Every tactic used by code enforcement has drawbacks, and slumlords have ways of ducking them.
Writing citations: Code enforcement can write tickets for shoddy conditions, but apartment owners may not show up for court, and police won’t spend time tracking them down over local ordinance violations. Sometimes landlords sell properties to new owners before cases are resolved, meaning code enforcement may have to write new tickets.
Fines: Any ticket code enforcement writes typically carries a maximum penalty of no more than a $1,000 fine or a few months in jail. But even with hundreds of citations, it’s a weak threat against private equity and out-of-state investment firms with millions of dollars and corporate attorneys.
Sweep inspections: Inspection teams can walk around complexes and write citations for every violation they see. But they can’t go inside apartments unless tenants invite them, and unless they bring warrants, property managers can boot them off the grounds. Sweeps are resource intensive, so most governments can only manage one or two per month.
Court orders: State court judges can order repairs. But that’s after months or years of court delays and back-and-forth negotiations between attorneys. Judges then have to monitor compliance and see that fines are collected if not all repairs are made.
Asking nicely: Code enforcement officials often say they’d rather kindly seek changes than go after landlords criminally. But governments may struggle to identify the owners behind LLCs. If they do locate them, the owners may stall by claiming to be working on their problems.
Interior inspections tied to business licenses: Several cities and counties require a quarter or a fifth of apartment units to be independently inspected each year. But some jurisdictions give owners leeway to cherry pick which units get inspected. Even if too many units fail, landlords can go on collecting rent.
Property condemnation: In extreme cases, a judge can declare a complex unsafe for habitation and have it condemned. But residents have to be relocated, and the vacant building becomes the local government’s problem, shifting the burden to taxpayers to maintain the structure or bulldoze it.
Featured
