Eviction and foreclosure moratorium imminent end

[Shaul]

8 million households face eviction or foreclosure within weeks

The article says as many as 8 million households could be forced to move.

Not stated in the article is that 8 million owners will regain control of their own property.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Not stated in the article is that 8 million owners will regain control of their own property.

Is being insanely callous to the poor a cool, hip thing, now?

 

[Stevicus]

8 million households face eviction or foreclosure within weeks

The article says as many as 8 million households could be forced to move.

Not stated in the article is that 8 million owners will regain control of their own property.

It may not be as many as 8 million owners. For one thing, 2 million of that 8 million are already owners, except they're behind on their mortgage and facing foreclosure. It's also likely that some of the owners are corporate entities which own multiple properties and could have multiple tenants facing eviction. So that would reduce their numbers a bit.

I think we need national rent controls and price controls to keep housing affordable.

 

[Shaul]

Is being insanely callous to the poor a cool, hip thing, now?

Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly. Leviticus 19:15

 

[Twilight Hue]

Is being insanely callous to the poor a cool, hip thing, now?

Look who's in charge.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly. Leviticus 19:15

You mean, by throwing them into the street because they're unemployed or earning less due to a global pandemic?

I'm fairly certain that's not what that passage means.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Look who's in charge.

Point taken.

 

[Trailblazer]

8 million households face eviction or foreclosure within weeks

The article says as many as 8 million households could be forced to move.

Not stated in the article is that 8 million owners will regain control of their own property.

Long before the pandemic, one of my tenants has been consistently behind on the rent, sometimes over six months behind. I thought about it evicting him, but I knew he was struggling and I knew he was honest, so I always waited for him to catch up, even though he never got completely caught up. Then last year after the pandemic hit it got much worse. As of the end of May 2021 he owed me $14,400, which is a year of rent.

I forgot to mention that he has only been paying the same amount of rent since he moved in 8 1/2 years ago, I have never raised the rent. The house he is renting is a 2500 sq ft 4 bedroom house overlooking the Pacific Ocean so I could be getting a lot more rent than that.

Back in March, an attorney said I could sue him for the back rent even though the eviction moratorium was still in place but I chose not to go forward with that. Instead I looked for rental assistance programs and I pursued it till I found one and I have been on the phone with various people since January.

As soon as the program opened up with funding on May 19 I applied for rental assistance and I just found out I will be getting the $14,400 plus three additional months of rent money going forward, so his rent will be paid through the end of August. This feels too good to be true but I guess God must have been working overtime.

 

[oldbadger]

Not stated in the article is that 8 million owners will regain control of their own property.

I cannot worry about the 8 million home owners, Shaul.
You see, these properties (not homes, Shaul) are NOT their homes, these properties are their additional props.
And so, although it's tough for them, they will still have homes with bedrooms etc for tonight.

We are about to have a similar problem here in the UK. Special protections (from eviction) are just about to end and many tenants/mortgagees are going to be evicted. Single persons and couples should be able to cope but families with children need to be provided for.

 

[pearl]

Is being insanely callous to the poor a cool, hip thing, now?

On the surface it may seem that way, but there is a ripple affect. Absente landlords and slumlords are one thing. We have a large number of two and three decker home owners who depend on the rent to help with mortgage and taxes. It would only be fair if the banks and city government gave them a break.

 

[metis]

Oh, so just kick lower-income families out without having any fallback plan for a great many of them? We still haven't regained the previous employment levels that we had two years ago, so their plight can now be "Let them eat cake!"?

Yes, the owners need to earn with they invested, but we still are struggling economically and will for a while, thus there needs to be some consideration for them as well.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Yes, the owners need to earn with they invested,

Considering how this wasn't the approach taken for equity investors, I struggle to see why it should be the approach for real estate investors.

Sure, there are people who depend on rental income to make ends meet, but there are also retired people who depend on their stocks and mutual funds to make ends meet, and they got no support at all.

 

[Revoltingest]

Is being insanely callous to the poor a cool, hip thing, now?

Let's consider who is callous......
Government & lefties say that landlords should provide
housing to tenants who don't pay rent. Landlords should
eat the costs of debt service, utilities, insurance, property
taxes, management costs, & maintenance.
It's the charitable thing to do.

But why should only landlords bear the burden?
Why don't non-landlords chip in to either pay the
rent or cover the landlords' costs?
Have you given any money to landlords or tenants?
Has any other non-landlord here done so?
Or is it only someone else's responsibility to pony up?

I say that government should use tax money to aid
those in need, thus spreading the burden widely.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Single persons and couples should be able to cope

Why do you think that?

 

[oldbadger]

Why do you think that?

Hi....
Here was the original paragraph that I wrote, with that phrase within......

We are about to have a similar problem here in the UK. Special protections (from eviction) are just about to end and many tenants/mortgagees are going to be evicted. Single persons and couples should be able to cope but families with children need to be provided for.

I think that single persons and childless couples are more able to move, to change lifestyles, to adapt, SF, whereas families with children will find these situations much more difficult. I could have added 'pet owners' to the families list.

Do you think that is wrong?