Yikes. Squatters' rights? Homeowner forced out of home in dispute with unwanted guests

[underpants]

LOUISVILLE, Ky. (WAVE/Gray News) - A Kentucky homeowner says he has been forced out of his own home after letting some guests stay in his garage while they fixed their car.

“[They] were working on the car for days in the driveway, I didn’t want to throw them out on the street. I was just trying to be kind,” he said.

Toma said they started getting mail, had Spectrum cable installed and even changed the lock on his garage without any type of rental agreement between them.

Sencuk and one of Toma’s roommates got into a fight. Sencuk then filed an emergency protective order against Toma, which a judge granted, forcing him to stay 500 feet away from them or his house.


https://www.foxcarolina.com/2024/09/13/squatters-rights-homeowner-forced-out-home-dispute-with-unwanted-guests/

[North Shore Chicago]

1. THIS is fucking insane!

The road to hell is filled with good intentions could not be any more true!

[flying_wahini]

2. I'll tell you how to deal with these people. If you are there you just happen to notice that the garage door has a

Part that needs replaced and you REMOVE it. The door too won’t close or lock so you REMOVE it.
Don’t return for a few weeks. They will leave.

[marybourg]

5. That's what the temporary order is intended to prevent.

[ScratchCat]

3. This involves stupidity, not "squatters"

I see the source is Fox. They can't get enough of the "squatter" nonsense.

[underpants]

8. I heard this on a radio show (not talk radio) and it's the best link

To try to capture the story in 4 paragraphs (DU rule)

[EYESORE 9001]

9. A Fox network affiliate station produced this story - not Fox News

Big difference. Unless it’s a Fox affiliate station owned by Sinclair Broadcasting, in which case it’s possible they are catapulting the propaganda.

[Ms. Toad]

14. The problem isn't Fox -

It is reporters (generally - not specific to Fox) not taking the time to understand legal concepts before they write the story. The same term is used in numerous versions of this story. When you grant someone permission to live in your space, they aren't squatters - and, depending on the law of the state, at some point you have to formally evict them in order to get them out. It makes no difference, in most states, if they are paying rent or not.

And, FWIW, that includes boyfriends/girlfriends - if you are the party on the lease/title and you let your partner stay with you, you should count on having to evict them if the relationship ends.

[marybourg]

4. This is not a squatters rights situation. The facts are all wrong for a squatter.

This is a tenant’s rights temporary order until the facts can be ascertained.

[ExciteBike66]

6. "Squatters rights" do not exist...

The problem here and elsewhere is that the people claim to be lawful tenants, and the justice system has to determine if that is correct (which takes lots of time).

Can't just have cops throw out tenants on the whim of the landlord, that is exactly what the law is supposed to prevent.

[intheflow]

10. Except that these people have no legal right to his garage.

They don't have a lease. There is no agreement between the parties. The homeowner is not a landlord.

[Ms. Toad]

15. Under the law, the homeowner is a landlord.

They were granted permission to stay in the garage. For purposes of tenants' rights, that makes them a tenant. There doesn't have to be a formal agreement. There doesn't have to be rent paid. If they are there initially with the consent of the landlord they are tenants, and are entitled to stay until evicted. In most states, absent a formal lease, they are month-to-month tenants. (The landlord may have rights to compensation for the period of time they remained after he decided he no longer wanted them there; those rights would be stronger if he had informed them that as of X date they needed to pay rent - and then he could simply evict them for non-payment of rent. (Since the term of the rental is likely month-to-month, all he would need to do to start charging rent is to inform them before the first of the month; their continued presence will be deemed consent to the new terms.))

[intheflow]

16. So isn't he evicting them now?

By your own reasoning, they "they are there initially with the consent of the landlord they are tenants, and are entitled to stay until evicted." He's evicting them and they're not leaving. I don't understand what point you're trying to make here.

[Ms. Toad]

21. The article I read didn't say anything about him initiating a court action to evict them.

It said he gave them a 30-day notice. Some sort of notice is mandatory in most states before the eviction process (a formal court process) can be initiated. (In Ohio it is a 3-day notice.) If he has filed an action for forcible entry and detainer (eviction), then once the eviction is complete they can be removed from the home by the sheriff. But until then, he cannot interfere with their possessory rights in the property.

The simplest eviction (aside from the peak of COVID) is for non-payment of rent. Currently, they aren't paying rent - and have no obligation to do so. So the landlord needs to notify them that as of Oct 1, the rent is $5000 (or whatever). When they don't pay rent, he gives them the statutory notice, then begins the court proceeding to evict them.

The point is that until the termination of the forcible detainer action, they are not squatters. They are tenants. They are entitled to the rights associated with being tenants. Including the right to be free from interference in their possessory rights to the home.

(And it's not my reasoning, that's the law in most states. You have to give notice the tenancy is being terminated; if they don't leave voluntarily you have to go to court to evict them - and you can remove them from the property only after the court process is completed.)

[Abolishinist]

17. That's right. I have a friend who allowed a person

he knew to stay in his condo for free. At the time he traveled a lot and had several pets. In return, she was to take care of his pets and maintain the house. This went on for years, but she wasn't that good with the pets, and messed up the place instead of keeping it clean. A very long story short, it took him over a year and thousands of dollars to stop her from living there, so the month-month thing doesn't always work. I told him, why not just change the locks? but that apparently would have made his legal situation even worse.

There are many similar stories out there, it seems certain groups know exactly what to do to enable this to happen for their benefit.

[Ms. Toad]

23. Yup.

That's why I suggested instituting a rent as of the beginning of the next month. It is the easiest way to evict. But yes, landlord-tenant law is not always kind to the kind-hearted landlord who is just trying to be helpful.

[underpants]

19. This guy was renting. He didn't own the home.

Mr. Toma mentioned in the article. I don’t know if that makes a difference. Thanks for the info I appreciate it.

[Ms. Toad]

25. It may mean he is in more trouble.

Formally, what he was doing is sub-leasing. Most rental agreements prohibit sub-leasing - so he could end up having his own lease terminated by his landlord for sub-leasing the garage.

[OLDMDDEM]

7. That us absurd.

[chowder66]

11. I would think a garage is prohibited as any kind of rental unit unless it was renovated

according to approved permits and given the green light for habitation.

[Jack Valentino]

27. I was just thinking that myself-- in Michigan a garage wouldn't be approved for habitation,

without having been renovated into actual living space...

[TheBlackAdder]

12. Why did Spectrum install cable without checking with the property owner first?

[underpants]

18. I don't know. The Toma guy was renting with his friends

he didn’t own the house

[Abolishinist]

24. According to the article, Toma was the owner. He did have several roommates as well.

"A Kentucky homeowner says he has been forced out of his own home after letting some guests stay in his garage while they fixed their car.

Daniel Toma says the guests ended up staying three months and a court order has now taken him out of his house."

[underpants]

26. As I heard it on the radio he was renting

[Trueblue1968]

13. In a red stage !!!!!!!!

[Marthe48]

22. My friend let her adult son stay with her in her house

He was an abusive alcoholic and refused to leave. He was there long enough to get mail and legal protection from being told to leave. She called police, protective services and other senior support, who said she had to legally evict him. She ended up selling the house and moving across town to a smaller place. It wasn't roomy enough for him, and he bounced back to a girl friend in another state. He came back again and actually rented his own place.