- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Big Ron squatters law in Florida first in the US outstanding .
Posted on 3/29/24 at 1:14 am
Posted on 3/29/24 at 1:14 am
Governor Big Ron DeSantis Squatters law in Florida first in the US a blessing to keep the trash from invading citizens property . Also law enforcement will throw the scums bags out and prosecute .
8
Posted on 3/29/24 at 4:19 am to Mr Cell Phone
This reads like a reply instead of an OP.
Can we get any sort of a details?
Can we get any sort of a details?
Posted on 3/29/24 at 5:04 am to pankReb
I'll agree with you, Pank Reb on this one. Classic drunk post.
Posted on 3/29/24 at 5:37 am to pankReb
The Florida Legislature just passed a new law, and DeSantis did sign it.
Bill Text:
LINK
Reporting: LINK . LINK
The bill was filed all the way back in November, and it has just now worked its way through the process.
if a property owner contends that someone is “squatting“ on his property, he can “fill out a form“ and have law enforcement officials remove the “squatter” immediately.
It does not seem to apply either to actual tenants or holdover tenants. It creates a misdemeanor offense if a person in possession of the property presents a falsified lease or related document.
it does not seem to allow the sheriff to leave the purported tenant in possession, even if the reported tenant provides a copy of a lease. Instead, it gives the purported tenant a civil action for wrongfully eviction.
in other words, so long as the property owner signs a complaint claiming that there is no lease, removal is basically automatic. The person in possession seems to have no option other than “after the fact” lawsuit to establish that he was indeed entitled to possession.
Bill Text:
LINK
Reporting: LINK . LINK
The bill was filed all the way back in November, and it has just now worked its way through the process.
if a property owner contends that someone is “squatting“ on his property, he can “fill out a form“ and have law enforcement officials remove the “squatter” immediately.
It does not seem to apply either to actual tenants or holdover tenants. It creates a misdemeanor offense if a person in possession of the property presents a falsified lease or related document.
it does not seem to allow the sheriff to leave the purported tenant in possession, even if the reported tenant provides a copy of a lease. Instead, it gives the purported tenant a civil action for wrongfully eviction.
in other words, so long as the property owner signs a complaint claiming that there is no lease, removal is basically automatic. The person in possession seems to have no option other than “after the fact” lawsuit to establish that he was indeed entitled to possession.
This post was edited on 3/29/24 at 6:13 am
Posted on 3/29/24 at 6:31 am to Mr Cell Phone
Should not FL law enforcement have already been doing this? The law is all fine and good, but should not the cops and judges have already been doing this? Adverse Possession really should have only applied to long term occupants living on a property for long periods under very specific circumstances .
Posted on 3/29/24 at 6:40 am to KiwiHead
quote:The perceived problem was that Florida law did not provide this sort of “near immediate“ relief. Property owners had to pursue a formal eviction lawsuit to remove people from their property.
Should not FL law enforcement have already been doing this? The law is all fine and good, but should not the cops and judges have already been doing this? Adverse Possession really should have only applied to long term occupants living on a property for long periods under very specific circumstances .
I just skimmed this bill, rather than reading it in depth, but it could be very problematic.
The property owner could demand that the sheriff remove tenant from his property, and it looks to me as if the sheriff would simply be required to do so, even if the reported tenant shows the sheriff a written lease.
The ACTUAL, contractual tenant”s only relief would be later filing a lawsuit for wrongful eviction. That private cause of action is all well and good, but it doesn’t put a roof over the heads of that family.
Posted on 3/29/24 at 6:47 am to MarquisHenri
quote:
The perceived problem was that Florida law did not provide this sort of “near immediate“ relief. Property owners had to pursue a formal eviction lawsuit to remove people from their property.
I just skimmed this bill, rather than reading it in depth, but it could be very problematic.
The property owner could demand that the sheriff remove tenant from his property, and it looks to me as if the sheriff would simply be required to do so, even if the reported tenant shows the sheriff a written lease.
The ACTUAL, contractual tenant”s only relief would be later filing a lawsuit for wrongful eviction. That private cause of action is all well and good, but it doesn’t put a roof over the heads of that family.
The law likely covers a situation some may not have considered. What if someone leases my beach house, which rents by the week, for 10K per week May 7-13, and I have a full calendar of renters all summer. I need the rental income to pay my mortgage.
Now, my May 7-13 renter decides they just love the view, and wants to squat there until October. Without this law, maybe they do just that, and deprive me of my income and deprive my guests of their planned summer vacation, and my house goes to the bank because some dirtbag just liked the view.
Posted on 3/29/24 at 6:47 am to KiwiHead
quote:
Should not FL law enforcement have already been doing this?
There are issues where tenets can legally withhold rent if owners are not doing necessary repairs or other things.
The law seemingly allows the owners the ability to kick people out who have a valid lease.
Perhaps just the way it's being reported but I would like additional information.
As long as protections are there for actual renters, I'm good with it however.
Also not a lawyer so interested to hear what lawyers have to say.
Posted on 3/29/24 at 7:21 am to OccamsStubble
quote:Most places, you can have an eviction judgment in two or three weeks. The holdover tenant (defendant) can then retain possession only by paying the contractual rent into the court registry. That is certainly an inconvenience to your other tenants, but you do eventually get paid.
What if someone leases my beach house, which rents by the week, for 10K per week May 7-13, and I have a full calendar of renters all summer. I need the rental income to pay my mortgage. Now, my May 7-13 renter decides they just love the view, and wants to squat there until October. Without this law, maybe they do just that, and deprive me of my income and deprive my guests of their planned summer vacation, and my house goes to the bank because some dirtbag just liked the view.
That system is not perfect by any means, but it is something that has developed over a period of centuries as a practical solution to a complex problem. it tries to provide some protections to both parties, until the merits of the matter can be resolved.
By contrast, this new legislation strikes me as a knee-jerk reaction and entirely one-sided.
Posted on 3/29/24 at 7:26 am to thetempleowl
quote:
Also not a lawyer so interested to hear what lawyers have to say.
I’m not - too many lawyers use situations like this to churn fees
Posted on 3/29/24 at 7:28 am to MarquisHenri
quote:
Most places, you can have an eviction judgment in two or three weeks
Meh, the eviction process in many many places is ridiculously long and drawn out.
Posted on 3/29/24 at 7:33 am to MarquisHenri
quote:
That is certainly an inconvenience to your other tenants, but you do eventually get paid.
unless they are broke arse illegals.
Posted on 3/29/24 at 7:35 am to Mr Cell Phone
Boots
Posted on 3/29/24 at 7:36 am to thetempleowl
I am a recovering attorney and I haven't read the bill. My complaint, if you call it a complaint, was that it was probably addressing a problem that was largely irrelevant and we were taking isolated instances and introducing overkill. Which according to another poster is what could happen to persons who are non squatters with valid leases. Like I said, have not read the bill.....also don't know the extent of the problem the new law was to remedy.
Posted on 3/29/24 at 7:39 am to 1loyalbamafan
quote:If the defendant is a “broke arse illegal,” he will not have the funds to pay contractual rent into the court registry during the eviction proceeding, and he will thus be removed from the property. What is your point?
That is certainly an inconvenience to your other tenants, but you do eventually get paid.quote:
unless they are broke arse illegals.
Posted on 3/29/24 at 7:52 am to MarquisHenri
quote:
this new legislation strikes me as a knee-jerk reaction and entirely one-sided.
Why?
This is a great piece of legislation considering the growing trend of squatting.
Posted on 3/29/24 at 7:58 am to MarquisHenri
If you don’t own the house and are told to leave, you should leave. If you don’t want that to happen, buy a house. What is so hard about this? There should be penalties for breaking contracts but tenants should not have more rights than owners.
Posted on 3/29/24 at 8:00 am to Drizzt
This new guy posts like a bleeding heart democrat.
Anything that’s going to create consequences may be problematic for him.
Anything that’s going to create consequences may be problematic for him.
Posted on 3/29/24 at 8:05 am to roadGator
quote:I will not argue that in some states the eviction process is more expensive and time-consuming than it should be. To my knowledge, Florida is not such a state.
this new legislation strikes me as a knee-jerk reaction and entirely one-sided.quote:
Why? This is a great piece of legislation considering the growing trend of squatting.
As a general rule, eviction lawsuits are intended to balance the rights of both the landlord and alleged tenant, until the merits of the case can be decided, including payment of interim rent into the court registry.
Feel free to disagree, but it strikes me that a process which allows for summary eviction of a person waving a copy of his lease at the sheriff is a bit more solution than is warranted by the problem.
Posted on 3/29/24 at 8:07 am to MarquisHenri
quote:
That private cause of action is all well and good, but it doesn’t put a roof over the heads of that family.
They should go kick the asses of some squatters while they wait for the legal process to work. Squatters starting to get out of control is why this bill has happened in the first place, so don't blame the reactions of property owners and the legislature/governor, blame the a-hole squatters who created the mess this bill is intended to fix.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News