Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's entirely about the fellow has LEGAL RIGHTS TO A TENANCY which are PROTECTED BY LAW in Colorado.
All this fellow has to do is resist moving out at the request of his friends and make a phone call to any of the Tenant's Rights groups in the area and the fellows trying to "kick him out" will find themselves on the WRONG END OF THE LAW. They are the ones who will be at risk of criminal charges and possible fines, not the fellow they're trying to get out of what was previously their place.
The State steps in to protect the "tenant rights" of the fellow who needs to leave to the detriment of his former friends. And as pointed out by others in this thread, those friends could find their own leasehold tenancy at risk with the landlord over this whole situation. They're the ones who stand to lose a lot here, not the guy who they were trying to help out.
I'm not missing the point. If your landlord violates your rights, your recourse is to SUE.
If the kicked-out friend doesn't sue, that's the end of it. There are no "fines" - there is no criminal law violation - there is no "State step[ping] in."
I'm not missing the point. If your landlord violates your rights, your recourse is to SUE.
If the kicked-out friend doesn't sue, that's the end of it. There are no "fines" - there is no criminal law violation - there is no "State step[ping] in."
LOL here.
You obviously don't have a clue as to the Colorado Tenant's Rights Laws.
This situation is what I was posting about in my first post.
You're so far off on Colorado LAW it's pathetic.
As a tenant, you don't have to SUE the landlord if your rights are violated.
All you have to do is contact the appropriate agencies and they will go to full extent of the law to protect your rights. Some of these are state agencies, some are private groups. But all have lawyers and the law on the side of the tenants aggressively seeking to invoke the tenant's rights laws of Colorado. Many aspects of the law are by statute regarding the performance and obligations of the landlords, no matter what is written in a lease. The state steps in on behalf of the tenants to enforce those laws, and they aggressively protect the right of a tenant to occupy and utilize a residence, no matter how it was established. That's why squatters in Colorado cannot just be "kicked out", they must be evicted through the entire legal process or the landlord (or, in this case, the roommates) find themselves facing criminal charges and fines by the state, not by a lawsuit.
The fact that you persist in asserting that there's no "state stepping in" verifies that you don't have a clue about Colorado Tenant Rights Law. It's a big deal here and in light of the current housing crunch in the area, it's more aggressively enforced than ever because there are a lot of landlord ... as well as tenant ... abuses. But the law tends to err on the side of the tenants and force the landlords to mind their "p's & q's" when they don't follow the laws here.
PS: I can verify from personal experience in Colorado as a landlord that the day you attempt to "kick somebody out" and start removing their personal property from a residence without their permission ... even though they haven't paid their rent for months and you haven't completed the eviction process and gotten a court order to allow you to retake possession of the premises ... can put you at risk of the tenant calling the cops and you are the one who is looking at a "cease and desist" order from the cop. In my case, it was a Sheriff's deputy ... actually three ... that showed up in response to the tenant calling them and complaining that I was "kicking them out" without a court order. Even though I'd followed most of the eviction process, the tenants had gotten the sympathy of a judge to not award me a court order so that they could have yet another 4 months to find a place to live. But they assured me that if I didn't "obey" their order to stop the eviction in process that I would be charged with the breach of the peace and I would be going to jail and have to face the charges. The tenants, OTOH, were at work and weren't even around to contest the eviction at the scene ... so there wasn't a "breach of the peace". Nevertheless, I was on the wrong end of the law and it took me another 4 months to get a court ordered eviction, during which time the tenants didn't pay any rent nor any of the utilities. The only recourse I had after their eviction was to sue them for my damages, and they didn't have any resources to sue for ... so a judgement against them would have been pointless and I could have all the legal bills to pay.
As a landlord in Colorado who was married to an attorney, I understand all the rules and procedures.
Here is what I would do:
I would give him a non negotiable date he must move out.
Everyday I would remind him that I was expecting him to be out at the end of the month.
IF he did not move I would rent a storage unit on the opposite side of town for one month and while he was at work I would move all his belongings to the storage unit.
I would go to his place of work and hand him the key to the storage unit, then I would go home and change the locks (give landlord new key). Done!
His biggest immediate problem is finding a place to live, he does not have time to go to tenant right advocates and even if he did they are not going to forcibly move him back in.
Slim chance he is going to sue or file a complaint. And tenant right advocates are not going to make a priority out of a single guy, with a job, who overstayed his welcome, they have families and elderly to worry about.
If he is the type to make a big deal about it and file complaints and lawsuits, would you really want to have him SHARING YOUR BEDROOM with you for 90 days while you evicted him?
You obviously don't have a clue as to the Colorado Tenant's Rights Laws.
This situation is what I was posting about in my first post.
You're so far off on Colorado LAW it's pathetic.
As a tenant, you don't have to SUE the landlord if your rights are violated.
All you have to do is contact the appropriate agencies and they will go to full extent of the law to protect your rights. Some of these are state agencies, some are private groups. But all have lawyers and the law on the side of the tenants aggressively seeking to invoke the tenant's rights laws of Colorado. Many aspects of the law are by statute regarding the performance and obligations of the landlords, no matter what is written in a lease. The state steps in on behalf of the tenants to enforce those laws, and they aggressively protect the right of a tenant to occupy and utilize a residence, no matter how it was established. That's why squatters in Colorado cannot just be "kicked out", they must be evicted through the entire legal process or the landlord (or, in this case, the roommates) find themselves facing criminal charges and fines by the state, not by a lawsuit.
The fact that you persist in asserting that there's no "state stepping in" verifies that you don't have a clue about Colorado Tenant Rights Law. It's a big deal here and in light of the current housing crunch in the area, it's more aggressively enforced than ever because there are a lot of landlord ... as well as tenant ... abuses. But the law tends to err on the side of the tenants and force the landlords to mind their "p's & q's" when they don't follow the laws here.
Pray tell, what "fines" will the State of Colorado impose on a landlord for unlawful removal if the tenant doesn't go to court?
What State agency will come pound on your door and force you to take your unlawfully removed roommate back in if he doesn't go to court?
You're the clueless one. The tenant can certainly go complain to the State or to a tenants right group, but nothing can be done against the landlord until the tenant GOES TO COURT.
Quote:
PS: I can verify from personal experience in Colorado as a landlord that the day you attempt to "kick somebody out" and start removing their personal property from a residence without their permission ... even though they haven't paid their rent for months and you haven't completed the eviction process and gotten a court order to allow you to retake possession of the premises ... can put you at risk of the tenant calling the cops and you are the one who is looking at a "cease and desist" order from the cop. In my case, it was a Sheriff's deputy ... actually three ... that showed up in response to the tenant calling them and complaining that I was "kicking them out" without a court order. Even though I'd followed most of the eviction process, the tenants had gotten the sympathy of a judge to not award me a court order so that they could have yet another 4 months to find a place to live. But they assured me that if I didn't "obey" their order to stop the eviction in process that I would be charged with the breach of the peace and I would be going to jail and have to face the charges. The tenants, OTOH, were at work and weren't even around to contest the eviction at the scene ... so there wasn't a "breach of the peace". Nevertheless, I was on the wrong end of the law and it took me another 4 months to get a court ordered eviction, during which time the tenants didn't pay any rent nor any of the utilities. The only recourse I had after their eviction was to sue them for my damages, and they didn't have any resources to sue for ... so a judgement against them would have been pointless and I could have all the legal bills to pay.
Hahah. In your personal story, your tenants WENT TO COURT.
The bickering between hammer time and sunsprit sort of illustrates why just politely asking the guy to leave and him amicably agreeing has not happened.
@ cr0756: Have you just told him in a respectful way that it really is time to go and you need him to be out by x date. If so, what has his response been? If you can handle it that way it will save everyone so much headache and potential trouble.
Pray tell, what "fines" will the State of Colorado impose on a landlord for unlawful removal if the tenant doesn't go to court?
Colorado Statutes have numerous provisions for protecting the financial and habitability and accessibility of an established residency that are automatic within the law.
For example, if a landlord doesn't comply with the statutory time limit to document and refund a security or damage deposit to a tenant, the tenant is entitled to damages in the amount of three times the amount per the statutes. They only have to complain to the state authorities, they don't have to go to small claims court or sue the landlord, the damage award to the tenant is by LAW. All they have to do is file the complaint and they don't have to go to court to get the judgement awarded by the State authorities.
As well, the State housing statutes/tenant's rights laws protect the access and habitability of a residence for the tenant. I repeat, even a squatter who never paid any rent has "rights" protected by the state. All they have to do is contact the appropriate agencies and the legal system, cops, and sheriff's deputies will defend and protect them against the property owners.
For reference, you might look at such websites as "www.tenantsrights.net", which are a private agency which aggressively protects tenants of all stripes. There's a specific Colorado connection to why this company was founded to protect tenants in Colorado, and their site lists many resources available at little or pro bono for tenants in Colorado. Further, I quote their operating premise:
"The overall goal of TenantRights.Net is to expose the oneness of land evils and abuses at many levels in many places, in order to inspire a more socially cognizant and sophisticated struggle against the evil powers that be. These would include class-biased tax sheltering of real estate speculation, gentrification and economic cleansing, immoral government funding of luxury residential developments using taxpayer funds, and many other things amounting to a dastardly oppressive situation for common tenants, especially those who are poor. Landlordism in general, or in other words the expanding exploitation of land as a manipulated capital commodity, is a morally bankrupt obsession that has been the ultimate class struggle for thousands of years. Such evil could scarcely exist without a tax shelter system designed to disenfranchise tenants. But in addition to these complex issues, TenantRights.Net will indulge the everyday struggles of the common tenant, the evicted, and the blacklisted. We will endeavor to deconstruct the entire hierarchy of abuses while networking and uniting the assistance agencies and other entities who share in our social challenge.
TenantRights.Net will not stop at simply whining. There are in fact many solutions that will be outlined. We endeavor first and foremost, to be the most comprehensive link portal to tenant rights and land struggles on Earth. That will be supplemented with a bit of journalism in the form of essays, opinions and photography.
Contrary to the propaganda of real estate capitalism, the miseries and burdens of tenants are NOT accidental side effects of economic boom nor of unplanned growth. They are in fact deliberate historical and contemporary constructs of diabolical purpose, the capitalization of upper economic classes through social manipulation of noncapitalized classes, ie all but the wealthiest tenants and the poor."
These folks are experts at invoking the state statutes that protect tenants from the evil landlords and utilizing those resources for the benefit, via state agencies and the police or sheriff's deputies, to enforce the provisions. Under the threat, of course, of legal action against the landlords.
They are but one of numerous such agencies and a google search in Colorado will reveal many more similar activist organizations.
What State agency will come pound on your door and force you to take your unlawfully removed roommate back in if he doesn't go to court?
You're still missing the point. If you have a legal right to a residence in Colorado and you are denied use or access by "unlawfully removed" process, you have but to call the cops! They will get you back into your residence and if somebody tries to interfere (perhaps your old roommate), the cops or sheriff's deputy will arrest them for the breach of the peace.
What you again miss is that the statutes have taken the privileges of a residency out of the purely civil/financial arena and placed it into a civil rights issue. That's why so many other agencies are involved in the protection of an individual tenancy.
You're the clueless one. The tenant can certainly go complain to the State or to a tenants right group, but nothing can be done against the landlord until the tenant GOES TO COURT.
Wrong. Many agencies will go to bat on behalf of the tenant without the tenant ever having to "GOES TO COURT".
The websites of ColoradoLegalServices.org and many similar organizations, like the Tenant's Rights.org group, list many resources which are available to tenants. A forcible entry and detainer (ie, eviction) to remove somebody is a big deal and the laws go to great lengths to protect the tenant in this process. Violate the law and process and you'll find yourself at odds with the authorities without the tenant ever having to go to sue you.
You appear to not understand that a civil lawsuit addresses primarily financial issues/damages asserted by a tenant. OTOH, the Tenant's Rights Statutes address issues far beyond such matters and violating somebody's civil rights becomes a criminal matter which the State has a great interest in enforcing and protecting.
Hahah. In your personal story, your tenants WENT TO COURT.
Ah, they certainly did so in response to being served with an eviction notice hearing. As disclosed by many tenant's rights organizations, if they didn't show up in court to respond to my action, they would automatically LOSE and I would get the eviction order.
The premise of their pleading was that they had to have a place to live near their work and that no others were available in the area at the time at an affordable price point so they couldn't afford to move. The judge completely ignored that they hadn't paid their rent in 4 months so they were living in my place for FREE and getting the utilities for FREE, too.
The judge made it plain that if I turned off the utilities that I would be in violation of the habitability statutes and that I would be fined under criminal statutes until I restored the residence to a habitable situation. As well, he said he'd order me to provide the people alternative housing; ie, a motel accommodation at my sole expense, if my house wasn't kept in a habitable condition.
The people were clearly freeloaders and well versed in the protection that Colorado tenants rights laws gives them. They dragged out the process of paying no rent for 8 months. This was in a mountain ski resort town, and they left at the end of the ski season that year to head to their summer resort jobs elsewhere (in AK and HI). At the end of that summer season, they returned to the Colorado ski town and their jobs for the next winter season, which is how I located them later that year to sue them via a collection agency in Colorado. Professionals at working the tenancy system, they were doing the same thing to another landlord in town, they'd paid a security deposit and the first months' rent, then stopped paying rent. It took him 6 months to get them out of his place. The same judge in Eagle county played very sympathetically to their plight of unaffordable places to live. And yet again, they played the same game in Summit county the next year while working at the same bars/restaurants in Vail they'd worked the prior years. My collection agency was tracking them for years until we finally had to drop pursuing them ... these guys were professionals at defrauding people and made sure they had no traceable assets to their names. In my house, they did over $20,000 worth of damages to the property ... punched holes in walls, destroyed appliances, tore out draperies and window coverings, trashed out landscaping by tying their dogs to the trees and shrubs, chopped up exterior wood panels, and so forth ... and that was on top of not paying rent for all those months.
I've still got the folder on my desk from the collection agency I engaged to chase these guys. When the agency finally realized that they had no resources to chase, they sent me the file back with an explanation as to why they couldn't collect and it wasn't worth their time via their normal 1/3 of the monies collected to pursue the case. OTOH, they were willing to go after the guys if I paid the agency a $12,000 retainer up front, but that was in the face of them knowing that even if I was awarded a civil judgement, they didn't believe that they could collect any money on my behalf.
We used to have a "blacklist" among mountain landlords about such folk so we'd know not to rent to them. But they were successful in getting the
courts to claim that that was illegal discrimination and a criminal matter on the part of the landlords. Again, the state was criminalizing prudent financial behavior on the part of landlords and they'd go after anybody involved in such a deal upon the complaint of a tenant. DA's have a desire to make a name for themselves in such high profile type abuses, or so it seems in some areas. Now the only thing I can legally do is require a reasonable credit score from a prospective tenant, which would have kept out that one group that ripped me off. But even that is shaky given that a lot of folks don't have good credit but are desiring to rent places in the mountains. As a landlord, I need occupied places from paying tenants, not vacancies.
PS: Check out Colorado Revised Statutes 13-40-101 through 126. On the surface, it describes the process for an eviction from a landlord's perspective, but what it really does in net effect is to delineate the rights of the tenants and the hoops that a landlord must go through to reclaim possession of their property. Included here is the protections that a tenant might have in a falling out with roommates. This is the basis for the protection that a roommate would have from the actions of their partners in a falling out situation. Indeed, most tenant's rights websites do specify that roommates should have their own contract amongst themselves for individual protection, but then you need to go to court over a civil matter to enforce that. It's a lot easier for such folk to take it into the arena of civil rights which becomes an interest of the state and the criminal justice system rather than the civil tort system.
As a landlord in Colorado who was married to an attorney, I understand all the rules and procedures.
Here is what I would do:
I would give him a non negotiable date he must move out.
Everyday I would remind him that I was expecting him to be out at the end of the month.
IF he did not move I would rent a storage unit on the opposite side of town for one month and while he was at work I would move all his belongings to the storage unit.
I would go to his place of work and hand him the key to the storage unit, then I would go home and change the locks (give landlord new key). Done!
His biggest immediate problem is finding a place to live, he does not have time to go to tenant right advocates and even if he did they are not going to forcibly move him back in.
Slim chance he is going to sue or file a complaint. And tenant right advocates are not going to make a priority out of a single guy, with a job, who overstayed his welcome, they have families and elderly to worry about.
If he is the type to make a big deal about it and file complaints and lawsuits, would you really want to have him SHARING YOUR BEDROOM with you for 90 days while you evicted him?
a couple of thoughts here:
The fellow here apparently is satisfied to live in the same place with folks that don't want him there.
As raised by other posters, my bet is that the fellow knows precisely what he is doing in taking advantage of the situation. Being a "friend" isn't part of his motivation, getting a good deal on housing is.
As well, I'd bet that if you consulted your legal resources, you'd find out how much you're at the wrong end of the stick by advising folk to remove another tenant's personal effects to another location in their absence and locking them out of their residence. BTDT, and I've had several counsel in Colorado advise me that it was leaving me wide open for all the civil and civil discrimination liabilities that the evicted party had on their side or disposal.
The only legal recourse the guys have is to continue their pressure upon the roommate to move out in accordance with their original agreement. Doesn't sound like that's worked so far, does it?
Worse yet, consider the possibility that the verbal terms of that tenancy according to the new roommate are at variance with what the OP claims was the original agreement. Perhaps he'd say that he was invited to stay with the people for as long as he needed to do so because they needed the financial relief that getting the extra money each month helped them out? a genuine quid pro pro, right? We both understand, of course, that that may not be the whole truth, but if the fellow is savvy to manipulating the situation I have no doubt that he'd know to say something to that effect that his residency was not only welcomed, but valued by the others. Looks to me to be a great opportunity to go to the tenants' rights folks and make a case for staying in the place.
As well, the tenant's rights outfits are very capable and experienced at dealing with housing emergency situations. Upon returning home to being locked out, I've no doubt that the fellow could make a call the next AM and get a very timely response to his roommates. Their personal financial stake in such forcible removal could be a very expensive exercise. They have no rights whatsoever to any such disposal of their roommates property.
The fellow here apparently is satisfied to live in the same place with folks that don't want him there.
As raised by other posters, my bet is that the fellow knows precisely what he is doing in taking advantage of the situation. Being a "friend" isn't part of his motivation, getting a good deal on housing is.
As well, I'd bet that if you consulted your legal resources, you'd find out how much you're at the wrong end of the stick by advising folk to remove another tenant's personal effects to another location in their absence and locking them out of their residence. BTDT, and I've had several counsel in Colorado advise me that it was leaving me wide open for all the civil and civil discrimination liabilities that the evicted party had on their side or disposal.
The only legal recourse the guys have is to continue their pressure upon the roommate to move out in accordance with their original agreement. Doesn't sound like that's worked so far, does it?
Worse yet, consider the possibility that the verbal terms of that tenancy according to the new roommate are at variance with what the OP claims was the original agreement. Perhaps he'd say that he was invited to stay with the people for as long as he needed to do so because they needed the financial relief that getting the extra money each month helped them out? a genuine quid pro pro, right? We both understand, of course, that that may not be the whole truth, but if the fellow is savvy to manipulating the situation I have no doubt that he'd know to say something to that effect that his residency was not only welcomed, but valued by the others.
I am fully aware that what I proposed does not met the requirements of the law.
IF he will not agree to move out, I see three options:
1) Continue to share a bedroom with someone who does not respect you and who you do not want in your home and also be open to being evicted yourself or your rent raised because you added a roommate.
2) Go thru the legal eviction process and share your bedroom for 90 days with someone you are in a ugly legal battle with.
3) Remove their possessions and change the locks.
There is a downside to all three options. So it becomes a question of the lessor of three evils.
I certainly know which route I would go. And it does not sound like the "by the book" option worked out well for you on your mountain property.
Also I would NEVER toss someone out if I was the actual owner/landlord, too much liability and recourse for tenant. But this situation sounds like three 20 something year olds where the guy couch surfing overstayed his welcome. These situations do not get a lot of sympathy from cops, judges or tenant rights advocates.
I think I'd give him one month and tell him you mean it. Then put all his stuff in boxes and stack them in the living room. Tell him you no longer want his rent money, but he can sleep on the couch for the remainder of that month rent-free. But after that it all goes out to the curb. Along with him.
PS: Check out Colorado Revised Statutes 13-40-101 through 126. On the surface, it describes the process for an eviction from a landlord's perspective, but what it really does in net effect is to delineate the rights of the tenants and the hoops that a landlord must go through to reclaim possession of their property. Included here is the protections that a tenant might have in a falling out with roommates. This is the basis for the protection that a roommate would have from the actions of their partners in a falling out situation. Indeed, most tenant's rights websites do specify that roommates should have their own contract amongst themselves for individual protection, but then you need to go to court over a civil matter to enforce that. It's a lot easier for such folk to take it into the arena of civil rights which becomes an interest of the state and the criminal justice system rather than the civil tort system.
Dude - you don't need to tell me the law. I'm a landlord, plus I went to law school (I'm not a practicing attorney).
Almost all of what you're saying is just flat out wrong:
Quote:
For example, if a landlord doesn't comply with the statutory time limit to document and refund a security or damage deposit to a tenant, the tenant is entitled to damages in the amount of three times the amount per the statutes. They only have to complain to the state authorities, they don't have to go to small claims court or sue the landlord, the damage award to the tenant is by LAW. All they have to do is file the complaint and they don't have to go to court to get the judgement awarded by the State authorities.
Totally and absolutely 100% wrong. The aggrieved tenant would absolutely have to sue in court to collect from the landlord.
Quote:
If you have a legal right to a residence in Colorado and you are denied use or access by "unlawfully removed" process, you have but to call the cops! They will get you back into your residence and if somebody tries to interfere (perhaps your old roommate), the cops or sheriff's deputy will arrest them for the breach of the peace.
Totally wrong. The remedy from unlawful removal is to SUE IN A COURT FOR MONEY DAMAGES (you could try asking for specific performance).
I could point out other falsehoods, but I'll leave it at that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
