RECENT COMMENTS
proposing landlord licensure
Laura Daab’s letter to the editor suggesting landlord licensure gets top billing on the RTD’s Opinion page today.
From the letter:
In the program, a person who owns property and rents it out, is required to be licensed and registered with the city. The property owners must comply with all current building and safety codes or they will be fined. After a certain amount of fines and due process, a landlord can have his license revoked and be put out of business.
[…]
People against this issue say that this would infringe on the long-honored land-rights laws that Virginians have enjoyed for centuries. Not true. People have the right to own land and rent it out if they want, but they don’t have the right to let their property become decayed and neglected at the expense and endangerment of others. Landlords should be held to the same standards as any other business owner.
What events have led Mrs. Daab to abandon her efforts to create a broader historic district through the Church Hill area (of which, I am not entirely opposed), and start this new campaign? Has someone been recently wronged? What is the motivation?
It seems this would add another layer of bureaucracy to our local government. Inspectors (the term is used loosely) from the Property Maintenance Division of the Department of Community Development have already been in our neighborhoods, “inspected” and written violations. I am assuming many violations were given, due to news from an acquaintance that his residential painting business has experienced a recent and sudden spike in customers. This would seem to address properties becoming decayed and neglected.
If the concern is for the rights of tenants, local or statewide, anyone can consult the VRLTA. The Virginia Residential Landlord and Tenant Act outlines the interactions between tenants and landlords, the responsibilities of each, and remedies for either in case of dispute. Attached to most internet publications are organizations that will assit or advise if such conflicts arise.
If interested, try these:
Code of Virginia
Renter’s Rights and Responsibilities: The Basics
Landlord-Tenant Frequently Asked Questions
She is still working on historic district status for Church Hill North. It sounds like things are plugging along… She has recently started a Church Hill North Historic District group on yahoo, check out the recent messages there for an idea of the current status.
… and thanks for the links! 2 things for which I’m ever so grateful are that I no longer rent or smoke…
The more rules and regulations imposed the greater the potential costs to property owners. So, in other words, these extra beauracratic hurdles could prevent people from buying or selling these houses, therefore condemning them to remain in perpetual decay.
Instead of new rules, the existing ones should be enforced. That would be a step in the right direction.
I agree. There are already laws in place. We have the same issues in Shockoe Bottom. I invited Code Enforcement to our last Clean-Up and they found several violations most of which have been corrected or is in the process. I plan to have them attend at least 2 Clean-Ups a year until there is no more problem.
No, I have not abandoned the Church Hill North Historic District Initiative – it’s alive and going strong.
In terms of my motivations for supporting landlord licensure, I am motivated by the endless, abominable conditions of rental units in this city and the free reign of slumlords in it.
I believe that I can support two causes at once – I can also walk and chew gum at the same time.
The tenant/landlord statutes that you speak of usually do not address any oversight from the city inspector’s office unless there is a complaint filed by either party. Those links are glorified rental agreements. There needs to be more accountability.
Many tenants of all economic levels are afraid to complain about their landlords for fear of repercussions, or because they don’t know how to go about it, and may not have access to the information you have listed above.
Besides, I don’t think that it should be the tenant’s duty to make sure their rental unit meets all inspection code standards. Just as I don’t think that a customer should be responsible for making sure a restaurant meets all health department codes.
To show you that I’m not completely unreasonable about a solution to this problem, I offer a less draconian solution:
Williamsburg has implemented a program that requires interior and exterior inspection of certain rental properties whenever the unit changes occupancy – Richmond should, at the very least, look into this program and develop a similar system.
Here’s the link to the program information.
Thanks Laura for all you do to make Church Hill a better place for all of us! I’m with you. I for one, would like to see the city get very aggressive with all property owners to address issues of obvious code violations, yard maintenance, and general property neglect. Any blatant violations that are visible from public rights of way should be addressed by the owner being warned, fined, forced to sell for non-compliance. Of course, there are always extenuating circumstances that may have to be reviewed on a case by case basis. Volunteer groups are fairly easy to mobilize to assist in cases of true need.
RTD: Fatal fire has areas considering safety
Thanks John, I was just about to add that article to this thread – talk about timing!
I would like to share some experiences that I have had with the city inspector’s office regarding occupied and unoccupied slumlord properties near me that demonstrate the need for landlord licensure or a rental inspection program.
A double house down the street from me has been in disrepair for years. Jim & I renovated the property next door to it a few years back and witnessed many terrible things at this property.
At one point there was an elderly woman and several young children living in one of the units. There was so much garbage and debris around the house that when we did the alley rallies we would spend at least a half an hour a that house alone cleaning up around (not on) the property. I had spoken to the woman a few times and it was clear to me that she had dimentia or Alzheimers, and when I looked into the home when she had the front door open you could see that the house was a “garbage house.” I called the city inspector’s office and filed several CAPS complaints about the property. The inspector’s office told me that they have to have the permission of the owner or the renter in order to go onto and into the property so nothing was ever done. The exterior also remained in an horrible condition. At one point there was cardboard up over the windows!
When they moved out, a squatter moved in. The city told me that they could do nothing about him because they needed to “catch” him when he was there. When I saw him enter the property, I’d call the cops and the inspector’s office – the sqatter always escaped through a hole in the floor and out the back. Finally one day, the cops finally got there when he couldn’t escape and entered the property. The guy had cans full of gas on the property and a space heater illegally plugged into the porch outlet of the unit next door (without their knowledge). I had to scream and yell to get the cops to get the inspectors out to condemn the property on the spot – and they did.
Recently, the same property has been partially renovated – albiet badly – but the owner left the north side of the property (next to my property), untouched with peeling paint and rotting window frames that are so bad that they’ve rotted through and left a gaping hole from the outside in.
I called the inspector’s offfice again for the millionth time and managed to get one out to the property. She told me that she had dirven by, but had not seen anything wrong with the property, and that she was not allowed to go onto anyone’s property in order to fully inspect the exterior.
I had to sign a release form allowing her to go between our houses so that she could see the rot. When she saw it she said “No one’s living in there are they?’ And I said that there was a young woman living there. Then, I took her through the back alley, whcih she had complete access to, but chose not to on her previous “drive by.” She took pictures of the rotting back porch, etc.
My point is, the system does not work as is. Inspectors need to be able to have access inside and outside of a property if they feel there is just cause. The squatter, the renter next door and my house could have burned if that squatter had not been removed by the police. He had been living there for 7 months, and I couldn’t get him out of there!
A responsible landlord should welcome better regulations and be completely comfortable with having their properties inspected. A modest licensing fee and training programs for landlords would also be welcome, I would think, if it meant improving conditions overall and legitimzing the landlord profession.
Laura,
I think the idea of having mandatory inspections b/t tenants is a great idea. I’m in full support. Please let me know if there is anything I can do to help.
some people see a new tax and new regulations as a solution to every problem. irresponsible tenants allow irresponsibe landlords to flourish.
now there is going to be a tax for the government to help irresponsible tenants avoid irresponsible landlords
where the govt has demonstrated that they are not capable of enforcing current laws.
where do these people come from?
I don’t think a tax would be needed and I don’t think EVERY rental property would need to be inspected. I would say to inspect properties that in the past had been neglected and make the owner pay for the inspections until he/she has shown regular improvement. The problem now is that there a laws in place but not funding to enforce them.
Mrs. Daab’s idea, while wholly un-unique completely undermines the Virginia Landlord Tenant Act and Mrs. Daab has more than likely failed to take into account that TENANTS are responsible for 80% of the loss value and damage to rental property. I applaud Mrs. Daab’s efforts to make Church Hill and Richmond more inviting communities however I doubt she owns residential property which she leases to the public and is therefore pontificating an uneducated and ignorant opinion regarding this issue. Personally, I feel if people choose to live in garbage and squalor let them… it’s their choice and nosey neighbors should probably stay out of their business. If however the property in question somehow materially detracts from your property either move or speak with your city council representative, which is after all why they have been elected to that auspicious office.
Finally, Mrs. Daab’s reference to the property management industry being somehow illegitimate smacks of spite, intolerance and jealousy. Richmond real estate and development is an institution in Virginia’s political past, present and future and is a major underlying force in our local economy. I’d recommend that Mrs. Daab not disenfranchise herself (or anyone else) from the future of our great community.
Jon, your post sounds suspiciously like you’re in favor of capitalism. What an odd notion to put forward!
Jon,
I have owned rental property that my husband and I have personally managed and we have also hired a professional real estate management company for a property. We had a very good experience with that company and they reported problems with the building and executed repairs quickly. I have also lived in a city where there was a landlord licensing program, and it was very successful and supported by property management companies and landlords alike.
If I still owned rental property I would welcome such a program and be happy to participate in it. I have spoken with many landlords who have told me that they would also support and participate in a licensing or rental inspection program.
There is already a rental inspection program in place in Williamsburg and it does not undermine, but compliments the Virginia Tenant Landlord Act.
One of the first things they teach in debate is to not use the “love it or leave it†line. It’s not a well-formed argument and bad debate. It’s also bad debate to use veiled name-calling through your entire argument.
Also, I’m self–employed and very pro business –a true capitalist in every sense. I don’t feel that my support for a landlord/rental program compromises that.
So let me get this straight:
Under Ms. Daab’s proposal, I would have to subject myself to the City of Richmond if I so boldly chose to rent my basement apartment to someone.
Nevermind that my entire house has already met the code, there must be a secondary inspection?
Correct?
Perhaps Ms. Daab would like to come over and inspect our apartment. She should be advised to wear white gloves.
How dare she attempt to dictate to us how we use our own property.
Although, since I have never lived in Minneapolis, perhaps I am not as enlightened.
The whole idea of landlord licsensing is absurd. Under Virginia law, individuals have the right to a safe place to live (VA Code 55-248.12)
How much redundancy is required?
Here’s the Virginia Code:
Meet the requirements of local building and health codes concerning the condition of your apartment.
Make the necessary repairs to keep your home in livable condition.
Keep all common areas shared by two or more apartments of the property in clean and safe condition.
Maintain in good and safe working condition all electrical, plumbing, sanitary, heating, ventilating, air-conditioning units as well as other facilities and appliances, including elevators, supplied or required to be supplied by the landlord.
Provide and maintain good quality trash cans and trash pick-up services in common areas of the apartments.
Supply running water and reasonable amounts of hot water at all times as well as reasonable air conditioning, if provided, and heat when needed
The purpose of licensing landlords is not to establish new rules, but to make it easier for the rules to be enforced. It sets up a system for the rental units to be inspected periodically.
Somes homes haven’t been inspected in decades.
I don’t want to put a big burden on landlords but I don’t think it is unreasonable or too expensive to have a quick walkthrough every few years — just to make sure the home is not a danger.
That said, I don’t think rental units that are in the landlord’s home (such as a basement or room for rent) should have to be licensed.
Very simplistic (compliments of wikipedia) definitions of socialism and capitalism. There’s not much left in our country that isn’t controlled by the state; and in recognizing or acknowledging such, one should be able to decide objectively under which system the USA currently falls: Socialism refers to a socio-economic system in which property is subject to social control often on behalf of the people by the state; Capitalism refers to an economic system in which the means of production are mostly privately owned and operated for profit, and in which pricing of services is determined in a free market. The property might be a house you rent or your medical records or your telephone calls….
As a Church Hill landlord, I am in favor of the above regulation. There are many slumlord types around that give trustworthy landlords a bad name.
But as other posters have said, there should be a mechanism that differentiates good properties from bad. Or good landlords from repeat offenders.
If the entire process only serves to make it more difficult to earn a living as a Church Hill landlord… Then than the good ones will probably go somewhere else. And that will only lead to properties in worse condition than they are now.
It appears that McQuinn has bought into this idea. She is patron of Ordinance 2007-086 (inspection of Residential Rental Dwelling Units) which is scheduled for public hearing on April 23rd. I haven’t had time to read the details of this paper yet so I have no comment.
jc: thanks for the update. I met with Delores & Sam in January and provided her with all of the research I’ve done, specifically on the Rental Inspection Program in Williamsburg. I knew that program might be embraced by her since it is a Virginia program and has a better chance of being implemented in Richmond.
I too await the details of the paper, and am thrilled that she took the initiative on this! I’ll certainly be attending the public hearing on April 23rd. See you all there!
Maybe the city can hire some additional highly skilled and efficient employees to handle the inspections. I’d sure like to have them come in and look around my apartment. This is also a great way to spend those pesky tax dollars, and tell people that rent that they are pathetic and unable to help themselves without big brother coming to keep that big bad landlord in check –just another brick in the road on the way to socialism. GRRRRR!
The other solution, more in line with you libertarians out there is to better fund a legal organization for the purposes of identifying and suing landlords for failing to operate in a legal fashion. (or to legislate an expansion of legal standing to include civic associations) which would you rather have, state regulation, or an enhanced tort focus? Seems to me, there are two masters involved in each: on one hand it is the mostly efficient, but unaccountable insurance industry who would push for compliance to avoid loss exposure, or the accountable but wholly inefficient and politically minded city inspection system. One thing is for sure, getting tenants more apprised of their rights is one thing the city could do much better.
The recent tragic house fire that killed 2 children and injured seven others illustrates why we need rental inspections. There were no working smoke detectors and one of the doors did not work properly.
The tragedy of that house fire saddens the heart,especially when the lives of children are lost.
Whether homes are leased or owner occupied, why shouldn’t all properties be subject to inspections? In the not too far past, there was an elderly gentleman in our neighborhood. He had lived in his house for decades. He had married and raised his children in that house, but as they do, the children grew up and moved away (out of state). Sadly, his wife died and left him alone. This fellow’s wife would cook for him and make sure he was taking his medications. He was outside and took a tumble which brought him to the attention of my neighbors and me. We found out that not only did he suffer from a broken heart but also poor diet and lack of proper medication. Minor dementia from lack of meds made it difficult to find any of his family. One of his adult grandchildren were located and alerted. This grandchild placed the grandfather in an assited living facility (where he is now very healthy, lucid, and happy) and in addition to that, the house was renovated and brought back up to code. What is to say his condition (or the condition of his house) might not have lead to a similar and unfortunate end?
Just because a home is owner occupied does not make the home safe or code compliant. If one group is subject to certain rules and actions, in all fairness, should not all groups?
and then there was this guy….
Ah, cradle to grave….
I wholeheartedly agree with the need to inspect and liscence rental properties. My landlord once told me that I needed to stop asking to have things fixed “or no one in this city will be able to afford to rent.”!! There are definitely landlords out there who abuse the power dynamic and threaten to evict, raise the rent, or generally make life hell for renters.