Artie,

How do we combat it though? I ask this as a guy on the job that is truly pissed off. I am tired of seeing people, particularly the elderly victimized by these dirtbags. The "hey you've got a warrant I need a green dot money card" are the worst. While bigger scams get the attention, the $1500 here $4000 there scams are far too common place. AND IT PISSES ME OFF THAT I CAN DO NOTHING TO HELP. The scammers are off shore. I don't have jurisdiction there, nor does any other local or state jurisdiction.

Warning people not to fall for it doesn't work. We could post on social media, run in on a 24 hour news cycle, press releases, and the like and people are still going to either not be reached, or ignore it because of the lure of easy money.

What can be done?

What the hell was she thinking?!?!

Keep your trap shut. Close the next day. Problem solved because it's someone else's problem now.

@jljones...

I really don't know. I think the best thing to do is to make the recovery process for the rightful, cheated homeowner easier and cheaper than it is now.

As I see it, there are three kinds of tenants in this situation. The truly innocent who thought they were signing a real lease, the credulous who should know better but did it anyway hoping the deal didn't fall apart, and the unscrupulous who either know they are signing a fake lease, or are themselves the scammer. This last one was the most common one in Florida. People just moved in, then used a fake lease and landlord-tenant law to make eviction difficult. The courts aided this by having no legal or moral sympathy for the homeowner who got screwed, including penalizing the homeowner who changed the locks as a form of self help in an attempt to stop this problem. For all but the truly innocent tenant, there needs to be fines and restitution. Even for the innocent tenant, there should be restitution. Technically they owe the homeowner for the use of the property, and their proper remedy is to sue the scammer (won't happen, I know) to get their improperly paid money back. If you think about it, even the innocent tenant is less innocent than the homeowner.

There are also two kinds of scammers. There are the organized, offshore criminals that we will never catch because they are in Russia or some other shithole and there are the local scammers. There are plenty of the local kind here in Florida. Someone usually shows the house, does the paperwork and hands over the keys. Not too many of these things happen totally by internet and mail in my experience.

We need to spend the law enforcement resources to find the people committing fraud, be they tenants or fake real estate agents and punish them severely. Like anything else in justice and law enforcement, it's having the laws configured to protect the right people first, and then spending the resources to find and punish those who violate those laws.

Of course, if we do this, it means that some innocent tenants will have bad experiences with bad landlords, and other law enforcement priorities won't be addressed. There will be fewer traffic safety tickets written, there will be fewer drug crimes, assaults, break ins, etc. investigated because those resources will be employed elsewhere.

The law always lags behind the crime. In this case, the law and procedure has not adapted to this scam, and it does not adequately protect the real people who are being harmed. Part of my frustration is that I don't see politicians, courts and police leadership addressing the problem. They seem to be more or less hoping that with the end of the foreclosure crisis, it simply goes away. I don't think that is the right answer.

Very, very common around here.

In NC the new resident is the victim of a fraud.

The owner is the victim of a breaking and enetting.

The "renter" or "seller" commits a felony fraud.


The new residents are put out immediately at the request of the legal owner. Arrested for trespassing if they don't comply. More often than not, the legal owner gives them some time to move out.

It's an every day thing here.

quote:

The new residents are put out immediately at the request of the legal owner. Arrested for trespassing if they don't comply. More often than not, the legal owner gives them some time to move out.

This is what does not happen in Florida. You have to go through an eviction and it takes a minimum of 30 days.

quote:

Originally posted by ArtieS:

quote:

What government function would it be doing to stop or minimize this?

There's a couple of things that Gvt. could do in these cases. First, they could have an expedited eviction proceeding for fraud cases, even where the tenant is theoretically innocent. Second, they could use some of their resources to come down on the fraudsters who collect the check to make the scams less appealing. In one Florida jurisdiction I am aware of, the threshold for significant police investigation is $20k. Since this stuff flies under that radar, nothing is done to the criminals who set up the scam.

The way the system works right now is that the most innocent person, that being the unaware homeowner bears the largest penalty in the scam. The tenant who should have known better, and who sometimes is the actual scammer usually gets a couple months free lodging and then leaves without penalty.

The law should protect the property owner first, the tenant (depending on their degree of culpablity, second) and it should seek to burn the scammers at the stake.

The problem of the owner is a civil one. The problem of the scammer is criminal.

The owner's remedy unfortunately takes time, even the supposed summary proceedings of unlawful detainer, depending on how bad they want to make you wait. The possessor has to be allowed the time to evaluate, arrange evidence, etc. Court calendars are jammed enough, and as I reported above, regaining possession even after a judgment in your favor is entered can take months, because the sheriff lacks the manpower to send out on these operations which can take a good deal of time.

We had one case where some grifters took possession of a very expensive property under a lease option. They immediately stopped paying rent. In the ensuing lawsuit, the jury deliberated long enough to enjoy a soft drink at county expense before awarding possession and damages to my clients, after a 10 week trial. It still took more than two years to resolve, living rent free that entire time.

I accompanied a sheriff many years ago on a kick out order. He notified the occupant that she must leave and stay off the property. She didn't want to. He took her to the curb, with one hand on his revolver, and ordered her, in the name of the law, to not set foot on the property thereafter or it would be off to the stoney lonesome. Then we searched the entire property, room by room, looking for other occupants. It takes time, and must be done by law enforcement, enforcing the court order. In some counties, the wait can be six weeks AFTER getting the court order to the Sheriff. Bankruptcy can slow it down further.

I know of no fool proof strategy for the innocent prospective tenant. Maybe knocking on neighbor's doors to see who owns the property, checking tax rolls, calling a title company. The homeowner can leave a property vacant, but maybe indicia of ownership in place, notices, family photos, or asking the neighbors for some help, hiring an armed guard, constant inspections. A real estate broker might see something amiss just before payday.

quote:

... and it should seek to burn the scammers at the stake.

I'm not sure the public has the stomach for that, but it would likely cut down on the problem.

There seems to be this notion that the government needs to take care of those without. The dirtbags take full advantage of that. Personally, I think we'd be much better of as a country if the government did a whole lot less in general, and almost no "taking care of" anyone in specific.

@JALLEN-

I don't dispute anything you say. My point is that the law handles these things incorrectly. If someone is trespassing in your business, it doesn't take months to get them removed. They are shown the door, or arrested, or taken to Bellview if they insist that they really are the owner of this particular liquor store. There is no extended legal process where you have to prove that you are the legal owner of the business, and they are not. You simply call the cops and they are arrested after a summary investigation of the parties involved.

Likewise, if someone steals you car, they are arrested. Waving a fake rental agreement in the cops face isn't going to slow that process down significantly.

On the other hand, squatters have significant rights, and I assert that they should not have those rights. The legal bias, if there is any, should be toward the owner, not the supposed tenant.

I imagine the law has grown this way because of abusive landlords. I have certainly seen enough of those in my lifetime. But the pendulum has swung too far, and the scammers are using laws designed to protect bona fide lessees against bad landlords to penalize innocent homeowners.

We have had cases in Florida where people returned from vacation to find families living in their fully furnished houses. Don't tell me that those tenants are innocent. It's not normal to lease a fully furnished house, full of someone elses of pictures, food, clothing, etc.

The remedy? Eviction proceeding, and the rightful owner had to find a hotel to stay in. Screw that. The "tenants" should have been arrested on the spot, and they would have been in any case other than a residence. The law is bent in this case, and needs fixing.

quote:

Originally posted by ArtieS:
@JALLEN-

I don't dispute anything you say. My point is that the law handles these things incorrectly. If someone is trespassing in your business, it doesn't take months to get them removed. They are shown the door, or arrested, or taken to Bellview if they insist that they really are the owner of this particular liquor store. There is no extended legal process where you have to prove that you are the legal owner of the business, and they are not. You simply call the cops and they are arrested after a summary investigation of the parties involved.

Likewise, if someone steals you car, they are arrested. Waving a fake rental agreement in the cops face isn't going to slow that process down significantly.

On the other hand, squatters have significant rights, and I assert that they should not have those rights. The legal bias, if there is any, should be toward the owner, not the supposed tenant.

I imagine the law has grown this way because of abusive landlords. I have certainly seen enough of those in my lifetime. But the pendulum has swung too far, and the scammers are using laws designed to protect bona fide lessees against bad landlords to penalize innocent homeowners.

We have had cases in Florida where people returned from vacation to find families living in their fully furnished houses. Don't tell me that those tenants are innocent. It's not normal to lease a fully furnished house, full of someone elses of pictures, food, clothing, etc.

The remedy? Eviction proceeding, and the rightful owner had to find a hotel to stay in. Screw that. The "tenants" should have been arrested on the spot, and they would have been in any case other than a residence. The law is bent in this case, and needs fixing.

If someone can move into your house while on vacation, and that is considered a civil matter, it sounds like you have an issue with your legislature, not the courts. To me that is simple B&E.

I can't claim the law handles these matters in the optimum way. I can only describe the rules and procedures, and the resources, as they presently are.

One difference is that in the case of a car, possession is almost immaterial. Your "ownership" is the certificate of title, the pink slip. Whoever the pink slip says owns the car owns the car. The pink slip is issued by a government agency which should make sure the proper documentation is done so there is no question about title, and the rights to that car.

Real estate is much more complicated. There is a recording system in each jurisdiction where documents affecting title to land are recorded, but anyone can record anything in proper form, valid or not. The deed operates to transfer ownership, not as an indicia of ownership. Proving title that is disputed can be a complicated endeavor. No authority is involved. Transfers are private. There have been attempts to have government involvement in land titles which have collapsed in chaos, uncertainty, financial distress, misery and fear.

As it stands, you can take a deed to the property popularly known as the Empire State Building to the appropriate recorders office, pay the fees, and record it, assuming it is in proper form, whether you own it or not. Actually, an intrepid reporter did this years ago and wrote it up to shock and dismay. I believe he was threatened with criminal charges, but I don't know if any were brought.

In ~40 years, I've probably seen several hundred forged or otherwise inappropriately executed documents recorded and made a steady and occasionally opulent living straightening out the resulting mess. It was not always scamming, but mistakes, bad information, some dishonesty, of course. It is actually not a huge problem, but seems to have become more prominent now that everone seems to have a word processor and printer in their home.

It is unheard of in residential rentals, but title insurance of some form could minimize the scam, making it certain that you were dealing with an owner, but what about property managers who lease for an absentee owner?

That is a common scam, but it usually doesn't get as far as someone moving in and being there for a month or two. Also, the victims, don't often claim they should get to stay once the scam is revealed.

In Texas, the true owner could get a judgment for eviction in about two weeks, or maybe even less. Then, if the tenant/squatter didn't leave voluntarily, it would take about another two weeks to have the constable execute on a writ of possession and forcibly remove them. I recently handled one pro bono where my client allowed a person to move in for a short stay, which then turned into "I ain't leaving." They day before the deputy was going to come and physically remove the "tenant" she finally bugged out on her own. It took just under a month.

We don't want the police evicting people summarily no matter how obvious the case seems. They aren't always so obvious, and even if the are that wouldn't comport with due process as guaranteed by the federal and state constitutions. There are genuine disputes over ownership and possession of real estate, and the police should not be in the judging business. The courts do that, after notice, the right to be heard and present evidence . . . the whole nine yards.

Cant the owner just move in too? After all it's there house! Id be inviting all my friends over for beans, franks and draft stout beer with death metal parties!

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:
That is a common scam, but it usually doesn't get as far as someone moving in and being there for a month or two. Also, the victims, don't often claim they should get to stay once the scam is revealed.

In Texas, the true owner could get a judgment for eviction in about two weeks, or maybe even less. Then, if the tenant/squatter didn't leave voluntarily, it would take about another two weeks to have the constable execute on a writ of possession and forcibly remove them.

We don't want the police evicting people summarily no matter how obvious the case seems. That wouldn't comport with due process as guaranteed by the federal and state constitutions. There are genuine disputes over ownership and possession of real estate, and the police should not be in the judging business. The courts should do that, after notice, the right to be heard and present evidence . . . the whole nine yards.

The most common victim seems to be lenders. The owners move out after foreclosure sale and is vacant for weeks while the lender gets organized, does remediation, lists the property etc.

It can take several months turn arond, or used to near the height of the mortgage crisis, so called.

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:
That is a common scam, but it usually doesn't get as far as someone moving in and being there for a month or two. Also, the victims, don't often claim they should get to stay once the scam is revealed.

In Texas, the true owner could get a judgment for eviction in about two weeks, or maybe even less. Then, if the tenant/squatter didn't leave voluntarily, it would take about another two weeks to have the constable execute on a writ of possession and forcibly remove them.

We don't want the police evicting people summarily no matter how obvious the case seems. That wouldn't comport with due process as guaranteed by the federal and state constitutions. There are genuine disputes over ownership and possession of real estate, and the police should not be in the judging business. The courts should do that, after notice, the right to be heard and present evidence . . . the whole nine yards.

The most common victim seems to be lenders. The owners move out after foreclosure sale and is vacant for weeks while the lender gets organized, does remediation, lists the property etc.

It can take several months turn arond, or used to near the height of the mortgage crisis, so called.

That isn't, to my knowledge, a big problem here. As you and I know, Texas evictions are much easier to accomplish than those in California, even for residential property. I think that makes that scam unattractive in Texas.

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:
That is a common scam, but it usually doesn't get as far as someone moving in and being there for a month or two. Also, the victims, don't often claim they should get to stay once the scam is revealed.

In Texas, the true owner could get a judgment for eviction in about two weeks, or maybe even less. Then, if the tenant/squatter didn't leave voluntarily, it would take about another two weeks to have the constable execute on a writ of possession and forcibly remove them.

We don't want the police evicting people summarily no matter how obvious the case seems. That wouldn't comport with due process as guaranteed by the federal and state constitutions. There are genuine disputes over ownership and possession of real estate, and the police should not be in the judging business. The courts should do that, after notice, the right to be heard and present evidence . . . the whole nine yards.

The most common victim seems to be lenders. The owners move out after foreclosure sale and is vacant for weeks while the lender gets organized, does remediation, lists the property etc.

It can take several months turn arond, or used to near the height of the mortgage crisis, so called.

That isn't, to my knowledge, a big problem here. As you and I know, Texas evictions are much easier to accomplish than those in California, even for residential property. I think that makes that scam unattractive in Texas.

I remember a response at a seminar about Texas real estate to a question from the audience wanting to know about "subdivision regulations and tenants rights."

The speakers sat in confused silence for a bit until the Houston lawyer took the microphone and said, "Few and none!"

quote:

Originally posted by Tommydogg:
Cant the owner just move in too? After all it's there house! Id be inviting all my friends over for beans, franks and draft stout beer with death metal parties!

This occurred to me also. Move in, change the locks and give the squatters no privacy. If it's a civil case then there's little the squatters could do.
Given, officers would likely direct one to vacate until the legal process is finished.

Common scam that was really rampant with all the foreclosures in the real estate bust.

Drive around, find a vacant home in a nice neighborhood. Break a window and let yourself in, change the locks. Repair the window.

Take pictures. Put the house up for rent on Craigslist. If homes in the area lease/rent for $1,750, list it for $1,500. You will get plenty of replies.

From here, there are multiple routes to go. If the prospective renters are gullible, you can have them mail you the check, money order, cashiers check - but that leaves a trail.

The slick ones I saw had the 'owner' tell the prospective renter that they were in some foreign country doing 'mission work' - but would have their 'agent' (cousin, uncle, brother, sister) meet with them to do the deal.

Agent meets them at the house and HAS KEYS. Ever demand to see mortgage paperwork on house and owners ID when you were renting? Of course not. No-one even thinks of it. They love the house. And inside they are thinking they are getting a smoking deal.

Need $1,500 for first month's rent, same for last month's rent and an equal deposit. Cash. Provide them a 'lease', easily printed from the interwebs. Collect the $4500. Another $500 is they have a pet. A cool, sweet 5k. Hand them the keys.

Sometimes it ends there. But some scammers have been bold. They have the tenant meet them once a month to hand them cash - or have them place the money at another house somewhere - placing it under a flower pot, or other novel location - then even mailing them a receipt a few days later. Some have continued the scam for extended periods of time, and were 'managing' multiple properties. Many of these homes were foreclosures and the banks had no resources to check on them, for years.

Eventually, someone showed up, typically from the bank, and did a wtf - who are these people? It took extended periods of time in a lot of cases, because a lot of these mortgages picked up by banks had been resold multiple times, and no-one actually had the paperwork for them...yet.

Best hope once police were called in was to nab the scammer when they retrieved the cash. Their story was they were picking up the cash for someone else, now a foreign national, somewhere in remote Tuk-all-ur-kash-astan, and they only mailed them the money. Prosecuting the declared 'flunky' wasn't going to get anyone anywhere, because a smart scammer would switch from their 'agent', who signed the 'lease' - to an unwitting mule, to not have any direct link or recognition in the actual lease-signing. Even if the mule ratted the scammer out...prosecution would be near impossible. And the scammers knew it.

Cha-ching upside...little downside.

didn't the 'renter' know it was a scam and 'rented' anyway?

quote:

Originally posted by Tommydogg:
Cant the owner just move in too? After all it's there house! Id be inviting all my friends over for beans, franks and draft stout beer with death metal parties!

quote:

Originally posted by nhtagmember:
didn't the 'renter' know it was a scam and 'rented' anyway?

They are usually way below market rent. The renters have to know somethings up but know it's a free ride for a while.
Boot them out quickly and word would get around and solve this problem.