What is Digg?Sponsored by newegg
Tired of paying the man? Ultra Low Emissions Vehicle 41 MPG highway view!
newegg.com - Enter for your chance to win Smart Prize Packages from WD and Newegg.
90 Comments
- DevilToo, on 11/11/2009, -3/+32I rented an apartment once that was remodeled and looked great. I later found out after my computer chair rolled all the way from one end to the other with me in it that it was completely unlevel.
- 5thdigg, on 11/12/2009, -0/+25that's not a slum lol.
- ZenSuckit, on 11/12/2009, -2/+23Life imitates art...
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0103007/ - nattybohman, on 11/12/2009, -0/+18Great news for the side of justice.
However, I wouldn't exactly call it a "Slumlord Win!"
Sounds to me like he clearly lost. - theodenking, on 11/12/2009, -3/+20The words of a man who has never even glimpsed poverty.
- minidiez, on 11/11/2009, -3/+19I wish my landlord had to do that.
- fleischkopf, on 11/12/2009, -3/+18a.k.a. "Screw the poor people."
- RealmDown, on 11/12/2009, -0/+13cool story bro
- theodenking, on 11/12/2009, -1/+14It's better than living on the street? Is that the standard you have for your fellow human beings? Everybody deserves a certain basic level of cleanliness and repair regardless of their means. Besides, this guy isn't skimping on maintenance because he can't afford it, he's doing it because he's a greedy, amoral *****.
- rednip, on 11/12/2009, -0/+13Getting the landlord to make the fixes is the intent. If the judge simply wanted to punish him, he'd throw him in jail.
- thetzar, on 11/12/2009, -0/+11A landlord will usually create a dummy corporation for each property, "34 Pine St, Inc", etc. This not only shields the owner(s) from liability for each property, but also insulates each property from another. Thus, if one building collapses and the landlord is judged to be liable for several million dollars, the courts can't take his other buildings to pay for it (unless the dummy corporations are very, very thin on paper). This also makes it harder to get a quick glance at who owns what; corporations can be layered several times over.
- rednip, on 11/12/2009, -0/+9I don't know why you're being dugg down, as the plot of the movie is 'a rich man forced by a judge to live in his own slum'.
- shnuffy, on 11/12/2009, -1/+10This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. His properties are a health and safety risk to those who rent them.
- covertbadger, on 11/12/2009, -1/+9Ah, but then there's the unwritten step 6: trash the place on the last day of your enforced occupancy.
- Iamien, on 11/12/2009, -4/+12No problem for him.
1. Find out when you have to move in.
2. Authorize a couple dozen work orders on a particular unit a few weeks before.
3. Live in it for that month.
4. Piss off judge.
5. ???
5. Profit more. - theOster, on 11/12/2009, -0/+8in brooklyn, there are no level floors
- GrandZooby, on 11/12/2009, -0/+8@DrNemo, sure, he can do what he wants with his property - as long as it doesn't impact other people who don't have a choice, namely his neighbors. Not maintaining his property devalues the neighborhood and is stealing value from his neighbors. This is where the government has an obligation to step in.
And it's not like his neighbors can just sell and move - their properties are worth less because of this lowlife.
Plus, most municipalities have laws that regulate rental properties, requiring that certain conditions be met. This is a result of the federal and state constitutions as well as county and city charters. You may not like it, but it IS what the people of this country have chosen to do, and legally so, through their governments. - Dundasbro, on 11/12/2009, -0/+8The man is disobeying laws and regulations designed to protect tenants. The man has a legal obligation to follow those, and the tenants no matter their income status have a legal right to expect those regulations to be followed or upheld by the courts. This is predatory and neglectful behaviour against the most defenceless possible tenants this man could have.
- shnuffy, on 11/12/2009, -0/+8FTA: "He owns 150 to 300 properties, according to city estimates."
So, according to the city, he may or may not own another 150 properties? Shouldn't the city know this sort of thing? - PhillyMJS, on 11/12/2009, -3/+10He'll probably strike a deal with a Hollywood studio to film it all and release it as "The Super 2"
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0103007/ - RealmDown, on 11/12/2009, -0/+7I'd say the list is both long and varied.
- RoyHobbs, on 11/12/2009, -1/+8In Russia unlevel floors level you!
- Demener, on 11/12/2009, -0/+7Actually once you sign the contract you're stuck. Its easy to make a place look presentable for a prospective tenant when underneath it's just a pile of *****.
So yes, the current residents are being forced to live there. - JoeF8577, on 11/12/2009, -0/+6Hate to split hairs here...
but isn't it more like Slumlord FAIL. Doesn't seem like he won anything. - govsucks, on 11/12/2009, -2/+8I worked for a company that cleaned up section 8 housing when I was 17. I can tell you without a doubt that most of the damage caused to these apartments is cause by tenants. I can't begin to describe the nasty things I witnessed. You think its so easy being a landlord, especially for poor people, I suggest you buy some properties and rent them out to the government and see how long they stay in rentable shape. People don't give a ***** about things that don't belong to them.
- curunir, on 11/12/2009, -0/+6Probably should be buried as inaccurate.
First of all, the picture in the story isn't one of his properties, and it's not in a bad part of Richmond (or even in the East End, where he owns properties). The East End *is* pretty run down, but it's not the worst part of Richmond. That would be the public housing project on Church Hill, and the public housing just north of I-64.
And the violations he was accused of weren't even tenant complaints. They were problems with properties he owned that were UNOCCUPIED - that is, he couldn't get them rented, and wasn't watching for vagrants breaking in and trashing the places.
This story has more information: http://www.wtvr.com/news/wtvr-richmond-slumlord-go ... - Sirlolalot, on 11/12/2009, -0/+6Are you kidding! The guy won a 30 day all expenses paid round trip to Jail! ...
- cajungator3, on 11/12/2009, -0/+5Didn't Joe Pesci have to do this?
- rednip, on 11/12/2009, -1/+6Most of the time, even poor people don't rent the 'broken' apartments, as when the move in everything is working fine and looking good. It's only when the winter comes along and you don't have any heat, or you find the central air isn't working on the hottest day of the year. etc. Some of these problems come in months, others after many years of renting.
Making a voluntary move is an expensive, time consuming process, and many working poor can't do it just because the landlord won't fix things he's legally required to. - Demener, on 11/12/2009, -0/+5It's called house arrest.
- naner, on 11/12/2009, -1/+6Hate to burst your bubble, but the judge did throw him in jail.
"Oliver Lawrence was sentenced Monday to 30 days in jail, followed by 40 days in home incarceration at a small, single-story house owned by his company, Bayou Properties. He also was fined more than $177,000." - shnuffy, on 11/12/2009, -0/+4Exactly what I was looking for. Thanks.
- Demener, on 11/12/2009, -0/+4He's not "the only businessmen that provide housing to the poor people" he's a douche bag slum lord.
Just because rent is cheap does not mean the property is in disrepair. Making a place work just good enough to trick people into moving in is dishonest at best and criminal at worst. Once these people move in they are being forced to stay there for the duration of the contract that the landlord is not properly fulfilling his end of (maintaining his property).
"Government has no business here. "
His properties violated health and safety regulations, so yes government does have a business here. If you don't think government has a place regulating health and safety standards then please go move somewhere that doesn't. I like clean air and clean living conditions and would never willingly live in a smog filled city. - MistrBrownstone, on 11/12/2009, -0/+4Heather: What is that smell? It smells like...
Louie Kritski: Piss.
Heather: Yeah, smells like piss, what is it?
Louie Kritski: It's piss. Drunks come in the hallway and they piss.
Heather: You let them pee in here?
Louie Kritski: It's not like they ask permission. - pinchduck, on 11/12/2009, -0/+4No one made him buy the building and sublet it to tenants, either. If he didn't do basic research to find out that housing is regulated by state and local laws in that city, then he is a moron. He had every opportunity to have complete knowledge of the regulations in force when he decided to go into that business, and knowledge that new regulations could be made at any time. Caveat emptor cuts both ways, buddy.
- Demener, on 11/12/2009, -0/+4That's what security deposits are for.
- 11oops, on 11/12/2009, -0/+3So he has motivation to fix up the property. Since he's living there, I'm sure he'll spend some money on making it inhabitable. It's less about justice than it is about forced motivation.
- steviesteveo, on 11/12/2009, -0/+3Uh, yeah they do. They draw up a court order to confine you to an address and they put an address on it. It's not as if they're asking him to live in someone else's house - he owns this house he's being told to live in.
You've confused yourself by talking about the drive through at Mc Donalds, he's not been told to live there, that's a great example of something the court has totally not done. He's been told to stay in a house and he owns that building and that's totally fine. - ChuckIT, on 11/12/2009, -0/+3Richmond, VA is a great place to live, they have some amazing restaurants and great places to live. Some people believe it to be a ***** hole - but when they come and visit find out they can have fun and live in amazing houses and rent amazing apartments expensively - they tend to change their mind.
Now this guy had his properties were in low income communities - which every city has.
I really hope he gets a change of heart after his whole ordeal and reforms his ways. I think this is a fair sentencing. I also think he should be made to answer to the people who rent from him. - j035u5, on 11/12/2009, -0/+3They clearly aren't that empoverished or they wouldn't be able to afford to take him to court, or pay any kind of rent for that matter. They're probably just averagely broke, unlike DrNemo who sounds like he is either this landlord, someone who hasn't moved out of his mother's basement, or someone who's never had money problems.
If he provides a service and the law says that he has to do it properly or not at all, and he knew that before he started the service, then he should obey the law or stop the service. - MistrBrownstone, on 11/12/2009, -0/+3http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNG-xrnaSE4
- MistrBrownstone, on 11/12/2009, -0/+3Louie Kritski: Why is it that you have twenty-four different kinds of pork rinds and you only have one kind of peanut butter?
Cashier: Because we don't get too many fussy little white pricks in here.
Louie Kritski: Okay. - SNESChalmers, on 11/12/2009, -1/+4Did you happen to live in Dowisetrepla?
- 11oops, on 11/12/2009, -0/+3When the person has millions of dollars and can easily spend some of it to bring the property that he owns up to code. The judge is forcing the property owner to live in a home that he owns and that he feels is good enough to have others live in -- how is that putting his life in danger?
- PhillyMJS, on 11/12/2009, -0/+3Possibly because someone else posted a comment with the link a minute before I did (which I did not see until after I posted my comment).
- 11oops, on 11/12/2009, -0/+2So they can't make me live somewhere like jail or prison?
Oh, and if what you say was true regarding primary residence only, I'm sure all lawyers would know that since they would be forced to learn that in law school and before passing the bar. And this wouldn't be a story because it would already be under appeal with a quote from the defense attorney stating that. - 11oops, on 11/12/2009, -1/+3Becoming a landlord is just like opening any other small business -- profits are not guaranteed! If you don't want to deal with those problems, then purchase nice properties, run background checks on prospective tenants, verify your tenants are upholding their side of the lease (beside rent, also paying utility bills, maintaining the grounds, not hoarding piles of garbage, etc.). At the first sign of trouble, start the eviction process. If you take all the necessary steps at the beginning, odds are you'll have long-term tenants and few problems.
There's nothing that forces property owners to buy outdated buildings in poor neighborhoods and then accept section 8 tenants except greed. They want to buy the cheapest buildings possible and then get the guaranteed section 8 HUD payments while doing nothing to improve or maintain the building/neighborhood. They threaten court action and eviction to try and keep the tenant's quiet over their failures to maintain the dwellings. They let greed destroy their quality of their tenant's lives and consider the properties to be largely disposable. - steviesteveo, on 11/12/2009, -1/+3Burst his bubble? Not really.
The judge wanted to punish him and get him to fix up his properties, that's the general idea. - 11oops, on 11/14/2009, -0/+2Property owner organizations maintain several databases of tenant's rental history, including damage inflicted, late payments etc. which landlords can research prospective tenants with. In additional, most landlords will sue for damages and unpaid rent which will show up in small claims court records which are easily obtained. In addition, eviction is handled through the courts and will also show up with a prospective tenants court history. There are numerous services that will do full background checks on prospective tenants including the above for a very nominal fee. Income and credit doesn't really matter -- rental history does.
Plus, if the prospective tenant can't provide a previous landlord that can provide a positive reference, then the landlord can turn away the tenant, even if it is a section-8 housing. They can also require a cosigner and can require that the cosigner have appropriate credit.
Landlords have numerous resources available to them to screen tenants, however most fail to do so because they want their units filled and don't want to do extra work. Tenants may cause them problems, but that's the property owners fault for not screening properly. - 11oops, on 11/13/2009, -0/+2No, I work for an electric company that provides power to everyone, including both good and bad landlords and good and bad tenants. We often become involved in disputes regarding properties, damage, theft, unpaid bills, and various other tenant/landlord disputes. I'm speaking from what I have personally experienced and from what I have been called in to court on numerous occasions to testify to.
How would you like to be a tenant in a building where the owner allowed a burst pipe to run for a week straight which filled up the basement with six four feet of water which then came into contact with bare wires from an illegally modified electrical metering point which then energized the flooded basement and killed two tenant's children who were down there trying to clear the floor-drain? That was the last case I was in court about -- sound like an ACORN talking point?
And how the ***** did you turn this into a right/left political issue? Greedy slumlords fall on both ends of the political spectrum -- don't delude yourself into thinking all leftists are neighborhood organizers and all conservatives are the greedy property owners. -
Show 51 - 92 of 92 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is