Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

BobbyRobertson OP t1_ja9qh26 wrote

>A public hearing will be held Tuesday in the state legislature on a proposed bill to set up a system to temporarily take over apartment complexes whose owners defy state and local health and fire codes. > HB 6784, “An Act Concerning Noncompliant Landlords,” was introduced in the Insurance and Real Estate Committee by Rep. Kerry Wood, who represents Rocky Hill and Wethersfield. > Wood said the bill was inspired by complaints by tenants of Concierge Apartments in Rocky Hill, which is just around the corner from her own home. She said for years, resident complaints about crumbling conditions have been ignored by management. > “This once-beautiful property ... has been turned into one of most horrific places a person can live,” Wood said. “These owners have no regard for their tenants or the community.” > She said she has heard complaints on other complexes statewide. > “Rocky Hill is not alone. Echoes of similar stories are haunting towns and cities across the state. Legal recourse can take years and in the meantime, tenants are put in danger,” Wood said. > > According to Wood’s bill, “Upon receipt of not less than twelve claimed violations in any one calendar year submitted by tenants of the same rental housing property development, such local code enforcement officer may report such rental housing property development to the Attorney General who may submit an application for a private receivership in the superior court.” > Wood said once a receivership is established, it would last as long as it took to fix the problems at the complex. > “The receiver comes in and takes control of collecting rents. Within a month, rental income would be used to rehab the building,” Wood said. “It may take a month. It may take six months. Once the rental collection comes in, it goes right back into fixing the problem. Once it is fixed, receivership can go back to owner.”

21

DP23-25 t1_jaagoq5 wrote

>> Wood emphasized that “99.9%” of landlords in the state comply with codes and properly manage their buildings. The minority who don’t comply with codes make the bill necessary.>>

So instead of dealing with 0.1% individually, they are creating a law for 100%.

−11

anothertimewaster t1_jaaj2ua wrote

What happens when the rent isn't enough to cover the cost of upgrades? Taxpayers foot the bill? Who is the state going to hire to run massive apartment complexes? Who pays that salary? Who pays the property tax? Who gets sued when the state inevitably screws something up? This sounds like it hasn't been well thought out.

−17

[deleted] t1_jaazum3 wrote

Actually it might be a great way for a landlord to evict troublesome tenants. Let the place fall into disrepair and then since it’s in the state’s possession we wouldn’t have to pay property tax and potentially the mortgage on it. And maybe even keep it in your assets to leverage it to buy a new apartment building in a more free state. Like a government mandated pause.

Insane how willing people are to hand over the government all kinds of freedoms.

−7

[deleted] t1_jab019d wrote

I love how they schedule a public hearing in the middle of a snowstorm so they don’t get push back lol

−13

[deleted] t1_jab09d6 wrote

Super accurate, truth gets downvoted in this sub. Lot of people here aren’t educated on the horrors of communism. So they are happy to hand anything off to the government. Despite CT showing they will take a good thing and fuck it up every time.

−14

beachbum1220 t1_jab36ne wrote

Do we think this would apply to all rental units, including multi families rather than apartment complexes?

5

SpeculateFailure t1_jabcd2x wrote

Yeah……because the state will fix the problems…..I also have a bridge for sale if anyone is interested.

−12

TreeEleben t1_jabhnpc wrote

Does having the state take control of the building mean property taxes are automatically taken from the rent collected? Or are taxes still the responsibility of the property owner/corporation?

Or what if the building is too far gone to repair?

0

Unfair_Isopod534 t1_jacaa5w wrote

Why state has to take over and fix it? Why can't the landlord be forced to fix it? Are health codes not a thing?

6

essaitchthrowaway3 t1_jacfu9z wrote

Is the state going to step in and take better measures at removing squatters and protecting landlords from negligent tenants too?

2

intrsurfer6 t1_jackth9 wrote

I doubt it; there would be more stigma attached if the government was going after small time landlords like this-makes it seem like the government is going after the little guy just trying to scrape by as opposed to the rich complex owners

3

Prudent-Ball2698 t1_jact494 wrote

See this should've actually been a thing years ago. I can't even count bow many friends live in complexes that are slipshod at best, had to fix a friend's busted pipe earlier this week bc his landlord wouldn't

2

Prudent-Ball2698 t1_jactcof wrote

I hold out the hope, got a few on my grandfather's properties that literally have hoarded every unless thing on their yards and basements to where you can barely walk, one lady in a 1br you have just a one person wide walking path the rest is hoarded shit. Talk about a fire hazard

2

Unfair_Isopod534 t1_jacvfhi wrote

They probably would if the state told them they cannot rent the property due to health code violation and if they currently have a tenant they have to pay for at least equal accomodations and tenant isn't obligated to pay rent for the time when the property is not up to code.

3

himewaridesu t1_jad088j wrote

These assholes tried to peg me and I can easily assume, other people for various “charges” that they conjured up citing “lease violations.” We did not break any rules in the lease and checked them on that. This is a multi-property multi-state holding company. They suck.

In other news, are you just a generic isopod or another sort?

I can also only hope they fix up the property. The amount of active water damage though…

1

Proud-Breakfast-8429 t1_jae1r2c wrote

There’s a difference between a family buying a duplex to rent out as retirement income and a company/wealthy individual that owns a large apartment complex especially the 544 unit concierge cheaping out on spending for repairs.

I have no problems with the state taking the rent money that will be used to pay for the repairs.

1