Is Detroit Finally Going After Unscrupulous Landlords?

"All rental properties in the first compliance area — ZIP code 48215 on the city’s east side — will have 90 days [[May 1) to get properties registered as rentals with the city. Under the new rental property ordinance, building owners will have six months to bring their properties up to code, have them inspected and obtain a certificate of compliance from the city.
Each month, a new ZIP code will be added, beginning its six-month compliance period. Detroit residents and landlords will have the opportunity to both verify and register their properties bringing them into code compliance."




https://www.freep.com/story/news/loc...ds/1086944001/

I foresee another round of tax foreclosures with Landlords abandoning their barely or no Longer profitable rentals. I foresee lots of buildings no longer in the rental market. I foresee the landbank getting a whole bunch more uninhabitable buildings.

I foresee Lots of people without places to live.

Detroit was already a tough place to be a landlord. This just adds more costly obstacles.

So poor people should be forced to live in shit conditions because laws are not enforced?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drjeff

So poor people should be forced to live in shit conditions because laws are not enforced?

---

No. Of course not.

But we also should not drive rents up and force 'poor people' onto the street and into shelters, should we?

Intent of law: eliminate shitholes.

Unintended consequence that may result: rents go up as landlords are forced to make unnecessary updates.

Which will happen? Depends on how Detroit writes the laws, and how they are enforced. Lead paint? Exposed live electric wires? Sewage being dumped into yard? We'd all agree. Bathrooms must be barrier-free for people using wheelchairs? There must be electric outlets every so many feet? Walls must have R23 for minimizing energy and CO emissions? All good goals -- but if in the law and enforced, except rents to rise, and unaffordability of apartments to increase.

And do you think landlords are going to fix up their place if they can't recoop the money they used. This is either going to severely drive up rents or drive the landlords out of business. Being a landlord is a for profit business. Not many people are going to do it if they can't make money at it.

That is exactly what happened in LA where homelessness increased 75% in 6 years.

I know some investors in another city that rent out crapholes,and the people living in them are happy to have a roof over their head verses sleeping in the street.

That is what is going to happen in the city as it progresses,there is going to be a segment of the population that will be displaced.

I give the currant mayor kudos for addressing the situation well in advance by implementing the 20% new build rule and being proactive.He is okay for a dem.

You cannot stop what is going to happen,only try and take steps to lessen the impact.In 6 months you will see the layout of how the city will be according to income.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ndavies

And do you think landlords are going to fix up their place if they can't recoop the money they used. This is either going to severely drive up rents or drive the landlords out of business. Being a landlord is a for profit business. Not many people are going to do it if they can't make money at it.

---

As a landlord, I believe rental conditions can be improved. It just has to be done gently. Bureaucracies aren't very good at applying discretion. But if anyone can make this work, it would be Duggan. The idea of 'by zip code' wouldn't be my choice. I'd rather they phase in 'by type of hazard'.

What might be done is something like this...

First, for the first 6 months, you go after fire safety items. Make sure windows are operable, and that there are safe exits from all room.

Then for the next 6 months, you check for environmental hazards such as lead paint and lead pipes. Get paint removed. Enforce changeout of any lead pipes on the property.

Then for the next 6, check all heating units. Are furnaces vented properly? Are the furnace and hot water spaces empty?

And so on for several years. This would protect both the residents from rent increases that would price them out of the market, but also protect the landlords from getting hit with a single monstrously large bill for repairs. That's particularly important for small landlords. A big slumlord has cash. Mom and Pop sometimes don't.

^ That would be massively labor intensive for the city,what they could also do is inspect the house and list everything and time factor repairs to level of urgency.

First would be dry roof and basic,here it is sanitary,a toilet and a kitchen.

They do not require lead paint removal,just encapsulated or painted over,but usually as long as the outside looks good then they do not bother you unless a tenant files a complaint,which is usually around the first of the month.

The rent assisted rentals are worse then the city,all the tenant has to do is call the program and complain valid or not and your payment is withheld until you prove that repairs have been made,it can be for something as simple as a landlord supplied washing machine.

In the U.K. the landlord provides nothing,tenant buys their own washer,cook stove,refrigerator etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richard

In the U.K. the landlord provides nothing,tenant buys their own washer,cook stove,refrigerator etc.

---

Maybe the tenants in the U.K. can afford that because they aren’t broke from medical bills.

This will help the big guys a lot. The big landlords [[recently rehab'd buildings especially) often get a lot of government money,.. and being newer,. they are compliant. These owners have a tenant base a large enough to be able to afford to deal with the city [[which can take hundreds of hours just to get through the process every year).

The small guys can't compete. Trying to go through the same process for a duplex of single family home that only has $100 a month in profit just doesn't pay.

Big government claims to help the poor,.. but really only helps the super rich. Just like on the federal level,.. where only the very rich can afford to donate large sums to politicians,.. hire lobbyists,... have offices in Ireland where their patents are held [[then claiming all their profits occurred there so as to avoid paying U.S. taxes),.. and bank accounts in Austria,... etc, etc, etc. The bigger and more complex government gets,.. the bigger the gap between the rich and the poor. The little guys can't play in that arena.

Back on the city / state level,.. the government takes tax money from businesses [[such as privately owned hotels, motels, apartments buildings and duplexes),.. and uses it to subsidize apartments for certain groups. In the Army for 2 years back in the '50's? Have a gambling problem? etc? Here's a brand new apartment for $165 a month.

Seems wonderful to the average news observer,.. but it is crushing to the business owners trying to compete with the socialist machine.

Houses and duplexes in Detroit are by and large very old. Being compliant is very difficult.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drjeff

So poor people should be forced to live in shit conditions because laws are not enforced?

---

How does this effect a homeowner living in their house? I have a relative on the east side, house paid, but it's a sh*TH*ole.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ndavies

I foresee another round of tax foreclosures with Landlords abandoning their barely or no Longer profitable rentals. I foresee lots of buildings no longer in the rental market. I foresee the landbank getting a whole bunch more uninhabitable buildings.

I foresee Lots of people without places to live.

Detroit was already a tough place to be a landlord. This just adds more costly obstacles.

---

obvious money/land grab here folks. the city just wants in on wayne county's game.

https://www.metrotimes.com/detroit/a...nt?oid=4179545

just follow the detroit future city plan to see how you will be impacted

https://detroitfuturecity.com/our-priorities/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chicago48

How does this effect a homeowner living in their house? I have a relative on the east side, house paid, but it's a sh*TH*ole.

---

This is addressing the rental property aspect,the homeowner will be next most likely because this way kills the whole look at that rental property down the street and you are bothering me aspect.

In the city I live in and in a What some would call ghettoish neighborhood as a homeowner they wrote me up for a 1" x 1" piece of asbestos siding missing on my 80 year old house.While the city lots remain overgrown and full of trash,one can clean the trash out but it would be filled up by morning again.

My $100 per day fine is up to $160,000 by now,but fines occur and when you fix it you negotiate a reduction,it is a castle doctrine state where it is extremely difficult to remove a homestead property owner from their house,you cannot even sue somebody and take their homesteaded house.

Most cases even with back taxes owed,unless it is derelict and a danger to the public not much threat.The object is to keep people in their house instead of the street,you would never see that many tax foreclosures come up,even if it does the homeowner still had 90 days to recover the property by paying a portion of the back taxes and auction fees.

As a homeowner,they cannot enter your property let alone the inside of the house without a warrent,so it is based on what they can see,they got me on another house in a different city by useing a drone to snap pictures of an enclosed fenced back yard,with rental properties they can enter with the tenants approval.

That is the way it is here,your friend can find out how it works there and apply it.

Detroit neighborhoods seem to be a large mix of multi family in with single family,once again here they have taken the stance of demolishing duplexs and triplex that are located in with the single family houses in an effort to create a more homeowner based neighborhood and help restore neighborhoods.

Probably just another money grab by a municipality. I doubt the city cares a whole lot about renters living conditions. I’ll bet they’re way more concerned about generating revenue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by softailrider

Probably just another money grab by a municipality. I doubt the city cares a whole lot about renters living conditions. I’ll bet they’re way more concerned about generating revenue.

---

Setting up code compliance is a hard way to generate revenue. I'm confident that this initiative is well-intended, and good for the citizens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

Setting up code compliance is a hard way to generate revenue. I'm confident that this initiative is well-intended, and good for the citizens.

---

Visit the permit office a week before a sweep and a week after and see the revenue generating aspect.

Even more so with rental properties,rent is due but my landlord changed out the water heater without a permit and I really do not feel safe.

Where I am at a permit is required to even change a wax ring on the toilet,most do not apply but in a rental situation it provides ammunition when it comes time to get paid.

But here for the low income homeowners they have a program where they will actually renovate the house,if you stay in the house 10 years the debt is forgiven if you sell before that the costs are due.

But that is what the hardest hit funds etc. programs were for,unfortunately Detroit is still suffering from the sins of the past where they were never applied for or abused.

I think someone predicted this somewhere in this thread.

Higher rents, 'massive displacement': The unknown costs of Detroit's landlord crackdown

https://www.metrotimes.com/detroit/h...t?oid=15129860

Next up in the MT, an article exploring the negative impact of minimum wage increases on urban youth.

I don't read the MT, but have they lost their left-wing mind?