• PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    How many of those SoCal homes had previously been taken over by bougie profit speculating developers and landlords?

    • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      I would support the squatters if it’s always million + dollar residences that have just been sitting idle.

      • evasive_chimpanzee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        I think that’s usually the case. Yeah, a squatter could be waiting in the bushes for you to go to work so they can break in and set up shop, but they’d know that would lead to a fight, so they’d aim for unoccupied houses where they’d be left alone

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Recently, squatters took over a Beverly Crest mansion and turned it into a wild party house where hundreds of rowdy guests would show up every night.

    In February, another group of squatters took over a Hollywood Hills mansion and used the property to produce OnlyFans content.

    I hope these are the squatters he’s focusing on and not desperate homeless people who found an unoccupied 2 bedroom house to sleep in.

    • comador @lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Actually he’s not, he is using a loophole whereby the owners sign an official lease with him for him to reside there.

      The other tenant(s) do not have a lease and therefore are not within the legal right to complain.

      edit: He also doesn’t do it directly for profit, thus bypassing other laws. His site explains it in a youtube video here: https://squatterhunters.com/about/

      • ineffable@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        6 months ago

        The website doesn’t really explain anything though, and even says that the laws should be amended

        Why would the legal world take much longer and many more dollars to achieve what this guy can? Why wouldn’t everyone just sign a lease to their friend?

        If the landlord is aware of the squatters and then enters into a lease intended to deprive them of possession, how is that not just an end run around the law?

        • comador @lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          The website doesn’t really explain anything though

          The video does, but here’s one that may explain it better:

          https://www.the-sun.com/news/10824220/squatter-hunter-flash-shelton-evict-laws-business/

          Why would the legal world take much longer and many more dollars to achieve what this guy can?

          The court system here has a huge backlog, so it can literally take a year in MOST cases to get rid of them (if not longer like during Covid). An owner basically has to first call the cops who verify they are not a paying tenant, then weeks later file a petition with the city to have them removed within 90 days, then after 90 days, if they do not vacate, submit a court action to go to court. If they’re a no show on the court date several months later, they will finally get forcibly removed a few weeks after the court date. All this because they, squatters have rights:

          https://www.sapling.com/12143680/legally-rid-squatters-california

          Why wouldn’t everyone just sign a lease to their friend?

          If you have friends willing to take the risk of getting injured or hurt in the process, sure, but I don’t know anyone who would do that personally.

          If the landlord is aware of the squatters and then enters into a lease intended to deprive them of possession, how is that not just an end run around the law?

          As stated before, it’s a loophole to the squatters rights linked above. Here is SoCal you either wait your turn for your day in court whilst they trash the place OR you do something like this. The law just hasn’t caught up and thus why Squatter Hunter is lobbying for change.

  • evasive_chimpanzee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    This guy just found a niche job as the bouncer for the 2nd/3rd/nth homes of the ultrawealthy, and he’s trying, and apparently news outlets are helping to promote it as a good thing. Most people don’t have a problem with squatters because they actually live in the house they own.

      • evasive_chimpanzee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        he charges his clients anywhere from $5,000 to $20,000 depending on the case.

        He’s not “helping”, he’s running a business. Also, only the ultrawealthy have homes like those he has removed people from, and you can tell from his YouTube channel that he’s certainly targeting a specific audience.

  • WoahWoah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    There are more empty homes in the United States than there homeless people.

    But the market says the problem is there isn’t enough home building going on. What a joke of a world we live in.

  • thefartographer@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    6 months ago

    If we had a squatter living in our house, my wife would just tell them that I’m finally making the correct portion size when I cook dinner.

  • rekabis@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    6 months ago

    If a home is unoccupied, it should be a squatter’s right to occupy it.

    If you can’t be arsed to find a tenant for a place, that place should be open season for tenants!

    • andrewta@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      6 months ago

      So let me get this straight.

      If I spend my hard earned cash on a house. For any reason I leave for a while. Maybe my work requires I relocate for. (It doesn’t matter what the reason is). Because I’m not there that means you can move in?

      Talk about seriously entitled.

      • rekabis@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        What’s even more entitled is you thinking you have a right to shelter you don’t even use when hundreds of thousands nation-wide cannot afford shelter due to people like you hoovering up unused homes.

        You know what your attitude is called? Parasitical and greedy.

        • andrewta@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          In my example what I was talking about was, while I was away I rented a placed for temporary lodging.

          And that is vacuuming up lodging?

          I still say you are entitled.

          But moving on. Have a good day

        • dogslayeggs@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          So a person earns money and spends it on something, and you think that is parasitic. A different person spends no money and uses something someone else paid for, and that isn’t parasitic?

          I agree that housing should be a basic human right. I agree that people owning many homes is problematic. But owning a second house that you use for vacations is not what is causing a housing shortage. Owning 5 homes and Airbnbing 4 of them IS part of the cause. Allowing corporations and foreign citizens to own homes is part of the cause. Me buying empty land and building a vacation house on land that has sat empty for millions of years isn’t causing a housing shortage.

        • dogslayeggs@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          You do realize that some people get temporarily relocated for work, right? If I have to do a job for 3 months in Minnesota, it isn’t long enough to rent my place in California because renter’s rights won’t allow me to kick them out when I get back. You think that’s me being greedy and parasitical?