New Zealand Squatter says to Landlord, “I’ll pay the rent if you take off your pants”

Yes, you heard that right.  In New Zealand, a property owner dealing with squatter subletters has been told that she will only get the rent if she takes her pants off.

The owner’s $2 million dollar home has been reduced to a pig sty, and she’s struggled to get the illegal squatters out.  After she finally managed to evict the tenants, she found that the tenants had in turn sublet the place to others, and now she was faced with the daunting prospect of engaging in yet another long court process to get those squatters out.

When the news meda entered the property with the owner,  two bedrooms were padlocked, one was vacant and a woman was in the fourth bedroom.

The woman said she was a friend of one of the occupants and had just moved in.

She said she didn’t know how many people were living in the house, or that she was living there unlawfully. She said she was not paying any rent.

When Zhao went to the property earlier, she claimed one of the illegal occupants told her: “I will pay rent only if you take off your pants.”

She alleged her mother was assaulted and the occupant had made threats.

“I was really scared so I called the police,” Zhao said.

The police came to the property, Zhao said, but they told her the matter was civil and not criminal….

New Zealand Property Investors Federation executive officer Andrew King said it was shocking that police wouldn’t act.

“It is incredible that a young woman being told to take her pants off to get rent money owed isn’t an illegal act and the police won’t get involved,” King said.

King said the case showed how dysfunctional the Tenancy Tribunal system was when emergency action was needed.

Outside the house in the garden, were many buckets of urine the tenants had put there as the utilities weren’t working as they hadn’t apparently been paid for.

buckets of urine NZ

More stories about nightmare tenants in Canada:

Naive property owners share stories of horror story tenants:

Squatter Finally Gets the Boot

It took 5 months, but the Williams family finally kicked the squatter off their property.  As reported by KATV:

When Marty and Amanda Williams rented a Little Rock condo to Andre Tucker in August, they had no idea that two months earlier he had pleaded guilty to felony theft….

“… it was in beautiful condition when he moved in,” recalls Amanda Williams. “… he broke our bed. You can look in here. It’s pretty…terrible.”

It took a court order, but after living in their Green Mountain Park condo without paying rent since September, Andre Tucker moved out on Wednesday.

Amanda Williams says not only did Tucker freeload for nearly five months, but he also left her once pristine condo in disarray.

“You know, you sign a contract that says if you don’t pay, you get out,” says Williams. “But then if you call the police, they say those contracts don’t mean anything.”

48-year-old Lawrence Andre Tucker has been in and out of trouble with the law for many years. And the Williamses aren’t the first landlords that have had to sue to force him out of a property.

A landlord filed suit in 2017 and a realty company had to do the same in 2011.

The process to legally evict a tenant who refuses to move is time-consuming and expensive – all at a time when no rental income is being collected.

“In rent, we have probably lost about $7,000,” estimates Williams. “And I’m not sure the damages, but I would guess between the A.C. system that he broke and just all the damages throughout the house…maybe $10,000 or more.”

Read the article here:

Deadbeat Tenants and Squatters, and Their Cost to Landlords

There are several reasons I’ve created this website.

One  is to give evidence, in the form of case stories. of the kinds of very serious problems that property owners can experience, when tenants stop paying rent and start squatting, or when serial squatters prey on multiple landlords.  This kind of evidence is needed politically, particularly in regions where politicians are trying to change legislation to slant landlord-tenant law even further in favor of tenants and their “right” to squat without paying rent, on someone else’s property.  Stealing a houseSimply put, we need to show the damage and at times grave harm that can be caused to property owners when the system requires them to take a serious financial hit while going thru a lengthy court process to remove a squatting tenant.
Another is to warn prospective or new landlords, about what could happen if a tenant stops paying rent, and help them plan ahead to best respond to such a situation should it occur.  Forewarned is forearmed. Forewarned is Forearmed

Yet another is to try to ensure that at least in a few of the more egregious situations, as where there was a media story done on the situation, some of these dastardly deeds and their doers are exposed.  The stories shared on this site are but a tiny, tiny fraction of the sum total of these kinds of incidents, since I’m only gathering stories by finding ones that have already been published in news online, or in blog reports, or shown on YouTube or news videos or TV shows.  What this means, is that for the most part, perpetrators of these kinds of malicious deeds may possibly see few repercussions for their actions.  Consider —– court cases containing the stories of these proceedings, and all evictions, cannot be found through standard online search engines.  You’d have to know which city/region/county to look in to find court records, and you might even have to pay a fee to look up court records.  Hence, those whose tenancy has been terminated but who choose to squat and refuse to leave, requiring the landlord to go through a long eviction proceeding, (or those who simply break into a property and squat, resulting in the same court action),  will generally be able to “hide” their bad deeds, except possibly from those prospective landlords who do background checks which reveal the previous eviction record(s).  Only those landlords who pay for a background check, (and sometimes those checks will be limited to one country’s court records) would find the evidence of the previous squatting and eviction.  Scot Free cropped Other than that, the tenant who squatted on someone’s property is likely to get away scot-free.  They might even be able to avoid paying the back rent owed to that landlord, particularly if they move far away or out of the country.

So, here on this site, I’m doing my small part, to see that for a very tiny fraction of more egregious cases of the total number of deadbeat or squatting tenants, or serial scammers, serial squatters, vandals and others who harm small property owners, that they will see at least some consequences for their actions, through public exposure.

One of the greatest problems about squatters, and the legal rights of tenants to refuse to leave a property until they are evicted in a long court proceeding, is the incredible amount of financial harm that can thus be done to small landlords.  In fact, for many landlords, they might well consider it would be better and far less costly for a criminal to steal their car, Stolen caror for a robber to point a gun at them and demand they hand over their wallet and smart phone, than for a tenant to refuse to pay rent, and squat on their property for many months, or even years.  A stolen car is insured.  A stolen smart phone may cost $500 to $1000 to replace, but not $10,000, or $20,000 or $40,000 or more, which is what it has cost some of these property owners, in their legal cases with squatting tenants, damaged premises, attorney fees and more.  So in my eyes, the ethical wrong done by these squatters may exceed that done by a criminal in a case of felony theft.

And yet, in spite of the ethical wrong involved in essentially stealing another’s income or use of their property, there are organizations which actually encourage people to illegally squat on other’s properties, as this group does:

I think that the court systems in many countries, and many “tenant’s aid” agencies or attorneys, are also culpable in the grave wrong done to small property owners, because the existing law is so unjust.

It’s understandable that some would not want to see tenants who may experience a hardship, suddenly thrown out on the street with all their bags, as in Dickensian tales.  However, laws that allow nonpaying tenants to stay in a property, essentially force small property owners into being charity organizations, something that many absolutely cannot afford to do, and which in any case, governments should not be compelling them to do. That someone is experiencing a hardship, does not make it justifiable for them to engage in theft of accomodations or use of property from someone else.

It would make much more sense to me, if any tenant who could not pay their rent, could apply for and be given up to 6 months emergency rent support from the government.  In this way, it’s the government not a small businessperson, which would be the charity provider, and that is much more appropriate.  Uncle sam collects debtThe tenant would be obligated to pay this back later on, and if they didn’t, it would be the government which could come knocking and collecting, with all their government-sized power to extract money from someone, rather than leaving this task to a small business owner and their very meagre collection power.
The tenant would only be supported in paying rent for up to 6 months — if at the end of that time they could not continue to pay rent on their own, they would be removed from the property, without any court proceeding or expense on the part of the landlord.  As a concession to recieving rent support, the tenant would have to waive their right to any court proceeding.  If the tenant chose not to receive rent support, they could go to court to fight the eviction, but could not request a jury trial, and the trial would have to occur within 30 days of the filing of the eviction suit, or if it took longer, the government would have to pay the rent due to the landlord beyond that point.  This concept that a tenant can squat and not pay rent and then demand a jury trial — well that is one of the stupidest ideas we’ve had in the last half century, and has got to go.  There’s no good reason for allowing jury trials for eviction cases.  They can and should be heard by a judge, preferably without attorneys present, just as occurs in all small claims cases.

Nightmare Tenants in Britain…See the Film Series

There’s a YouTube channel which has numerous episodes telling stories of both nightmare tenants, and slum landlords, in various locales around Britain.

This Episode shows a woman who owns a cottage in North Wales, who sought a tenant to stay for only 3 months just before she planned to sell the cottage. Three years later, she was still stuck in an eviction battle in court to evict this deadbeat tenant, who falsely claimed there was “damp” and mold all over the cottage, apparently even providing doctored photographs as evidence.  Oddly, and quite unjustly, the court initially relied exclusively on the tenant’s fraudulent claims to decide in her favor, and refused to allow the property owner even to testify or provide evidence.  Thus the fight went on for YEARS to get the bum out.

In this one, the poor property owner in London is in danger of losing his home in foreclosure, because the tenants have stopped paying rent, and he can’t get them out.  Even though the landlord in that case is a live-in landlord, meaning he lives on the property, he has been too scared to live in his own home because of the exceptionally aggressive nature of some of the tenants.  One in the film which you’ll see, actually threatens the landlord, tells him he is trespassing when he comes in with officials to serve eviction notices, and says “I’ll throw water on you.”  ill throw water on you 2

Also, there’s a story of people squatting in an RV on private property,

rv squatters on private property 2

This film states that in Britain in one year, 51% of landlords said that they had to deal with a problem tenant — which shows how widespread this issue is.

In this video, a west London woman finds that a tenant of hers has began subletting her property to multiple persons, on Airbnb, renting to as many as 15 guests a night.  The lease specifically prohibits subletting.  The house was the owner’s primary home, which she rented out while doing charity work in Africa.  When she returned from abroad, she was unable to get into her own home, and has had to sleep on sofas at friend’s houses.

In this one, a tenant stopped paying rent, and a year later, the tenant is still refusing to leave.

evicted tenants hide faces 2

In this one, the property owner, unable to get a tenant out who has stopped paying rent, has been forced to sleep at a local homeless shelter as she had nowhere else to go. Jobless, without the rental income, she literally did not have enough money to rent even a room somewhere.
When the property owner goes to talk to the tenant,  male friends of the tenant throw paint on the videographers’ equipment.
When the property owner finally gains possession, she finds the tenant has desecrated the place —
Another landlord in this video, describes how she’s lost all her life savings over one tenant’s shenanigans.

tenant ruins carpet 2

In this one, tenants have stopped paying rent, and are causingbad tenant 1 (2)
problems for the neighbors as well.

And in this episode, when owners of a home moved out and put it up for sale, a gang of criminals found out it was vacant, and broke in, moved in and are now claiming to be tenants there.  It may take months and thousands in legal fees to get them out.  Unfortunately, even after they are removed, there is no guarantee that either they or some other criminals won’t break in once again and start the whole months-long process all over again.

Explore this YouTube channel to find more films on nightmare tenants:

A “Sovereign Citizen” Squats While Claiming to be “Not a Person”

Thomas Benson is allegedly not only a criminal and squatter, but also claims to be “not a person”, and associates with another bizarre character named “Nana I Am.”

The duo tried to take over a bank owned home in Las Vegas, and are now charged with multiple crimes, as reported here:

This Nana figure tries to sue to take possession of homes in Nevada,as stated here:

A mysterious figure, Nana has filed dozens of lawsuits in recent years, often with people who lost their home to lenders. He has sought hundreds of millions, even billions, of dollars and laced his filings with nonsensical claims and pseudo-legal jargon. He writes his name countless ways, including as Nana-Amartey-Baidoobonso-IAM, and is connected to at least five homes in Southern Nevada


Deadbeat Tenants Ruin Working Class Landlords in California — and the Government Supports Squatters

It is getting increasingly expensive to evict a tenant in California…or even a squatter, who broke into your home, committing a crime to get in, and who by all rights you should be able to call the police to remove.  But in California, hysteria about housing has led to increasingly anti-landlord legislation, which gives even more power to tenants who already had the scales tipped in their favor.

This article highlights one case and reveals the problem:

In California, it is not a stretch to say that the state actually funds squatters and squatting, because government funds go to eviction defense agencies, which provide legal support for any tenant facing eviction, as well as any malicious squatter who broke into someone’s home, and is being evicted through the court system, since the state refuses to see this as the criminal matter that it is.

From the article:

If Carlos Lopez lived anywhere but California, he could have forced the squatter out of his modest rental house months ago. But here any eviction defendant, even one who has admittedly refused to pay the rent, can get a free attorney and demand a jury trial as leverage. That’s what the woman occupying Mr. Lopez’s house in northern Los Angeles County did. Only ethics or ignorance prevents every evictee from doing the same.

As Mr. Lopez’s lawyer, I was skeptical when he told me someone was living in his house without payment or permission—until I discovered that my firm had helped evict the same woman from three other area houses. The difference this time was that the squatter had an attorney, provided by a state-funded nonprofit whose mission is to reduce evictions.

Things didn’t use to be so bad in California, until tenants were enabled to extort landlords by threatening to litigate the eviction in a jury trial, which can easily cost over $50,000. Most small time landlords do not have that kind of money, so some of them, facing an expensive eviction suit, may be forced to sell their property, as they cannot afford to evict a deadbeat tenant who is getting the state’s support to steal accomodations from the property owner.

Historically, eviction was intended to be faster and simpler than other civil litigation so that landlords could quickly reclaim their property from deadbeat tenants. In California, jury trials for evictions were nearly unheard of until the mid-2000s, as they still are in other states. Most residential leases included jury waivers, and most tenants couldn’t afford the legal expense of a jury trial.

That changed in 2005, when the California Supreme Court ruled jury waivers unenforceable. Lawyers swarmed to represent tenants free, making money by demanding landlords pay tenants thousands of dollars to leave. Landlords pay because it’s cheaper than litigation.

Aussie Duo Pay no Rent for a Year, Refuse to Leave

The property owner had had quite enough from Deborah and Scott Brady, who had failed to pay rent for a full year in Australia, yet continued to run a successful dog kennel business from the property.

This video shows the story of their long belated eviction:

Scott Brady:

2018-08-29 (21)

The house was admittedly not in a good state of repair, but the owner also did not want to do more work on it, he just wanted the tenants out. Finally he got them out.

Man Builds Mini House on Trailer and Squats in Driveway

Here’s a new spin on squatting — the squatter who, instead of squatting in a vacant home, builds a trailer home on the driveway of someone else’s property and then refuses to leave.  Turns out he has the same absurd “right” to remain, until evicted by a court procedure, as do all the other malicious creatures of his ilk.

See the story here:

Cox was related to one of the tenants in the main house who moved out.  When she moved out, he built a mini-house on a flatbed trailer in the driveway, and refused to leave.  2018-08-29 (18)

When police came out to talk to Cox , he said ” I know my rights. You guys can’t touch me, you can’t do nothing to me.  You’re trespassing, get off my property. ”  They all know their “rights”, these despicable abusers of a badly designed law.

2018-08-29 (17)

In the comments section on the video of this story, some readers have the right idea — when Cox goes out to get groceries, should someone with a truck and a hitch pull up with nefarious intentions, the property owner is quite likely to blink when the truck drivers hitch up the little home, and tow it the heck out of the driveway.  When Cox comes back, the owner could say, “Oh dear, while you were gone it seems your little shack was stolen.  Boo hoo.”

Duo Squats in Soldier’s Home: Nasty Surprise when He comes Home from Service

While a loyal American was stationed half a world away in Afghanistan and then Hawaii, little did he suspect that he would come home and find…that he couldn’t go home.  Because the squatter Julio Ortiz had moved into his home (trespassed) and as usual, police refused to help, citing it as a civil matter…even though breaking and entering and trespassing are clearly criminal, not civil matters.

See the story in this video:

The squatters Julio and Fatima Ortiz said they had permission to move into Michael Sharkey’s New Port Ritchie FL home, but he said he has never spoken to these people in his life.

The two have criminal histories, Julio has a record for robbery, carjacking and selling drugs on school property.  Fatima has drug charges as well.  Typical of the losers who try these appalling and reprehensible things.

Squatting on the Squatter??

Here’s a novel idea, one which in my opinion should be deployed much more often on squatters.

The idea is that, if victimized by a squatter on her premises, what prevents a second squatter from moving in? And this second one just might be a squatter who is in the employ of the homeowner. How would that go down?

Consider, after all, the first squatter moved in (or broke in) illegally — serial squatters often either trespass or physically break into the homes they squat in. So, if the original squatter is there illegally, it’s fair to ask– why couldn’t others also enter illegally? Why can’t others just, in fact, break into the property, and squat beside the squatters? Particularly if the property owner gives them permission to do so.

See how just this kind of strategy went down, here:

A “friendly” squatter went to the owner’s home, intending to squat beside Lynn Arthur Williams, a criminal on probation who’d invaded her home. As it turned out, Lynn Arthur ended up being arrested, so the plan to squat beside the squatter wasn’t needed.

Still, it sounded like a primo plan to me and I’d like to see a video of someone else doing this.

Three squatters in a home? No problem, if 25 more squatters move in, all authorized by the property owner to squat next to the squatters….

Tales from the Landlord Side