If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.
Duplicate of another approved link: 7806735


(LA Times)   "Landlords from hell" to serve prison time after cutting holes in their tenant's floor, among other insanity   (latimes.com) divider line 80
    More: Followup, Landlords from hell, security service, U.S. Department of State, insanity, tone hole, building manager, landlords, diamond blade  
•       •       •

3745 clicks; Favorite

80 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-21 07:07:55 AM
wow.. that's just farked up...

notice TFA doesn't say what kind of tenants they were either.

my last roommates completely screwed me over, didn't pay the rent the second month they were there and ended up getting me kicked out of my apartment, and when they finally left, their room was a disaster area and they stole some of my stuff
 
2013-06-21 07:29:14 AM
it takes over 2 years to get rid of a tenant in san francisco? wtf
 
2013-06-21 07:56:58 AM
This thread is SO Thursday.
 
2013-06-21 08:09:26 AM
They went a bit nuts, yes, but when the People's Republic of San Francisco effectively takes away your private property rights it's understandable. Their building, their rules - once the owner no longer wishes you to be on their property and you refuse to leave, I don't really have much sympathy. In some states you're allowed to use deadly force against unwanted people on your property.
 
2013-06-21 08:10:11 AM

NickelP: it takes over 2 years to get rid of a tenant in san francisco? wtf


California requires a minimum of 90 days after notice served in some cases.

Anything beyond that is the owners' own fault for writing a shiatty contract that doesn't let them evict for some reason.  Given that TFA says they "failed to evict" the tenants, that's probably the issue, CA is more renter-friendly than other states but there's no place on earth where the owner can't legally kick you out eventually.
 
2013-06-21 08:10:14 AM
Isn't there a Michael Keaton movie where he's the tennant from hell in San Francisco?  He ends up getting the OWNERS of the house removed from the property, doesn't pay rent, has all kinds of crazy habits and parties, and continually destroys the house?
It wasn't a comedy, it was a thriller.  And I remember thinking it was insane until someone told me that property laws in SF were actually that way
 
2013-06-21 08:11:55 AM
The funniest part is that the italian embassy simply reissued their passports after the US confiscated them so they couldn't leave.
 
2013-06-21 08:12:14 AM

NickelP: it takes over 2 years to get rid of a tenant in san francisco? wtf


NY has some screwed up laws like that. My buddy and I were roommates and he started dating this girl. Now she never fully moved in but she spent a lot of time there. Eventually the crazy was too much and they got into a huge fight and broke up. She called the cops on him because he moved her stuff into the hallway to try and stop her from picking a fight with him. The cop told him that since she had been "living" there for more than two weeks she was a legal resident and could technically get him evicted if she wanted to.
 
2013-06-21 08:12:26 AM
Yep, Pacific Heights was a couple decades ago....
 
2013-06-21 08:14:14 AM
My landlords are close. looking for a lawyer, contacts in profile and it works.
 
2013-06-21 08:14:51 AM
Lol, in Denver. Legal weed and horrible housing.
 
2013-06-21 08:16:38 AM

mister aj: They went a bit nuts, yes, but when the People's Republic of San Francisco effectively takes away your private property rights it's understandable. Their building, their rules - once the owner no longer wishes you to be on their property and you refuse to leave, I don't really have much sympathy. In some states you're allowed to use deadly force against unwanted people on your property.


Oh, horseshiat. San Francisco is a civilized city - not Galt's f**king Gulch - and that's pretty common knowledge.
There are rules - and if you don't want to play by those rules, you play elsewhere.
 
2013-06-21 08:17:36 AM

Tat'dGreaser: The cop told him that since she had been "living" there for more than two weeks she was a legal resident and could technically get him evicted if she wanted to.


Cops aren't lawyers and come from low-education backgrounds for the most part, and say stupid and incorrect things about the law all the time.  It's more likely that the cop was just being stupid, or to be charitable was winging it in an effort to address the immediate situation and slipped up, than that that's what the law actually says.

//Cops are one of the reasons I had to memorize sections of CA rent law when running a building there including section references.  They'd tell residents blatantly illegal things all the time from ignorance.
 
2013-06-21 08:17:52 AM

nich0lai: Lol, in Denver. Legal weed and horrible housing.


more like legal housing and terrible weed
 
2013-06-21 08:18:46 AM

jso2897: mister aj: They went a bit nuts, yes, but when the People's Republic of San Francisco effectively takes away your private property rights it's understandable. Their building, their rules - once the owner no longer wishes you to be on their property and you refuse to leave, I don't really have much sympathy. In some states you're allowed to use deadly force against unwanted people on your property.

Oh, horseshiat. San Francisco is a civilized city - not Galt's f**king Gulch - and that's pretty common knowledge.
There are rules - and if you don't want to play by those rules, you play elsewhere.


Yes, that's the law and they broke it. Are we not allowed to point out unjust laws that violate liberty and the Constitution? The US was founded on libertarian ideals of freedom for all, and states like California should really fark off out of the union if they don't want to respect that.
 
2013-06-21 08:19:35 AM
Those property laws were written to prevent the wealthy from buying inexpensive property and kicking the elderly, and handicapped who are on fixed incomes into the street. Imagine your landlord saying "Property values have skyrocketed, get your paraplegic ass OUT!

Even if you could find a dirt cheap $2000/mo. apartment to move into..you'd have to have the first months rent, deposits (on the order of a months rent) moving expenses etc.

It would cost someone on a fixed income...fixed low....$5000 just to get into another slum.

http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2013/05/23/mapping_the_average_rental_ ra te_of_a_one_and_two_bedroom_in_san_francisco.php
 
2013-06-21 08:23:51 AM

grunthos: Those property laws were written to prevent the wealthy from buying inexpensive property and kicking the elderly, and handicapped who are on fixed incomes into the street. Imagine your landlord saying "Property values have skyrocketed, get your paraplegic ass OUT!

Even if you could find a dirt cheap $2000/mo. apartment to move into..you'd have to have the first months rent, deposits (on the order of a months rent) moving expenses etc.

It would cost someone on a fixed income...fixed low....$5000 just to get into another slum.

http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2013/05/23/mapping_the_average_rental_ ra te_of_a_one_and_two_bedroom_in_san_francisco.php


Why should the landlord have to lose income because their tenant can't afford the market rate for the place they are living in?  How is that situation you described any different then just saying they shouldn't be able to charge new tenants 2k a month and a deposit because some people can't afford it?  If the property is inexpensive only because it has tenants that are paying below market and the laws tie the landlords hands from doing anything about it then he is getting screwed.
 
2013-06-21 08:24:10 AM
These landlords are asshats, and got what they deserved.  But I have to ask, in San Francisco is it illegal to not renew someone's lease?  In Georgia, if you buy a building with a renter you are obligated to either pay moving expenses and 3 months rent compensation, or let the tenant serve the remainder of his lease, giving 90 days notice that the lease will not  renewed.  There is no way it would take 2 years to get someone out of a building.
 
2013-06-21 08:24:44 AM
http://www.sftu.org/eviction.html

This gives I'm sure just a glimpse of the hell it probably was for these landlords.

I'm not excusing anything the landlords may have done, but most likely they've been trying to get shiatty tenants out for many months.

I love that you have to go through this awful eviction process even if the tenant isn't paying their rent.

Whenever I think of buying a rental property, it's this legal bullshiat that stops me.  I know there are tenants out there who know the system and will fark over every potential landlord they can.
 
2013-06-21 08:25:37 AM

grunthos: Even if you could find a dirt cheap $2000/mo. apartment to move into


Dirt cheap is $2000? Hell some of the better suburbs here $1500 is average
 
2013-06-21 08:26:21 AM

mister aj: jso2897: mister aj: They went a bit nuts, yes, but when the People's Republic of San Francisco effectively takes away your private property rights it's understandable. Their building, their rules - once the owner no longer wishes you to be on their property and you refuse to leave, I don't really have much sympathy. In some states you're allowed to use deadly force against unwanted people on your property.

Oh, horseshiat. San Francisco is a civilized city - not Galt's f**king Gulch - and that's pretty common knowledge.
There are rules - and if you don't want to play by those rules, you play elsewhere.

Yes, that's the law and they broke it. Are we not allowed to point out unjust laws that violate liberty and the Constitution? The US was founded on libertarian ideals of freedom for all, and states like California should really fark off out of the union if they don't want to respect that.




fark you, the USA was founded on Christian principles like killing people with drones.

Drone strikes for Jesus.
 
2013-06-21 08:27:17 AM

mister aj: jso2897: mister aj: They went a bit nuts, yes, but when the People's Republic of San Francisco effectively takes away your private property rights it's understandable. Their building, their rules - once the owner no longer wishes you to be on their property and you refuse to leave, I don't really have much sympathy. In some states you're allowed to use deadly force against unwanted people on your property.

Oh, horseshiat. San Francisco is a civilized city - not Galt's f**king Gulch - and that's pretty common knowledge.
There are rules - and if you don't want to play by those rules, you play elsewhere.

Yes, that's the law and they broke it. Are we not allowed to point out unjust laws that violate liberty and the Constitution? The US was founded on libertarian ideals of freedom for all, and states like California should really fark off out of the union if they don't want to respect that.


I'd much rather have a country where the poor, the handicapped and the minorities are not kicked out to the gutter to die in the rain. The world is better off without your sociopathy.
 
2013-06-21 08:28:34 AM

MugzyBrown: http://www.sftu.org/eviction.html

This gives I'm sure just a glimpse of the hell it probably was for these landlords.

I'm not excusing anything the landlords may have done, but most likely they've been trying to get shiatty tenants out for many months.

I love that you have to go through this awful eviction process even if the tenant isn't paying their rent.

Whenever I think of buying a rental property, it's this legal bullshiat that stops me.  I know there are tenants out there who know the system and will fark over every potential landlord they can.


They should've read your link before buying
 
2013-06-21 08:28:49 AM

NickelP: grunthos: Those property laws were written to prevent the wealthy from buying inexpensive property and kicking the elderly, and handicapped who are on fixed incomes into the street. Imagine your landlord saying "Property values have skyrocketed, get your paraplegic ass OUT!

Even if you could find a dirt cheap $2000/mo. apartment to move into..you'd have to have the first months rent, deposits (on the order of a months rent) moving expenses etc.

It would cost someone on a fixed income...fixed low....$5000 just to get into another slum.

http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2013/05/23/mapping_the_average_rental_ ra te_of_a_one_and_two_bedroom_in_san_francisco.php

Why should the landlord have to lose income because their tenant can't afford the market rate for the place they are living in?  How is that situation you described any different then just saying they shouldn't be able to charge new tenants 2k a month and a deposit because some people can't afford it?  If the property is inexpensive only because it has tenants that are paying below market and the laws tie the landlords hands from doing anything about it then he is getting screwed.



I don't think this scenario applies.  The landlords weren't trying to rent the building, they wanted tennants out to renovate the building to sell it.  The rent was probably at the current market value, the tennants just weren't going anywhere.

You'd think that just having exterior rennovations done would disrupt daily life enough to get rid of at least ONE tennant.
 
2013-06-21 08:36:01 AM
img.fark.net

But did their ducts seem old-fashioned?
 
2013-06-21 08:36:07 AM

MugzyBrown: Whenever I think of buying a rental property, it's this legal bullshiat that stops me.  I know there are tenants out there who know the system and will fark over every potential landlord they can.


If something bothers you, put it in the contract.  "Violated the terms of the contract" is a legal reason for eviction everywhere, including SF.  Even if they contest it in court all it takes is a severability clause to prevent one or two requirements getting thrown out from letting things get out of control.

Owning a rental property, especially if you manage it yourself, is an actual job, though.  If you're thinking of it in terms of just buying a house and it making money for you then you're wrong.  It's not rocket science, no, but it is a job that requires time, some specialized skills, and knowledge of the associated regulations and a lawyer with a relevant specialty.
 
2013-06-21 08:37:03 AM

NickelP: it takes over 2 years to get rid of a tenant in san francisco? wtf


It does if you're trying to force them out illegally.  I imagine it's a little easier if they're actually causing problems.

NickelP:
Why should the landlord have to lose income because their tenant can't afford the market rate for the place they are living in?  How is that situation you described any different then just saying they shouldn't be able to charge new tenants 2k a month and a deposit because some people can't afford it?  If the property is inexpensive only because it has tenants that are paying below market and the laws tie the landlords hands from doing anything about it then he is getting screwed.

And yet, I'm sure they don't complain when they're paying property taxes on expensive property that are 30 years out of date.

The landlord should have considered this simple fact when they bought the property.  It's not like they didn't know the tenants were there and how much they were paying for rent.
 
2013-06-21 08:37:37 AM
How about if your landlords break into your house, you catch them, and they kick you out because? We had agreed to sign a new lease, and are disabled, and offered to buy the house when it was up.... just needed a few months to put money together. Wanted to wait and buy a house after I healed from a brain injury. We caught them breaking in the started trying to evict us over nothing was and is bizarre. Moving. But we want compensation. I run a business here.

Also found a letter detailing they rented it to us because wife was cheating and moving to mt.s was plan to save marriage and they didnt have the money. lol
 
2013-06-21 08:38:27 AM
Believe it or not in Denver if they break in AND steal you still can't file a police report. Only a civil case for breaking the lease. Denver is messed up.
 
2013-06-21 08:39:02 AM
It would have been easier to write them a $5000 check to GTFO at the beginning..
 
2013-06-21 08:39:40 AM
I would take that happily.
 
2013-06-21 08:40:38 AM

nich0lai: Believe it or not in Denver if they break in AND steal you still can't file a police report. Only a civil case for breaking the lease. Denver is messed up.


WTF? That is seriously messed up.
 
PJ-
2013-06-21 08:40:49 AM
What I got from the article was that they actually didn't have bad tenants, they wanted to buy the property and renovate it to sell units individually.  I don't know what previous agreements they had with the previous owner, but what happens if they had an on-going lease with the previous owner?  Does the state laws say that you have to honor previous contracts of the previous owner when it comes to renters?

From the sounds of this, couple was looking to cash in on a neighborhood that was 'up and coming'.  They made a quick decision letting greed blind them from researching everything they needed to know, then lost it when they found out they were losing money, and nothing could really be done short of chasing these people out.

I have zero sympathy for house flippers.  You took a risk, it didn't pay off, too bad so sad.
 
2013-06-21 08:42:50 AM

nich0lai: How about if your landlords break into your house, you catch them, and they kick you out because? We had agreed to sign a new lease, and are disabled, and offered to buy the house when it was up.... just needed a few months to put money together. Wanted to wait and buy a house after I healed from a brain injury. We caught them breaking in the started trying to evict us over nothing was and is bizarre. Moving. But we want compensation. I run a business here.

Also found a letter detailing they rented it to us because wife was cheating and moving to mt.s was plan to save marriage and they didnt have the money. lol


If they break in without a valid reason (emergency maintenance, properly noticed entry for a variety of reasons, have a lawful court order and a sheriff, etc) at the minimum you have a criminal complaint against them.  Laws very but I think there are pretty stiff penalties for landlords that do this nearly everywhere civilly too.

That said if you lease is up (baring some weird shiat like discrimination) then they typically have the right to evict you on the grounds of you being a hold over tenant living their after the lease expiration.  Talk to an attorney that shiat varies wildly as SF illustrates.  Outside of if you are getting some special government financing that places restrictions on how you deal with relocating tenants they wouldn't owe you shiat for moving expenses anywhere I deal with this stuff.
 
2013-06-21 08:42:59 AM

jso2897: mister aj:

A).  They went a bit nuts, yes, but when the People's Republic of San Francisco effectively takes away your private property rights it's understandable. Their building, their rules - once the owner no longer wishes you to be on their property and you refuse to leave, I don't really have much sympathy. In some states you're allowed to use deadly force against unwanted people on your property.

B.)  Oh, horseshiat. San Francisco is a civilized city - not Galt's f**king Gulch - and that's pretty common knowledge.  There are rules - and if you don't want to play by those rules, you play elsewhere.


Nice, the Lefty-Righty dynamic illustrated perfectly in two posts.  Both generated without enough information for either side to be sure they are correct; with the truth somewhere in between.

If they were ponies at the track, I'd bet on B
 
2013-06-21 08:44:08 AM

mike_d85: The rent was probably at the current market value


Or the current artificial rent-controlled value which is below actual market value
 
2013-06-21 08:47:01 AM

Jim_Callahan: Tat'dGreaser: The cop told him that since she had been "living" there for more than two weeks she was a legal resident and could technically get him evicted if she wanted to.

Cops aren't lawyers and come from low-education backgrounds for the most part, and say stupid and incorrect things about the law all the time.  It's more likely that the cop was just being stupid, or to be charitable was winging it in an effort to address the immediate situation and slipped up, than that that's what the law actually says.

//Cops are one of the reasons I had to memorize sections of CA rent law when running a building there including section references.  They'd tell residents blatantly illegal things all the time from ignorance.


i'll agree cops aren't lawyers but a heck of a lot of them do have college degrees. how a cop is supposed to enforce the laws/statutes when so many exist lawyers often specialize in one given area of their field - is beyond me. meanwhile, the unwashed masses are told ignorance of the law is no excuse. asking or listening to a cop for advices is like seeking reliable input about your Ferrari 308GTB from the guy who changes oil at the Corner Gas. one might mean well but who's stupider of the two.
 
2013-06-21 08:47:23 AM

PJ-: What I got from the article was that they actually didn't have bad tenants, they wanted to buy the property and renovate it to sell units individually.  I don't know what previous agreements they had with the previous owner, but what happens if they had an on-going lease with the previous owner?  Does the state laws say that you have to honor previous contracts of the previous owner when it comes to renters?

From the sounds of this, couple was looking to cash in on a neighborhood that was 'up and coming'.  They made a quick decision letting greed blind them from researching everything they needed to know, then lost it when they found out they were losing money, and nothing could really be done short of chasing these people out.

I have zero sympathy for house flippers.  You took a risk, it didn't pay off, too bad so sad.


Everywhere I work the only way a lease gets set asside from a transfer is if it goes through a court and a judge kills it (rare).......  I do agree though this sounds like barbie real estate agent decided to play condo developer and had no idea wtf she was doing.  Either SF has way farked up laws or she failed to do what was legally required of her and decided being a biatch to her tenants was the easier way.  She should have known what the process and restrictions were to get the tenants out prior to closing, if not like you said too bad too sad.
 
2013-06-21 08:48:29 AM
And this is another reason why castle doctrine laws are so great.   These tenants where given multiple opportunities to shoot these farkers dead if only they lived in a castle doctrine state.   This would have improved the lives of everyone with much less paperwork while nothing of value would have been lost.
 
2013-06-21 08:49:15 AM
First Effort
Hello tenants. This is Moe, Larry and Curly. They are the guys who will be renovating your apartments.

Second Effort
Hello tenants, these guys are from the Violent Investigation Paranormal Responders. They are investigating a series of brutal murders that occurred in this building back in the 60's. Not sayin' Manson, but it's probably Manson. (long pause) And not Marilyn.

Third Effort
Hello tenants. This Akbar el BombaMaker. He's interested in renting the basement to store fertilizer and diesel. No one here is Muslim, right?

Forth and Final Effort
The exterminator was supposed to use earth friendly chemicals when he tented the place and began spraying. Looks like he used asbestos and dioxin. Well, you guys are the government's problem now.
 
2013-06-21 08:50:56 AM

NickelP: PJ-: What I got from the article was that they actually didn't have bad tenants, they wanted to buy the property and renovate it to sell units individually.  I don't know what previous agreements they had with the previous owner, but what happens if they had an on-going lease with the previous owner?  Does the state laws say that you have to honor previous contracts of the previous owner when it comes to renters?

From the sounds of this, couple was looking to cash in on a neighborhood that was 'up and coming'.  They made a quick decision letting greed blind them from researching everything they needed to know, then lost it when they found out they were losing money, and nothing could really be done short of chasing these people out.

I have zero sympathy for house flippers.  You took a risk, it didn't pay off, too bad so sad.

Everywhere I work the only way a lease gets set asside from a transfer is if it goes through a court and a judge kills it (rare).......  I do agree though this sounds like barbie real estate agent decided to play condo developer and had no idea wtf she was doing.  Either SF has way farked up laws or she failed to do what was legally required of her and decided being a biatch to her tenants was the easier way.  She should have known what the process and restrictions were to get the tenants out prior to closing, if not like you said too bad too sad.


In that situation too the tenants are served as parties to the lawsuit, and have the same chance to litigate their right to have the lease enforced as anyone else in the lawsuit.  Its not like 'oh shiat our house got sold now our lease is void, no one told us, and we have 3 days to get out'.
 
2013-06-21 08:54:30 AM

Maul555: And this is another reason why white castle doctrine laws are so great.   These tenants where given multiple opportunities to shoot these farkers dead if only they lived in a castle doctrine state.   This would have improved the lives of everyone with much less paperwork while nothing of value would have been lost.


img.fark.net
 
2013-06-21 08:55:12 AM

Jim_Callahan: MugzyBrown: Whenever I think of buying a rental property, it's this legal bullshiat that stops me.  I know there are tenants out there who know the system and will fark over every potential landlord they can.

If something bothers you, put it in the contract.  "Violated the terms of the contract" is a legal reason for eviction everywhere, including SF.  Even if they contest it in court all it takes is a severability clause to prevent one or two requirements getting thrown out from letting things get out of control.

Owning a rental property, especially if you manage it yourself, is an actual job, though.  If you're thinking of it in terms of just buying a house and it making money for you then you're wrong.  It's not rocket science, no, but it is a job that requires time, some specialized skills, and knowledge of the associated regulations and a lawyer with a relevant specialty.


But I just want to buy one a them properties like what's on them TV shows and start gettin' paid!
 
2013-06-21 08:56:15 AM

TheGreatGazoo: It would have been easier to write them a $5000 check to GTFO at the beginning..


That was my thought: "You have 90 days to GTFO. We'll give you your full deposit and a month's rent to help cover finding a new place. Thank you for being a good tenant. Sincerely, The owners of the building"

In Ohio, my wife and I had a two year contract to rent a house. As soon as the contract was expired the owner said, "I'm selling the house... you have 30 days to leave."
 
2013-06-21 08:58:13 AM

ERNesbitt: In Ohio, my wife and I had a two year contract to rent a house. As soon as the contract was expired the owner said, "I'm selling the house... you have 30 days to leave."


That must be illegal in San Fran, the only thing I can think of.
 
2013-06-21 09:00:13 AM

NickelP: Everywhere I work the only way a lease gets set asside from a transfer is if it goes through a court and a judge kills it (rare).......  I do agree though this sounds like barbie real estate agent decided to play condo developer and had no idea wtf she was doing.


SF has had issues with real developers and landlords pulling shady shiat during real estate booms and a very big problem with homeless populations, so they do make it somewhat hard to evict.  One of the things they've done is that if you buy a building with existing tenants you inherit those tenants at their existing rent (raising rent on existing contracts is heavily regulated as well).

The major problem they seem to be running into here is that they want to take the rental property, renovate it, and then keep using it as a rental property at higher prices.  This is one of the practices that Bay Area rent law was specifically designed to avoid (it's generally called "gentrification" and thought to be at least somewhat questionable and potentially racist in other places as well).

If you ever find yourself in this situation, though, the solution is to harass your one holdout resident with the non-rent terms of their contract, since you do still have to make a new contract with them.  It's not to saw holes in their floor or glue their locks shut.  Helping them find another place always makes it easier too.
 
2013-06-21 09:00:39 AM

Tom_Slick: ERNesbitt: In Ohio, my wife and I had a two year contract to rent a house. As soon as the contract was expired the owner said, "I'm selling the house... you have 30 days to leave."

That must be illegal in San Fran, the only thing I can think of.


From the link someone posted up above about evictions in san francisco it sounds like you have to give 90 days notice and pay some relocation expenses if you intend to do a condo conversion.  Maybe they just figured 'fark that, i'm not paying them shiat, lets just make them leave'?
 
2013-06-21 09:04:50 AM

Jim_Callahan: Tat'dGreaser: The cop told him that since she had been "living" there for more than two weeks she was a legal resident and could technically get him evicted if she wanted to.

Cops aren't lawyers and come from low-education backgrounds for the most part, and say stupid and incorrect things about the law all the time.  It's more likely that the cop was just being stupid, or to be charitable was winging it in an effort to address the immediate situation and slipped up, than that that's what the law actually says.

//Cops are one of the reasons I had to memorize sections of CA rent law when running a building there including section references.  They'd tell residents blatantly illegal things all the time from ignorance.


Tat'd is correct on the 2 week thing. I owned a house in the area he is most likely referring to and I had the same issue with my ex.  I called the cops to have her removed from the property (also to have legal witnesses because I knew her kind of crazy only too well) and they informed me that she was a legal resident because she lived there longer than 2 weeks.  The only difference is that the deed was in my name only so she couldn't evict me from my own house.  I would have had to go through legally evicting her if she didn't already have another place to go.
 
2013-06-21 09:06:30 AM

mister aj: jso2897: mister aj: They went a bit nuts, yes, but when the People's Republic of San Francisco effectively takes away your private property rights it's understandable. Their building, their rules - once the owner no longer wishes you to be on their property and you refuse to leave, I don't really have much sympathy. In some states you're allowed to use deadly force against unwanted people on your property.

Oh, horseshiat. San Francisco is a civilized city - not Galt's f**king Gulch - and that's pretty common knowledge.
There are rules - and if you don't want to play by those rules, you play elsewhere.

Yes, that's the law and they broke it. Are we not allowed to point out unjust laws that violate liberty and the Constitution? The US was founded on libertarian ideals of freedom for all, and states like California should really fark off out of the union if they don't want to respect that.


The US was founded on "I got mine, fark you" and hatred of non-caucasians?

Hmm... you might have a point there.
 
2013-06-21 09:07:51 AM
Can't you just not renew their lease?
 
Displayed 50 of 80 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report