On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 3:22 PM, Nicole Woo <[email protected]> wrote: To clarify, a bill signed by the President last spring (S. 896) already > provides key renter protections, including: > > * 90-day pre-eviction notice to tenants whose homes have gone into > foreclosure. > * The rights of tenants to remain in their homes for the terms of > their leases. (However, if the new owner will live in the home, leases > can be terminated subject to the 90 day notice.) > * Tenants with vouchers able to remain with both their lease and > rental assistance payments intact, subject to the rights of a purchaser > who wants to occupy the home after 90 days notice. >
All of which adds up to considerably less than the five years of protection granted to homeowners under the Grijalva/Kaptur bill. Given that the measure your organization advocates both A. Excludes renters; and B. Has as one of its goals to, in Michael's words, avoid "depress[ing] housing prices further" (which is to say, to screw renters, the lowest-income participants in the housing market); I'm hard-pressed to see it as a good thing. On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 6:56 PM, Michael Meeropol <[email protected]>wrote: In response to Joe, I don't see how this law changes anything with respect > to renters. The law only applies to owner-occupied primary residences. To > the extent that there is a second family/individual renting from the current > owner (or a third family/individual for that matter) that contract would > remain in force if the owner switches to a 5 year rental as per the law. > > Landlords who were buying houses on spec and renting out the place who now > default will leave renters in the house with the bank now having to make > decisions. That is no different under this proposed law as it is now ... > It may be me, but I'm not entirely sure what most of your message is supposed to mean. Are you informing me that the Grijalva/Kaptur bill doesn't affect the rights of renters, other than inflating their rents? Well, yes, that was my gripe to begin with. However, this line jumped out at me: > Why bankers who foreclose would kick out renters if they're actually paying > the rent is beyond me. > That is, in fact, exactly what banks do. If there are any exceptions to the rule (and at this late stage in the game, there may very well be), I have yet to hear of them. -- "Hige sceal þe heardra, heorte þe cenre, mod sceal þe mare, þe ure mægen lytlað."
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
