmail by the supreme court. Shameful! Landlords should only rent to family and friends from now on! Screw tenents and the government. Good luck finding an apartment
I agree no wonder they are shortage on housing.
Family and friends can be just as bad and demanding - it’s why many have a policy of NOT renting to family and friends.
@@stevebabiak6997 When the state that I live in start making it to where tentants have more rights than landlords my will either be empty or sold
FaMily and friends are the biggest liability to a landlord.
@@eln0n01 not anymore!
The relocation fee should only be in effect for those who moved into the property after the law in in effect...
That sounds crazy to me' having landlords pay relocation fees for tenants renting their properties. I would think as long as landlords give tenants enough time to find another apartment, whatever that would look like, landlords should NOT be forced to pay relocation fees. The U.S. has gone crazy!! BTW, I am not a landlord. I have only one property with a mortgage, that I live in.
I’m a landlord and if they ain’t paying they gots to go. No sympathy for none of them. My bills don’t sympathize with me so no time for the nonsense
@@ashbennett261 I get it, I really do.
@@ashbennett261 Not in California.
@@truther001 riiiiiighhhhtttt. Not in New York either but I managed to get rid of non bill paying ass tenants quick fast. Came at them with a different angle you see. Once I noticed they weren’t paying that rent I instantly knew there was an issue. In my case I was currently getting a bathroom done in a different unit. These people were extremely ghetto so I really needed a good plan, not the typical one but a plan indeed. I offered to pay for a hotel for a few weeks while I turn “their bathroom” into a dream. Didn’t come at them aggressive or upset. Little did they know I was extremely aggressive and upset. But was absolutely conscious of the temperature with these folks and had to control their mind. Once I convinced them well enough to the point where we were all smiling about the “soon to be changes” they ass was kicked out and they had no clue. Paid for their hotel for about two weeks all the while I was changing things around. In their minds it was a free vacation but in reality they ass was grass. Put all their stuff in storage during that time. They came with the cops a couple of weeks later once they noticed the new locks and it turned into a shouting match. Not with myself and tenants but the tenants and the cops. They saw what I’ve done and swore up and down to the cops that I had done foul play. Knowing the actual people I completely knew they wouldn’t be able to properly articulate themselves to the officers. They were offensive to the point where the officers were disgusted and started to side with me. In this whole process I denied everything they were saying from them currently residing there and even changing the locks.I used them against themselves and turned the system on its head. Everyone is thinking courts or violence while I simply use my mind. Best thing everyone has going for them is their minds, Use it!
Now it’s gonna be,….first month, last month, security, application fees, and whatever the city decides to charge the landlord for moving expenses. That’s what tenants will need to come up with in order to get a place. And if I just gave landlords an idea where they didn’t have one, that’s fine by me.
No one would rent if they needed to pay that much to secure a rental. You do realize that most could probably put a down payment on a house with that kind of money. Why would any fool rent at that steep of price? Use your damn head.
@Talking Crypto It's just foolishness to pay a large lumpsum amount to move into a rental. If a landlord can con some poor sap into doing it I suppose more power to them at that point.
Already illegal to charge over a set amount to move into a rental in most states. California is 3X the rent amount total for an unfurnished rental. 4X if its furnished. Landlords are NOT going to win this war between Landlords and tenants. Because it's a war between Landlords and their government. The tenants are merely spectators.
@@davidsine4390 Maybe they shouldn’t be. Maybe they’re being swindled by the same people.
@@natrixxvision6997 Good point.
This is unbelievable! I was sure the Supreme Court would throw that out. This does not look well for the CHIPS lawsuit making it way to the Supreme Court.
Landlords should ask for security, 1st month rent, and $6500 for future moving expenses
Yea and we can sue 10x much for wrongful eviction or illegal deposit
Yes, landlords will have to ask for other fees upon move in to make up for this and raise the rent higher
@@musictosoothe yes ask for billion$ per month and see who rent. Lol enjoy non stop taxes and fee expanses.
Hey I was wondering how landlords would deal with this ruling in places like Oakland. That’s pretty good. My hats off to you for that one.
@@IslamicAmerica550 Define “wrongful eviction.” It’s not wrong to evict for repairs. It’s not wrong to evict to move back into the property. It’s not wrong to evict if the tenant is a nuisance. It’s not wrong to evict to sell the property. It’s not wrong to evict for lack of payment. And you don’t have any valid argument as to why any of those would be wrong,
I guess people will not be satisfied until there are no more properties to rent. Every landlord is not greedy. Many of them are struggling right now but no one ever seems to want the landlord’s side of the story. When all of the so-called “greedy landlords” disappear and take their properties with them, I don’t want to hear any complaining because that’s what the people making the accusations wanted.
I appreciate your comments. And as a landlord I stopped renting out b/c of these laws making us responsible for the many bad. I now see high rents & scarce availability. Now I just hold my ground. It's too risky
In the communist state of Maryland, we have new rules such as delaying by 10 days when a landlord can file a failure to pay rent. Legal assistance is always available to the tenant. The new pro-tenant laws go on and on. As a result, the number of rental units available to rent continues to drop. The monthly rents continue to rise sharply. We have a crisis when it comes to finding available affordable rental housing in Baltimore. In some areas of the state, Landlords can not "discriminate" based on income (read you must take Section 8). Over-regulation and pro-tenant laws are having the opposite effect the politicians expected. It will get a lot worse for the tenant in this woke environment...
Oh they expected it. The jist is that the larger investment groups buyout the smaller landlords. The tenant doesn't get it.
The landlord should NOT have to pay a cent IF the tenant is evicted due to a violation in the lease or Failure to pay the rent within legal grace periods which should be at least 14 days (because people only get paid bi-weekly). Or if the tenant moves out voluntarily. However if the tenant is forced to move out due to no fault of their own, Then the landlord should have to pay for reasonable moving expenses. Not tens of thousands of dollars. But enough for a U-haul. (and labor to help with the move if the tenant is elderly) It's not that the tenant is getting paid to move, They are just being reimbursed for an "unexpected" and unnecessary expense! Except it is necessary because the landlord wants them out.
Agreed.
Ridiculous. Save up your own moving fees. I own but live in a rental in another city. Should my tenants pay my relocation fees when I have to move?
Thankfully I am in Houston! Small landlords need to sell out of these tenant friendly states and cities. Let the big corporate landlords handle the market with super high prices. Let the rental market dry up. Perhaps selling with HIGH INTEREST owner financing and big down payment would be the way to go.
They are not tenant friendly. This is just another step toward communism, turning tenants against landlords.
The title is misleading. The Supreme Court has "denied review"; i.e., it has not heard this particular case. Only 1% of cases requesting review by the Supreme Court make it. There are very strict rules to adhere to in order for a case to be heard at the Supreme Court. It is unknown whether the case was denied review because it did not meet that restriction.
Completely unjust. I don’t understand why a landlord should have to pay for relocation fees for their tenant. This is going to force small landlords out leaving most of the property to be owned by large investment firms. Either way the rents are going to go up, how is that a win for tenants rights?
Politicians will never admit their laws have created a shortage of rentals. Politicians will spin it that they have created more single family homes to buy. Shortages, raise rent, and once again the landlord gets blamed.
Glad I don't live in this state. I would sell all mine or let them set empty.
@@johnniebeavers having empty houses in the UK now attracts 3x the local taxes on those dwellings to leaving them empty is no longer attractive, best to sell up.
@@brianlopez8855 I don't live in the UK. I guess in the UK its best to sell your rentals
Get a real job
I have a job. It's nonprofit serving the poor without pension so i had to invest so i will have some income. No one can live on social security.
It means rents are going to go up, that’s what it means. I’m going to treat this like another capital expenditure and force the tenants to pay their own eventual relocation fee.
Good luck on that pal.
@@murrproductions9654 Don't need luck. The market will force it to occur.
Don’t rent in Oakland in the first place.
What exactly does the government and tenant advocates want from housing providers?
More and more restrictions/laws are forcing housing providers to just say F it.
What do they want?
They want totally free housing …
It is time to be digging graves in the back yard!
Does anyone know if a lease was in effect at the time of the eviction, or not? It seems unlikely that an out-of-state property owner would allow a month to month agreement, but if that's true, then it seems as if the owners returned and asked the tenants to leave despite a lease being in effect. So in that case, the tenant has some rights. But if it was a month to month, then yes of course the owners should simply be able to give the tenant 30 days notice and that's it (the agreement is only for one month at a time). In which case, the tenant should have know that was always a possibility. More details about this case would be very helpful.
Wait, Tony, you don't get a bonus or an award for leaving as a renter in someone's property? lol We are living in clown country.
Go resign city officials!!
Does anyone realize that, without rent control, CA landlords would simply evict tenants at-will, just to make a few upgrades, then just raise the rent on the new tenant? The month-rent fee is to de-incentivize landlords to buck the new rent control system. I'm a landlord and hate the state's rent control (tenant welfare), but I understand this issue and don't think it's totally unfair. I don't know how it would be thousands. I have unit in Orange County that needs rehab. I only lose one-month rent (currently $1750) to evict for rehab purposes. Sounds like a fair exchange for me, to make more future rent while uprooting a 30-year tenant who probably doesn't want to move. Since I am in no hurry, I could just raise the rent each year until it exceeds the market value and makes no sense for the tenant to remain. He's none-too-bright and would probably just pay above-market rent, year after year.
HITTING HARD 😎
If the rental market in Oakland gets bad enough, maybe it will stop other cities from thinking that they should implement similar laws (like St. Paul, MN)
No, the politicans and city councils are not going to figure this stuff out. Well, maybe a few individuals will. If they had any kind of clue they would be acting differently by now. What will happen is that they will just sit around and invent more rules that will just compound this mess. I bet more than a few landlords are happy. I paid the relocation fee and tenants are now gone. Thank god. I can sell, take my capitol gains and get the hell out.
lol @ getting the hell out. Good idea.
Go resign them and don't vote for them.
Just add $6k as a housing stability fund in order to get a lease. Give it some bs woke name and it will be cool. If they move out at endwithout problem the Refund the tenant.
Prohibited in my state. You can only raise the rent
The military should had backed them up where they didn't have to pay. The Supreme Court is not as RESPECTABLE as one would think this shows. The people of these cities and states should fight these laws but DON'T!!!!
There was no new private sector residential rental market at all in the UK from the 1960's to mid 1980's owing to rent control and security of tenure. Those who had regulated tenancies could stay in increasingly worn out dwellings and only left when they died or won the lottery. The tenancy is personal and does not tie to the dwelling. Consequently those renting could not move around for work etc without losing that tenancy. As for new tenants they had to take terrible accommodation on the sly before they could afford to buy. Thatcher freed up the market in the mid 1980's and rentals increased to a normal level in the following 10 years. Legislation is now headed back towards increased regulation until it strangles the rental market once again. My advice is out of residential and into small commercial letting space in stead as it only lightly regulated by laws from the 1950's. While the communists are in power this nonsense will jut get worse.
Thats why I won't rent my property your responsible for the tents thats some bullshit I didn't take them to raise I'm not thier dad
Tony, you say politicians put out policies that discourage landlords from renting their units. You are correct. Now SF is introducing a law to tax vacant units. Modeling a law in Vancouver. I don't know how SF will enforce those policy. The landlord game isn't fun anymore.
Than go resign the city officials!!
"Rent" it to your brother for a dollar
Glad they lost they everyone should be payed to forcefully leave. .
It's not the tenants house stupidddd
Good news, make all greedy property owners pay.
karma
The tenant didn’t pass the law jack
It is just worth it to be a landlord in liberal cities. Here in Miami with our new tenant bill of rights law realtors are aggressively pushing landlords to sell and these units are all being bought by owner occupiers. There will soon be no single family rentals available here. Most landlords are purchasing multi=unit properties in conservative areas of Florida.
Where are the conservative areas of Florida?
Your in the 9TH CIRCUIT and that will work there in the 9th wow Montana is in the 9th there screwed . So these big movies stars that rent there home out to any one will have to pay moving expenses even in Montana. Wyoming is in the tenth there laughing right now .
I would make that property unlivable, so that the scambag move out on his own
Oh so landlords are supposed keep everybody up this is going to cause more homeless. if I was these landlords I would counter sue.
Maybe there a kind of insurance that would cover it. Otherwise it would be pointless to be a landlord. Too much stacked against the land lord right now. Its like going to a poker game when the other side has all the aces and kings. Probably time to bail. Real estate is getting ready to tank really hard. I wouldn't be surprised if investors are selling short on real estate right now.
stop u whinning in my state u cant just inlegally envict people for no reason if the tenate diddnt do anything clean house all the time n no bother n pays rent on time u lucky u can pay 6 grand to get them out my state u cant do that n useing u service to stop on tennate rights isnt right ethier
:P
It's not your house hunn
I just wanted to tell you that I think you are so right about about everything that you talk about. And I'm not a landlord. I'm a tenant who pays his rent. Even when those moritoriums in place. The reason I'm writing you is the town were talking about Chehalis is pronounced She Hail Us. Chehalis Washington. I live in Spokane WA about 75-80 miles east of the said town and tourist town. I wouldn't live there for anything because of the carelessness of the tourist that doesn't pay attention to the fire laws my belief is that the landlord should exempt from paying for a lazy ass tenant! I feel sorry for them.
I am a little lost here. Was there a lease.. I see no evidence of a lease and apparently the law says
"The Ballingers are disappointed that the court failed to recognize that the Oakland law forcing them to pay their software industry tenants $6,500 before they could re-occupy their own home, in accordance with the terms of lease executed before the law was even enacted, is unconstitutional," the foundation said in a comment after the Ninth Circuit ruling four months ago."
The people pay an expense to move into a place they have the right to stay there that long. Just because the owner suddenly wants that there is a lease and rules in place. The landlord just can't do things at their convience. Or if they want to they SHOULD have to pay to displace the current tenant because they are making it a burden on the tenant. I don't care how much the tenant earns or makes that is not the issue here.
Just because a lease was signed before a law takes effect does not always grandfather in the past conditions. Just like when say marijauna becomes legal in a state they don't let all the pot heads that were convicted in the past go. It doesn't matter a house was built in 1950 before x safety laws apply your insurance company or safety inspector will eventually come around and be like you have to update that for this to sell or be insured.
This is no different then a tenant breaking the lease and having to pay the costs of doing so. Hey if you want the house back NOW.. well it is only right that you pay to move the tenant out. If its month to month lease.. Give them their 30 days notice and stay in short term housing ... You signed a contract as a Landlord. YOU ALSO HAVE TO FOLLOW THE RULES.
SCOTUS didn't even take this case, they just lost in all the lower courts.
You're forcing someone out of their home instead of extending the lease for your convenience. You absolutely SHOULD be paying a fee for that. Everyone knows that law is on the books. Don't like it, don't be a landlord.
So by your logic the property owner has no rights to their own property?
@@RealEstateAndLandlordNews That's not what I said at all. Of course owners have rights to their property. After all, they got it back didn't they?
All I'm saying is that they knew this law was in place. Even if they didn't, that's still their fault. A Tennant can't trash a place, then show up in court saying saying they didn't know they'd be liable for damages as a defense. Only police officers get to use ignorance of the law as an excuse lol.
Laws exist. There's plenty I don't like myself. I still follow them.
Fix your damn sound levels this is unlistenable
Boo hoo 😢 about time the law works in favor for the little people. Aka most of America. 👊🏽
forever renter
What y’all crying about now? lol
Teenager
This stops greedy evil landlords with no heart that throw people out even thou they pay rent
It's not the tenants house hunn, Do you need to be reeducated? The greedy city officials will take the landlords house when the bill stops. Think a little Einstein! Forever renter
Nobody should rents. Let's them greedy property owners get fines for vacant or abandoned properties. If those greedy property owners vacant more than 24 hours, the new dwellers can use adverse possession with quick deeds titles claim for becoming new property owners. When greedy property owed any money to fines or fees, they shall foreclosures properties to new property owners. Nobody shall rents and everyone will have a home.
Rent is slave. Abolished all rents and slave. Everyone shall lives freely and enjoy their freedom.
U must not be paying rent...smh
@@dennmmmy I dont have rent. I am not stupid victim of greedy property owners criminal
@@Dc-sl3up Since you care so much about homeless people and want to stick it to greedy property owners, why don't you buy properties and let people live in them for free?
@@AWomansView2 +
Every one should live rent free,only greedy assholes have a problem with this
We need to bring greedy property owners to justices and force greedy property owners to pay tenant to watch their property.
We love abandoned and vacant property with fast track adverse possession with quick deeds titles claim.
We need Islamic Emirate states of America with sharia constitution now.
If you like the Islamic Emirate so much why don't you go back there and stay there
@@kpackard1 why I need to leave. I'm native Americans. Yes I love God and want to live in God ways. All you criminals hates God so you dont want Islamic Emirate states of America with sharia constitution.
We need to have " tenants" to go to College , Save money,stop using Drugs and Alcohol, and put renters back in school so they can get a JOB.
@@israeliteonlycampkilluhi.o2108 any college will do, even if it’s a technical college. Or they could become a trucker or look for a decent job.
You need to buy your own place to live. I"m glad that is not going on where I live. Landlords don't owe others a living