Landlords neglecting upkeep and necessary repairs in the buildings they own is not a surprise to tenants on Section 8. These folks, essentially the working poor of the U.S., wait for months on long waiting lists to end up in what is usually barely adequate housing – or worse.
However, with the government footing the bill, landlords are supposed to keep the apartments in good conditions. And it makes sense, I don’t want my tax dollars going to subsidize a shady landlord’s slum. And the federal government actually does something pretty cool here – if an apartment fails a Section 8 inspection, the government stops paying the rent. If the Section 8 recipient/tenant stays in the apartment – the landlord cannot collect the portion of that Section 8 would pay (if the apartment hadn’t failed inspection).
However, the reality is that plenty of landlords violate federal law and do try evict tenants for nonpayment of the Section 8 portion of rent. The great big bureaucracy that is the New York City Housing Authority doesn’t do a great job of educating its tenants about what it means if their apartment fails a Section 8 inspection – and what practical and legal options they have. Often tenants think that if Section 8 stopped paying it is probably because they did something wrong – or they assume that they are now responsible for Section 8’s portion of the rent.
The Section 8 recipient may try to engage a pro bono attorney to help them – and the attorney would catch the fast one the landlord is in the middle of pulling. However, in my office only 6 out of 10 people who come to seek housing legal assistance are represented by staff attorneys. There just isn’t enough money here to support a staff of attorneys to meet the need.
So without an attorney, the recipient heads to Housing Court and chats with the landlord’s attorney. Who knows if that attorney (who probably has 10 cases on that day) knows that the tenant is on Section 8. That attorney just knows their client wants the back rent (that they are not owed because they have failed to keep the premise up to code). The landlord’s attorney convinces the recipient tenant to sign a stipulation that states the recipient tenant will pay back all the rent (including Section 8’s portion) by a certain date – thereby buying them some time in the apartment. The tenant knows the landlord hasn’t been paid the full rent amount – and the tenant may think that they are responsible. Also, it feels scary to go in the Court and explain everything to the judge...the tenant worries the judge might say that they have to leave their apartment that day! When the tenant speaks to the judge to submit the stipulation to the Court – he or she might not even think to mention that the apartment is under Section 8 regulation.
This happens all the time – sometimes the landlord gets caught and the tenant does not lose their housing. Other times the tenant is evicted, and had no idea what rights were available to him or her. Even if the tenant ultimately stays in their apartment, it is exhausting and stressful to fear losing your housing. It is especially nefarious because it is the landlord who is in violation for not keeping up the apartment. It wastes the time of tenant’s attorneys who have to continually go to court to fight nonpay actions brought by the landlord because of the landlord’s own violation of the rules.
What to do? Impose significant penalties for landlords who try to evict or use tenants for back rent that was the Section 8 subsidy. Now landlords roll the dice – maybe the tenant will not have a lawyer and will pay the money or will be evicted (thereby potentially giving up a valuable rent stabilized or rent control apartment) and the landlord benefits for neglecting their properties and subjecting the tenants to terrible conditions. Or maybe the tenant has an attorney or housing advocate who can help the tenant assert their rights – and the landlord loses a little in legal fees. Either way, if there were significant penalties on landlords for pulling these kinds of tricks – I believe it would greatly dissuade landlords from trying to collection Section 8 subsidy monies from tenants.
One could argue that penalties on landlords who accept Section 8 would be a problem because it would dissuade any landlords from joining the program. This argument accepts as a given that our tax money should go to people who will not keep apartments for working low income people in good repair. It also implicitly acquiesces to the idea that poor people need to accept some level of poor living conditions and harassment – as yet another cost of being poor.
Go to Housing Court for a morning - and observe or speak to people who are there. It is a very stressful situation – and how much worse is it when people are potentially being evicted or saddled with huge rent arrears because of the negligence of their landlord to keep up the building. It is just unfair.
Monday, October 1, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)