5 ms·

Actually there is. It's called Rent Control and it protects the elderly from stuff like this (because they need the protection). As far as I'm concerned, the la

by radley 13y ago

Actually there is. It's called Rent Control and it protects the elderly from stuff like this (because they need the protection). As far as I'm concerned, the landlord simply found a loophole.

Crito 13y ago
loophole ˈlo͞opˌ(h)ōl/ noun: Part of a set of laws that I do not like. Rent control does not give you the right to live in an area for a given amount of rent in any circumstance. The circumstances in which it does not provide assurances are not "loopholes".
- radley 13y ago
  Think of it this way: she was renting a room in the house, except as a courtesy to each owner she would to come in through the garage. New owner decides he's tired and wants her out. If he suddenly claims the room to be an "inlaw apartment", then it would be illegal. Now he can start the process to evict. Legal loophole. [Update] The timing is suspicious too, since these units could be legal soon: http://www.sfgate.com/default/article/S-F-in-law-units-law-clears-Planning-Commission-5295635.php http://www.sfgate.com/default/article/S-F-in-law-units-law-c...
  - Crito 13y ago
    There was never any question if the unit was illegal. Everyone involved knew that it was (hence my absolutely minimal sympathy for everyone involved, except perhaps^W the cat.) The new owner did not declare the unit to be illegal, the city did. (edit: I definitely feel sorry for the cat.)
    - Zancarius 13y ago
      > hence my absolutely minimal sympathy for everyone involved, except perhaps the cat. My sympathy rests entirely with the cat. Pets live more or less at the whim of their owner, no matter how unfortunate, and have little choice in the matter (well, I suppose they could escape...). The poor thing likely has no idea what's going on, and it certainly does not look happy. Breaks my heart. But then, I'm a softy with animals. Cats in particular. The people? Meh. I'm inclined to agree with the posters here (yourself included) suggesting that she has a choice. I feel bad for her, don't get me wrong, but considering how many people are often forced by economic reasons to move from one area to another and do so without any public sympathy lends me to feel the same in this circumstance. What she's making on SSI a month isn't very much, but I'd imagine her medications are probably paid for in full or in part by her plan, and there are cheaper and safer areas to live in the country than SF. Many retirement communities out here in NM are populated with people who make about what she does a month, but the cost of living is lower. As someone pointed out (maybe it was you, I'm not sure), if she were of working age, she'd probably have fewer safety nets to fall back on. It certainly isn't a good situation for anyone involved (except maybe the lawyers), but imagine if this were a story about some programmer/retired programmer who was having to leave his home of 35 years for greener pastures. I'd imagine most of the comments would be along the lines of "suck it up and move." Either way, the story is still gut wrenching because it's so uncomfortable.
CocaKoala 13y ago
I like how you can read an article that details all of the ways in which this woman was a terrible and destructive tenant and then say "Oh yeah, she was definitely evicted because the asshole landlord wanted to flip the property".
- jack-r-abbit 13y ago
  and they owned the place (and let her live there) for 10 years before they had had enough of her. 10 weeks is a pretty long flip.... 10 years is not a flip at all.
johngalt 13y ago
Evicting someone who doesn't pay rent is a loophole? If anyone found a loophole here it's the tenant.

by radley 13y ago

Actually there is. It's called Rent Control and it protects the elderly from stuff like this (because they need the protection). As far as I'm concerned, the landlord simply found a loophole.

Crito 13y ago

loophole ˈlo͞opˌ(h)ōl/ noun: Part of a set of laws that I do not like. Rent control does not give you the right to live in an area for a given amount of rent in any circumstance. The circumstances in which it does not provide assurances are not "loopholes".

radley 13y ago
Think of it this way: she was renting a room in the house, except as a courtesy to each owner she would to come in through the garage. New owner decides he's tired and wants her out. If he suddenly claims the room to be an "inlaw apartment", then it would be illegal. Now he can start the process to evict. Legal loophole. [Update] The timing is suspicious too, since these units could be legal soon: http://www.sfgate.com/default/article/S-F-in-law-units-law-clears-Planning-Commission-5295635.php http://www.sfgate.com/default/article/S-F-in-law-units-law-c...
- Crito 13y ago
  There was never any question if the unit was illegal. Everyone involved knew that it was (hence my absolutely minimal sympathy for everyone involved, except perhaps^W the cat.) The new owner did not declare the unit to be illegal, the city did. (edit: I definitely feel sorry for the cat.)
  - Zancarius 13y ago
    > hence my absolutely minimal sympathy for everyone involved, except perhaps the cat. My sympathy rests entirely with the cat. Pets live more or less at the whim of their owner, no matter how unfortunate, and have little choice in the matter (well, I suppose they could escape...). The poor thing likely has no idea what's going on, and it certainly does not look happy. Breaks my heart. But then, I'm a softy with animals. Cats in particular. The people? Meh. I'm inclined to agree with the posters here (yourself included) suggesting that she has a choice. I feel bad for her, don't get me wrong, but considering how many people are often forced by economic reasons to move from one area to another and do so without any public sympathy lends me to feel the same in this circumstance. What she's making on SSI a month isn't very much, but I'd imagine her medications are probably paid for in full or in part by her plan, and there are cheaper and safer areas to live in the country than SF. Many retirement communities out here in NM are populated with people who make about what she does a month, but the cost of living is lower. As someone pointed out (maybe it was you, I'm not sure), if she were of working age, she'd probably have fewer safety nets to fall back on. It certainly isn't a good situation for anyone involved (except maybe the lawyers), but imagine if this were a story about some programmer/retired programmer who was having to leave his home of 35 years for greener pastures. I'd imagine most of the comments would be along the lines of "suck it up and move." Either way, the story is still gut wrenching because it's so uncomfortable.

CocaKoala 13y ago

I like how you can read an article that details all of the ways in which this woman was a terrible and destructive tenant and then say "Oh yeah, she was definitely evicted because the asshole landlord wanted to flip the property".

jack-r-abbit 13y ago
and they owned the place (and let her live there) for 10 years before they had had enough of her. 10 weeks is a pretty long flip.... 10 years is not a flip at all.

johngalt 13y ago

Evicting someone who doesn't pay rent is a loophole? If anyone found a loophole here it's the tenant.