City: Notice of Rental Inspection

[Eli]

I guess nobody caught it, but I meant of course that driving isn't a right. Edited now.

I am fully aware that I'm operating a business, and like I said, if this was presented precisely like that, it would be fine. I know my other business is subject to random searches, and that makes complete sense. I have no reasonable expectation of privacy in my business.

My tenants however, do have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their homes. They can come in and search my shit up and down when it's not currently anybody's home. But with tenants in place? Nope, nope, nope. It's none of the cities business how my tenants live. Like I said, it is barely mine, and I own the place. I know that can easily be twisted to mean "They can live in squalor and I don't care" but that's not what I mean. This is what I mean:

A short intrusion can reveal very personal information about one’s religion, political beliefs, emotional or mental state, hobbies, sexual orientation, and/or gender identity. Needless to say, people shouldn’t lose their privacy rights just because they’re renting a property.

http://ij.org/action-post/does-the-...s-a-primer-on-warrantless-rental-inspections/

Are things really so bad out there in landlord land that they'll sacrifice their tenants 4th amendment rights just to make sure everything is OK themselves, above and beyond whatever their lease specifies?

Obviously, I really like the idea of needing whatever documentation on file with the city, before the utilities can be put in someone elses name. That makes complete sense, and if this was presented like that, up front, I would have had no problem with having the places inspected. When they're empty. That means before the tenants put the utilities into their name and move in......

But this? Nope. Never. Like I've said over and over again, as a renter for 34 years, I would not want this, ever. I once lived in a place without(proper) heat for 7 years. This isn't the way to fix it. I'd have told the city to fuck off then too. I probably would have been even more extreme about it, even. This is just.. No.

Looks like the tenants need to consent to the inspection. Do you know what happens if they don't? Serious question, do they say anywhere what will happen?

There is no option for refusing, and they don't say what will happen anywhere that I've found. But from what I've read on some forums and stuff, if the tenant refuses, then they really start trying to get the landlord to let them in. Yeah. How about no? So if I say no too, that hopefully will be the end of it.

 

[Imp]

It's perfectly fine for grandma to safely live there for 60 years with the original electrical system. Now it might have to be replaced only because someone else is moving in? Doesn't make sense.

Not sure what the logic is, but my guess is that you're allowed to fuck yourself any way you want. You are not allowed to fuck over someone else whom you owe a duty of care.

 

[Humpy]

Not sure what the logic is, but my guess is that you're allowed to fuck yourself any way you want. You are not allowed to fuck over someone else whom you owe a duty of care.

🙄

The property management code goes beyond basic life safety code and seemingly includes aesthetic and convenience requirements.

 

[Eli]

Not sure what the logic is, but my guess is that you're allowed to fuck yourself any way you want. You are not allowed to fuck over someone else whom you owe a duty of care.

Ugh. Really?

Again, I just had a home inspection done. I just got a new water heater, with permit. What evidence is there that I'm doing anything wrong, or that my tenants are unhappy about anything? Aren't these things evidence that I'm doing things right? Do they think I'm going around and undoing everything that was OK in the initial inspection or something? This is just not reasonable in any way, shape or form. I agree with the concept of rental inspections, but not random inspections.

It's just ludicrous. I admit that it probably really does help with reducing the "poor people problems" that inflict a city(drugs, crime), but it's not the right way to do it. There has to be a better way. Why single out renters? Why aren't they coming to inspect my house? Because I'm a homeowner, I'm doing everything right?

I have a home owner a few houses down who doesn't take very good care of their property. Why aren't they inspecting their house? If I was, you know, INSANE, I would want that house to be inspected. Because, you know.. when someone doesn't take very good care of their property, it means ___________________, and they should be checked out. Right?

Not the world I want to live in, and I can pretty much guarantee it's not the world you want to live in either.

What about the mexican family that lives behind my new units who just had a bunch of their mexican friends put in a new fence? I'm not racist, they're nice folks, those are just the facts. The fence is a piece of shit, there's no way they got a permit for it - I doubt they've ever built a fence in their lives. It's that bad. Why aren't they inspecting them? Because they're home owners?

Ahh, but you see.. I could turn them in, for not getting the proper permits to build that fence. They make it very easy to do this in Gresham. And Portland. They even enable you to do it anonymously! And then they would be inspected. See how that works?

Initial Rental Inspections OK. Mandatory Random Rental Inspections (at any time) NOT OK. Pretty simple, actually.

 

[Spacehead]

There is no option for refusing, and they don't say what will happen anywhere that I've found. But from what I've read on some forums and stuff, if the tenant refuses, then they really start trying to get the landlord to let them in. Yeah. How about no? So if I say no too, that hopefully will be the end of it.

In the letter to the tenants in bold:
"Please complete & sign the consent form..."

There's a number to call for questions. Ask the tenant(or you) to call & see what happens if they don't sign the consent form.

 

[shabby]

My tenants however, do have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their homes.

Its not their home either since they don't own it, now if they decided to do an inspection of the landlords house for whatever reason then you start going bonkers.

 

[JEDI]

It's perfectly fine for grandma to safely live there for 60 years with the original electrical system. Now it might have to be replaced only because someone else is moving in? Doesn't make sense.

when the code changes, people are grandfathered under the old code.
if u make any changes (ie: remodel), everything has to be brought up to current code

 

[JEDI]

Initial Rental Inspections OK. Mandatory Random Rental Inspections (at any time) NOT OK. Pretty simple, actually.

yes, initial inspection for each time you rent to new people makes sense.
random inspections, not so much.

but in your case, even if they said initial, they still have to inspect while your tenant is occupying your rental property because you rented b4 getting the rental license.

 

[Eli]

yes, initial inspection for each time you rent to new people makes sense.
random inspections, not so much.

but in your case, even if they said initial, they still have to inspect while your tenant is occupying your rental property because you rented b4 getting the rental license.

Yeah, but they planned it like that.. Another thing that grates me about this.

Rather than making it so I was forced to have the Rental Permit on file so my tenants can turn on their utilities(up front), they go ahead and let them turn them on, but implement a cross check to add the suspected renters address to the pot of random pulls(cryptic). Nice. I am not TRYING to do anything wrong here. I'm TRYING to live the American Dream, and be a good person while doing it. Had they made it up front like that, I would have had no problems complying. But fuck you if you want to come into my house. As far as I'm concerned it's the same thing, I view my tenants as I view myself. Equal.

And it's still ongoing. A successful inspection removes you from the pot for "1-3 years", but I guess it's typically only one. Meaning this could still happen to my tenants again, or new tenants. Nope. I'm not going to play these types of games with my tenants, the city most certainly doesn't get to.

Gresham has it all backwards. They implemented this program, THEN implemented the ability to file individual complaints too. In this specific form, this is nothing but a power grab... and it will be struck down, I'm quite confident of that. Of course likely not by me, unless I find a really generous attorney who's willing to fight for the sake of fighting. I'd rather just buy more properties. Outside of Gresham. 😀

 

[Humpy]

when the code changes, people are grandfathered under the old code.
if u make any changes (ie: remodel), everything has to be brought up to current code

Typically, yes. Though not everything has to be brought to code, it's usually only in areas where work is being done, if it's deemed to be a total remodel, or if it's a clear immediate hazard.

This rental inspection is different because they can apparently come inspect at random and force you to make improvements. A lot of it is safety oriented and reasonable, some of it isn't.

 

[Imp]

🙄

The property management code goes beyond basic life safety code and seemingly includes aesthetic and convenience requirements.

You only mentioned electrical requirements, I gave a guess at the intent based on that.

I can eat/serve myself expired, rotten food. I could be sued or shut down if I serve it to guests or clients, whether they pay for it or not.

Ugh. Really?

Just to clarify, I was just commenting on his situation. Your situation... Good luck with that?

 

[twinrider1]

You, as landlord, are allowed to enter a renter's home with 24 hours notice. How is that any less a violation of their privacy?

 

[Humpy]

You only mentioned electrical requirements, I gave a guess at the intent based on that.

I can eat/serve myself expired, rotten food. I could be sued or shut down if I serve it to guests or clients, whether they pay for it or not.




Just to clarify, I was just commenting on his situation. Your situation... Good luck with that?

Sorry for the rolly eyes. I read too much into your post.

 

[Imp]

Sorry for the rolly eyes. I read too much into your post.

I probably could have cut down on the overly casual use of the f-word.

 

[shabby]

You, as landlord, are allowed to enter a renter's home with 24 hours notice. How is that any less a violation of their privacy?

But but but its their home... privacy! 4th amemememdment!

 

[pete6032]

Maybe they used to inspect all properties but cut back to random selection to save money?

 

[who?]

Its not their home either since they don't own it, now if they decided to do an inspection of the landlords house for whatever reason then you start going bonkers.

It is their home because it is where they live regardless of who owns it.

 

[Red Squirrel]

Rental laws are ridiculously skewed against the land lords. I know someone at work dealing with a bad tenant and there's pretty much nothing she can do. The guy is an alcoholic, rarely pays his rent, brings in prostitutes, even underaged girls, pretty sure there are drugs involved, all sorts of crazy stuff. But because the laws protect the tenants so much the guy is basically untouchable. When he does not pay his rent for a certain amount of time she can get a form and have an official letter sent to him, but if he makes even a small payment, it resets everything. Same with other issues like noise etc.

The guy has caused tons of damage too. When he gets mad at her he just lets the sink overflow so it ends up leaking to her living space. She's on the hook to fix all of that.

She's at a point where she wants to bring him to court but it's ridiculous it even has to get to that and you need lot of money to do that. When it's your own property you should be able to kick anyone out at any time with some notice. It's crossed my mind to rent, but glad I never got into it, you practically don't even own your property anymore at that point because of all the laws. This mandatory inspection is just an example of that.

 

[Eli]

It is their home because it is where they live regardless of who owns it.

This x9000. Period. The difference is that it's the government coming to check things out.

I'll say it again. You would be okay with the police stopping by at random? Inviting themselves into every room in your house, to check everything out? What do you have to hide, right?? Are you completely insane?

Regarding tenant landlord laws.. It's tricky here in the US because every state and even municipality has it's own laws. Some states/areas are very pro tenant, some are pro landlord.

Random Inspections are purely anti-citizen though. This has nothing to do with protecting renters.

But there are other alternatives to mandatory rental inspections. Tenants can ask for inspection if they’re concerned about a property. In addition, inspections could avoid infringing renters’ privacy by conducting them only when a property is vacant. Cities could also incentivize landlords and landladies by offering seal of approvals or quality standards. These could then be used in marketing to promote better properties. These options would both protect the health and safety of renters, without sacrificing their civil liberties.

I was saying all of these exact things before I found and read the Institute of Justice website. When I saw the letters I about shit a brick, instinctively. Can't believe everyone doesn't have the same reaction.

Seriously, who believes it's OK to sacrifice someone's 4th amendment rights in the name of safety? How can this be any more clear?

“The court fully understands that the City has a valid and important governmental interest in protecting the public, however, the court sees no reason why this should be done at the expense of infringing on rights guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.”

I'm kinda hoping the Institute for Justice will take up my case. That would be epic. Probably dreaming though.

 

[Red Squirrel]

The scary part is a lot of people are willing to give up their privacy for safety. Just look at how most people don't even care about all the spying the US does on the internet. People need to fight this stuff, not be ok with it.

 

[Eli]

In the meantime, I'm going to spend about 5k to put in a motorized rolling gate across the driveway. The property is recessed back in the middle of a block, and it's the only access. I was planning on doing it anyway for tenant safety(it's a pretty bad neighborhood..), but was a little shocked at the price when I looked into it just a few weeks ago. In light of all this, it doesn't seem like such a big deal anymore....

No city goons get to walk onto my property without my permission. Will be installed before the 20th. 😀 Wife is worried they'll say something about her two beehives we have there (ran out of room at home, and bees are good, mmmkay?). It should be okay(you're allowed 4), but again, what could possibly go wrong when you have people inspecting for the sake of inspecting?

I need to buy properties in the country. Ugh.

 

[Red Squirrel]

Yeah people inspecting for the sake of inspecting are pretty much wanting to find stuff so they can justify their jobs. Every little stupid thing they'll want to flag.

Speaking of the stupidities of today's world, just saw a news article about another kids lemonade stand being shut down. It's not the first time I hear about that happen. We live in such an idiotic world. In general, it's the lawsuit system's fault. Everything always boils down to liability BS.