Eviction startup gets gig workers to help landlords kick people out
businessinsider.com
businessinsider.com
I can't imagine what could go wrong here.
It seems like the American way to me! /s
You also don’t have to be gentle with the tenants stuff. You just throw it out on the curb.
Edit: I usually don’t comment on downvotes. But why is a factually correct comment being downvoted? I was a landlord, this is exactly the process in my state.
After that one eviction , the next time my rental properties became empty, I started getting rid of the properties. They weren’t worth the trouble.
Facts aren’t always nice. That doesn’t mean they aren’t facts.
Money is never “personal” to me. Once the real estate crash happened and my tenants started leaving, I did strategic defaults. I actually let one tenant stay at one of my properties for months without paying rent. I knew I was going to walk away from the underwater property anyway. I told them they could stay until the bank kicks them out. I told them I was going to let it go in foreclosure. They were fine with it. They had a place to stay for months, saved money and left before the bank evicted them. No eviction on their record.
Edit: it seems to be endemic to this post, anyone care to reply why I am incorrect or why they disagree?
Luckily, I found a remote job at Big Tech. But I dreaded thinking I might have to go through the hassle of moving pre-Covid.
I hate to get meta. But I really haven’t seen anything this weird in the years I’ve been posting here. Easily verifiable facts with no opinions being added getting downvoted and no one disagreeing with me.
You're being downvoted because (as is common knowledge) this is definitely not true for many (and I would wager most, if not nearly all) states.
Choosing the three largest states.
It is the process in
California
https://civil.lasd.org/CivilProcess/cwig19.aspx?1
New York
https://nycourts.gov/CourtHelp/Homes/beingEvicted.shtml
Texas
https://www.buildium.com/laws/texas-eviction-laws/
And a few other states.
Florida:
https://www.managecentralfloridaproperty.com/blog-eviction-p...
GA:
https://www.citywiderpm.com/eviction-process-in-ga
Alabama:
http://www.cloudwillis.com/2020/09/02/whats-next-for-evictio...
Tennessee:
https://www.omnirealty.net/tennessee-eviction-process/more-4...
Kentucky
https://kycir.org/2020/03/16/courts-may-be-closed-but-some-e...
Illinois
https://www.paynelawchicago.com/eviction-faqs/
Ohio:
https://www.dannlaw.com/understanding-ohio-sheriff-sale-evic...
Wisconsin:
https://www.danesheriff.com/Divisions/Support-Services/Evict...
Mississippi:
Like they say where I hail from: "None a 'yer bizness."
That said, a "scientific" analysis of a "representative sample" of the above links indicates that very few (if any) deal make any mention at all of the case to which we are referring: that is, where the tenant has vacated the premises (leaving their belongings on site) after the landlord has reclaimed possession.
To use just one example that does make mention - California - it says:
Any property of the tenant left on the premises will be turned over to the landlord for storage.
That is - the landlord may not, as you suggest, dispose of it as they will. Rather, they need to put it in storage for the tenant to reclaim it a future date.
And in Florida:
If the renter leaves any personal property at the rental unit, the Florida eviction laws mandate you to notify them in writing. In Florida, the law requires that you give the tenant at least 10 days to claim the property. The 10-day period is if the notice was personally delivered to the renter. If mailed, the tenant has 15 days to claim the property. You can charge the tenant for storage of the property. The costs should be reasonable. If the tenant fails to claim the property within that time, you are at liberty to dispose of it whichever way you please.
Again -- the guidelines (that you yourself posted a link to) clearly state that the landlord may not simply dispose of the property as they see fit. Rather, they need to put it (safely) in storage for a certain minimum period as prescribed by law.
That's just checking 2 of the links that you provided - both of which clearly contradict the assertion you made.
Yes there is a process. After 18 days, what do you think the landlord does with the property? Do you think they keep it forever?
The eviction process in some states and getting rid of the property have separate timelines. But after that holding period, you are still allowed to remove the property as you see fit.
As far as the article is concerned, the landlord would just have to wait 18 days before calling the company.
Even your own citation says “you are at liberty to dispose of it whichever way you please.” Just as I said.
There are plenty of Byzantine steps to the eviction process. But at the end of the day, someone from the sheriff’s department removes the person and ultimately you are responsible for disposing of the property. Whether that happens the same day is immaterial.
This is a typical debating "technique": bully the other party with questions like "Have you ever lived in country X? No? Then you have no right to question anything I say about the politics or history of country X."
Yes there is a process. After 18 days, what do you think the landlord does with the property? Do you think they keep it forever?
The point is, your initial message 100 percent, straight up said the complete opposite of what you're saying now: that as a landlord you can just "throw their stuff out on the curb" with no process whatsoever.
Thank you for explicitly backpedaling, at least.
A) it’s dangerous to hire a third party inverted movers because their might be an interaction between the evicted tenant and the crew moving things out. The police are always involved during a legal eviction when you move the tenant out.
B) inverted movers may destroy the property. Secure “storage” in states where the two don’t happen the same day - moving the tenant out and moving their stuff could just be leave it in the house and if they don’t come for it dispose of it however you want - including using inverted movers.
Have you ever lived in country X? No? Then you have no right to question anything I say about the politics or history of country X."
You are allowed to have your own opinions but not your own facts. One of us have actually gone through the legal eviction process. One of us haven’t. I think I have more credibility.
A lot of people on this site are cruel and callous.
My statements are
A) at least in my state, the police are there monitoring the actual eviction either way.
B) you don’t hire professional movers who are careful with the tenants stuff. No one does. There is no increased liability from using this service over getting day laborers.
Silver lining: you can get paid to move to another place if you game this correctly.
How is living at a property without paying for it any different than walking out of Walmart without paying for bread?
Staying at a place without paying rent is a form of direct theft. The non-paying-tenant is stealing use of the property without payment. It's somewhat normalized, but that doesn't make it ok or something anyone needs to tolerate.
It just seems comically short sighted. The most idiotic temporary punt of 2020.
It varies by state but evicting someone is not the "just show up and kick out the tenant with threat of violence" process that many comments seem to be operating under the assumption that it is. You might be able to get away with that once or twice but (in the US) even the most shady of slumlord make a profit on a timeline longer than that approach is tenable.
When a landlord wants to evict a tenant who hasn't been paying rent, it's not uncommon for the landlord to actually pay the tenant cash to leave! This is so the landlord doesn't need to wait months with no rent income while spending significant time going to court, etc[1].
In much of the country it likely takes several months. Each step in the multi-step process generally has lots of loopholes, gotchas and potentially weeks of waiting.
It’s a win/win for everyone.
The tenant won’t have an eviction on their record making it harder to rent somewhere else, they can move their own stuff out without the risk of it being damaged, they have cash in hand to stay somewhere else temporarily like a weekly stay hotel [1], and/or they could put their stuff in storage.
I should have been willing to pay up to two to three months mortgage for a cash for keys deal. They weren’t paying anyway, I could have saved the aggravation and they wouldn’t have trashed the place.
[1] all weekly hotels aren’t bad. I stayed in one with my wife and son for months after my lease was up and we were waiting for our house to be built.
It's a lot easier to just leave when the semester is almost over, you find out your roommate was maybe pocketing your rent, and the landlord shows up and says "I don't want to rent to singles any more. I've got a family moving in on Monday." That one had ripple effects in my life for years even with the highly undesirable safety net of moving in with family on short notice.
I also know how much damage a bad tenant can do to a property -- graffiti, smoke damage, pet stains -- on top of not paying rent.
I can see why people get pretty heated about tenants' rights, but I've also seen how badly both sides of the transaction can behave. Sometimes eviction is the best course of action for both parties.
The difference is that failing to pay the rent isn't a crime.
Furthermore, according to the article
> The CDC has ordered a moratorium on evictions amid COVID-19 — making it illegal for landlords to force out tenants who can't afford rent during the pandemic
Which makes a certain number of evictions illegal at first place.
I guess I am arguing against some type of narrative that I don’t know about.
Landlords usually provide little value compared to what they ask for and for a lot of them, it's essentially passive income, an investment if you want, but one that is basic survival for others. The US should not be having a homelessness crisis. We have more empty places than homeless.
The same way I personally believe Nestle or anyone else should not be trying to commodify drinking water beyond the "utility" grade.
If you want an expanded look at this line of reasoning, I can recommend Thought Slime: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2EWQ4v9wbA
Evictions become much more difficult, maybe even illegal.
What happens to people who want to rent apartments?
And you believe the government should have a monopoly on buying/renting houses?
And how would government renting houses be different than landlords? If the government wanted to give rent flexibility they can do it other ways besides owning the houses.
I'm also fine with incremental change. We can start by moving ownership of unused decrepit housing to a public body that transfers based on real occupancy. Essentially expanding adverse possession.
In Europe such debt collectors are notorious for very direct intimidation. But people at least still call them gangs instead of startups.
Edit: Does someone care to share how the above statement is factually incorrect?
Then you add on the cost of a management company - 10% of rent + up to 50% of the first month’s rent. The only people who I know that can stay cash flow positive are those with no or a low mortgage and/or are very hands on with maintenance and repairs.
We've watched other companies in the startup space with lives on the line cut corners---What are the odds that this is going to go well?
After you go through the eviction process, you schedule someone from the sheriff’s office to monitor the process and you get some day laborers if you don’t know anyone personally.
The other startups are in danger of civil penalties and fines. If you go into your own rental property and evict someone illegally, you personally can be charged with trespassing, assault, criminal threats, etc.
It’s really not even worth the civil penalties. The tenants can stay on your property longer and even when you do evict them, lawyers love suing landlords on a contingency basis.
You run a legitimate protection business. Of course you wouldn't extort money by breaking store owners' legs. ;)
Setting up a situation where there is risk of breakdown and structuring that situation so if the breakdown happens, all of the responsibility falls on the gig workers who lack the means to defend themselves and none of it falls on the company making all the money is an already understood pathology of the gig economy. Uber has spent so much time, effort, and money trying to convince legislatures and courts that they don't have any employees providing ride services for a reason.
The sheriff is responsible for removing the person. You and your crew that you have hired is responsible for removing items and changing the locks. You aren’t responsible for any damage to personal items or what happens when you put them on the side of the road - where you are legally required to put the items at least for a single tenant house.
I've always insisted that the USA doesn't really exist. Because no country so fucked up could possibly command so much power and influence in the world.
Some day I hope to prove my theory by earning enough money to buy a boat and then sailing due west from Ireland until I reach the east coast of Russia.
(And has Fix television optioned this for reality TV yet?)
So my only knowledge of this part of UK law comes from watching this garbage TV, but what amazes me is how much freedom the officers seem to have with respect to how strict their enforcement actions are. In some cases they only ask for a small amount of the debt and a payment plan to make up the rest, but if the debtor's uncooperative or a bit of a dick, the officers are going to start towing cars and carrying out TVs.
Yeah, about that, how the f*ck is that legal?! How can the government outsource law enforcement to private companies? Corruption?
It feels like the RoboCop of the 80's where OCP owned the Detroit Police Force and were carying out evictions.
I don't understand how this could be better than the police other than the timing? This is going to end terribly, just some John Doe showing up to peoples homes?
https://www.npr.org/2018/08/28/642597968/for-450-this-japane...
You want something even weirder?
There's also a service where you can hire somewhere to apologise for you/your company's fuck ups. I actually had a roommate that ran such a business. His clients will even issue him official name cards and an email address so he looks like a real employee, which they'll promptly burn once the case is over. Then they get to say that the guy that caused the issue has been fired and everythings all good now. Amazing guy, extremely resourceful, probably would've been running a successful start up if he ever found a way into SV.
https://www.tokyoweekender.com/2018/11/never-say-youre-sorry...
Just the a facet of the Japanese work culture. They respect their bosses and upper management so much so that I’m sure the worker feels guilty or shameful when leaving.
> Civvl is owned by OnQall, a catchall platform for hiring gig workers.
2: Takes advantage of desperate people with "gig economy" jobs? Check!
3: Describes itself as "The Uber or Air B'n'B of <something>"? Check!
I hated them already. Even before I found out what they did!
Of course, it's a big leap from being willing to screw over strangers for a few bucks to being willing to throw them out of their homes on to the street, but I've got a feeling some would sadistically enjoy the transition. As long as it paid enough.
Honestly it seems to me like something out of a crappy, dystopian sci-fi B movie from the 90s. With everything else we've seen this year, though, I'm not even that surprised. People being horrible is normalized, and most of my outrage has been depleted. It's just expected now.
If you evict people legally - at least in my state - you have to schedule a 2 hour window with the police and they are present supervising during the entire process.
Also, the eviction process required at least 5 people to be present to actual clean the unit out depending on the size of the house/apartment.
The company is doing nothing differently except putting hiring day laborers online. Home Depot wasn’t liable when the guy I hired picked up a crew from the parking lot. We waited for someone from the police department to show up - as legally required - and started the cleanup process.
It is up to the landlord to follow the law.
The implied expectation of class / race / ethnic / ... loyalty is fundamentally flawed, though. I'm friends with people of many groups who are unlike me, and conversely, there are many people in my demographic whom I dislike. Not all [insert race][insert socioeconomic class][insert religion][insert ethnicity][insert career] people are the same, and we don't want segregation.
This is a particularly nasty cross-class alliance, but at the core, we WANT cross-class alliances.
> Hey, it puts food on the table, and my kids are hungry. And it keeps the debt collector at bay.
At the core, there are few or no internal "Do Not Cross" moral lines. Moral lines are first culturally-situated, and second, individually-situated.
Incentive structures set by the ruling class drive a huge part of culture. Media does too. There are a lot of tools to manipulate culture, and they're actively (and increasingly scientifically) used. At the end of a Roman Triumph -- a big celebration -- captured war prisoners would be strangled in front of an audience. In that culture, that was okay.
From there, you need to find just a few people, either divided, disgruntled, or of low moral character. If I want to keep poor Southern whites in-line in 1870, I can find blacks who hate them. If I want to keep poor Southern blacks in-line, I find poor Southern whites. There, we had a nice 50/50 split, but there will always be a few.
The expectation that "it's the turncoats fault" isn't a productive one. You need to fix systems, not individuals (with incentive structures around individuals are part of systems, of course).
Systems are things like checks-and-balances, incentive structures, power structures, organizational design, and conflict resolution structures.
The US didn't work better than Soviet Russia because it had better people, much as Americans would like to believe themselves superior. It worked better because it had better institutions, starting with a very well-drafted Constitution.
Given a 2020 context, those structures are starting to function less well. You won't fix them by asking politicians to behave better; you need to address the structural issues.
And people at the top rarely understand implications of their actions. Organizational systems are HARD.
As we've so often seen, at scale it's easy to move that line for enough people to enable any atrocity.
I wonder when someone will start a retail mercenary business...
Edit to add: To quote what someone on HN said: the whole gig economy platform is basically like having day labourers hanging out outside your local DIY store until a pick-up truck shows up and tells a few of them to hop in, but this time, it's all happening online!
To clarify: I am a proud American, but am frustrated with how distorted life has become to allow business to supersede seemingly almost everything.
Edit: I'd really like to hear what people think will happen when landlords don't have income for 9+ months. Or what they expect to happen when the moratorium ends and people have 9 months back rent. Just what, exactly, do people expect the outcome here to be?