Counterpoint: some people would rent an Airbnb and stay after the two weeks they rented, effectively preventing the homeowner to return to their homes after a vacation. There’s little legal recourse to speedily remove them, as two weeks of occupation requires a lengthy judicial process to evict them (IIRC in California).
I dislike rent seekers too, but it happens to people with only one home as well. They think they could put their home to use while they’re not there (effectively reducing the problem of real estate under occupation), only to be exploited.
If squatters were a very big problem, and most squatters come from overstaying rentals, fewer people would be landlords because of the high risk. There would be squatter insurance for landlords.
I don’t see that. So in our current situation, either squatters are not really that big of a problem, or the insurance industry is not being greedy enough? You can see why I think it’s the former.
And it also wouldn’t explain the high vacancy rate.
But here’s an idea that fits what we see more closely. You have a bunch of unrentable units because they’re not up to code. The owner doesn’t want to fix it. They’re just sitting on the property hoping it goes up in value so they can sell it. Squatters see that and move in because they don’t care if it’s up to code. The owners freak out because squatters reduce the property value.
Counterpoint: some people would rent an Airbnb and stay after the two weeks they rented, effectively preventing the homeowner to return to their homes after a vacation. There’s little legal recourse to speedily remove them, as two weeks of occupation requires a lengthy judicial process to evict them (IIRC in California).
I dislike rent seekers too, but it happens to people with only one home as well. They think they could put their home to use while they’re not there (effectively reducing the problem of real estate under occupation), only to be exploited.
If that’s true, we would all do it. No?
Are you asking why isn’t everybody stealing each other’s property?
If there’s little repercussion and everyone is broke, yes.
I think you either a) underestimate people’s desires to not be absolute assholes; or b) underestimate how often this happens.
Very possibly. But the train of thought loses me.
If squatters were a very big problem, and most squatters come from overstaying rentals, fewer people would be landlords because of the high risk. There would be squatter insurance for landlords.
I don’t see that. So in our current situation, either squatters are not really that big of a problem, or the insurance industry is not being greedy enough? You can see why I think it’s the former.
And it also wouldn’t explain the high vacancy rate.
But here’s an idea that fits what we see more closely. You have a bunch of unrentable units because they’re not up to code. The owner doesn’t want to fix it. They’re just sitting on the property hoping it goes up in value so they can sell it. Squatters see that and move in because they don’t care if it’s up to code. The owners freak out because squatters reduce the property value.