BREAKING NEWS: SENATE THINKS YOU HAVE TOO MUCH FREEDOM

[TheReal_ND]

Protection rackets

[jbird4049]

Protection rackets

As in some guys in suits telling the grocer "nice business you have here, it would be a shame if anything happened to it". The Mob used to do this, and maybe still does. Some particularly corrupt police departments have had regular "donations" to the police association's "benevolence" fund. So why not building inspectors?

[jbird4049]

Building dept shows up and says: show us the illegal construction work.
I say: what illegal construction work.
show us the illegal construction work.
I say: I don't know of any construction work. do you know what apartment of this building you want to see?
No.
So you want to go on a fishing expedition through all the homes in this building?
Pause. We'll be back.

They slapped me with a $4500 fine for not letting them in. Utterly illegally. I discovered SCOTUS ruled in Camara vs SF (1967) that if buildings wants in they need a warrant. Everyone, including lawyers not in this field, told me to let them in, but now I was pissed. Finally found a lawyer who knew his shit, and when he saw the docs said "this is bullshit". But it cost me $2500 to make it go away.

Building Dept perjured themselves to the judge saying they had wanted to see a unit with an open permit (only open because they failed to complete their paperwork after inspecting it years earlier). Had they asked to see one unit, I would have notified the tenant, and gotten permission, since I cannot otherwise legally enter a tenant's apartment unless it is an emergency, which this was not. Can you imagine if I let these guys into people's homes and they had anything incriminating sitting around? I could get sued.

There's your 4th amendment bedtime story.

That is some craziness. Even I know the 4th Amendment requires a warrant to search a home even if it is often honored in the breach. But how about this: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the ... 494dea66d2?

Yesterday we looked at a warrantless, mass search of Georgia high school students that was almost certainly unconstitutional, and that some students say included touching and probing of their genitals. Today, another disturbing story about what would seem to be clearly unconstitutional searches at a Colorado low-income apartment complex:

The Longmont Housing Authority says it was using the homes of low-income residents to train police drug dogs. There weren’t warrants, but simply a notice that the landlord was coming, and a police officer and drug dog would be there, too.

The letter to residents of The Suites low-income housing community starts with standard stuff, notifying them of an inspection. That’s what landlords across Colorado do.

Then it mentions that the police officer and drug dog. Nowhere in the letter are residents told that while they must let the landlord in, they do not have to allow the police officer and drug dog inside without a warrant. And then, if the officer does come inside, anything they find is fair game.

The head of the complex is Krystal Winship Erazo, and she appears to have no concept whatsoever of the Fourth Amendment.

[clubgop]

I like the term rent seeking to point out economic inefficiencies those other things already have names like corruption, bribery, fraud, and usury. Good landlords get a bad rap, but when you have an experience with a bad one that is hell. You feel under seige in your own home. Our obsession with home buying already puts renting in a bad light, bad experiences are just icing on the cake.

[brewster]

I like the term rent seeking to point out economic inefficiencies those other things already have names like corruption, bribery, fraud, and usury. Good landlords get a bad rap, but when you have an experience with a bad one that is hell. You feel under seige in your own home. Our obsession with home buying already puts renting in a bad light, bad experiences are just icing on the cake.

I've understood it's meaning clearly, but since it has nothing to do with rent they could have simply come up with a less loaded term. But as a listener to Econtalk I know economists often have their own meanings for common words.

Renting an apartment should be like any other deal, participants should be happy or able to walk away. It does have a lot of friction in that process, as moving is not as easy as walking out of a restaurant that gives you bad service, but in a free market the landlord should value a tenant and not make them miserable enough to leave. It's a pain to find new tenants. Sadly, way too often we don't have free markets, and between rent controls and restrictive zoning keeping down supply you often get a cage match between landlords and tenants.

I've been at this 20 years, and have never had a conflict with a tenant I rented to, only the losers who were in there when we bought it. Best was a moron who tried a slip and fall suit, then called every city agency to report violations. In the presence of a uniformed FD inspector he says "I don't care if I'm on parole, I'm going to beat you down!" I was happy to evict those scumbags. People think NJ is tenant friendly, and it mostly is, you can't refuse to renew a lease. But they gave notice, then changed their mind, presumably after the new landlord credit checked them. Turns out in NJ there's no backsies on that, you can legally double the rent. And I did.

[Okeefenokee]

I like the term rent seeking to point out economic inefficiencies those other things already have names like corruption, bribery, fraud, and usury. Good landlords get a bad rap, but when you have an experience with a bad one that is hell. You feel under seige in your own home. Our obsession with home buying already puts renting in a bad light, bad experiences are just icing on the cake.

I've understood it's meaning clearly, but since it has nothing to do with rent they could have simply come up with a less loaded term. But as a listener to Econtalk I know economists often have their own meanings for common words.

Renting an apartment should be like any other deal, participants should be happy or able to walk away. It does have a lot of friction in that process, as moving is not as easy as walking out of a restaurant that gives you bad service, but in a free market the landlord should value a tenant and not make them miserable enough to leave. It's a pain to find new tenants. Sadly, way too often we don't have free markets, and between rent controls and restrictive zoning keeping down supply you often get a cage match between landlords and tenants.

I've been at this 20 years, and have never had a conflict with a tenant I rented to, only the losers who were in there when we bought it. Best was a moron who tried a slip and fall suit, then called every city agency to report violations. In the presence of a uniformed FD inspector he says "I don't care if I'm on parole, I'm going to beat you down!" I was happy to evict those scumbags. People think NJ is tenant friendly, and it mostly is, you can't refuse to renew a lease. But they gave notice, then changed their mind, presumably after the new landlord credit checked them. Turns out in NJ there's no backsies on that, you can legally double the rent. And I did.

patriarchy

[brewster]

patriarchy

I admire brevity as much as the next guy, but you'll have to elaborate for me to get your point.

[C-Mag]

Building dept shows up and says: show us the illegal construction work.
I say: what illegal construction work.
show us the illegal construction work.
I say: I don't know of any construction work. do you know what apartment of this building you want to see?
No.
So you want to go on a fishing expedition through all the homes in this building?
Pause. We'll be back.

They slapped me with a $4500 fine for not letting them in. Utterly illegally. I discovered SCOTUS ruled in Camara vs SF (1967) that if buildings wants in they need a warrant. Everyone, including lawyers not in this field, told me to let them in, but now I was pissed. Finally found a lawyer who knew his shit, and when he saw the docs said "this is bullshit". But it cost me $2500 to make it go away.

Building Dept perjured themselves to the judge saying they had wanted to see a unit with an open permit (only open because they failed to complete their paperwork after inspecting it years earlier). Had they asked to see one unit, I would have notified the tenant, and gotten permission, since I cannot otherwise legally enter a tenant's apartment unless it is an emergency, which this was not. Can you imagine if I let these guys into people's homes and they had anything incriminating sitting around? I could get sued.

There's your 4th amendment bedtime story.

Yeah, these city and county offices have started looking at fines as a source of income. I know in some places they have their inspectors driving allies and looking at trash cans for signs of construction. Something as little as a new Water Heater box can get you put under their microscope.

[SuburbanFarmer]

Back to OP - that leaves bank debit and credit cards as the only acceptable forms of currency. Where do you suppose they got that idea?

[clubgop]

you can't refuse to renew a lease

Can't you jack the price up to something unreasonable?