Landlords - "HEROES Act" Could Make You House Folks for Free

[Mark Rogers]

I am deeply troubled by the latest HEROES Act and hope that it will not survive in its present form. Section 110203 beginning on page 961 may be one of the biggest land grabs and transfers of wealth in recent memory and looks like it is forcing Mom & Pop landlords to pay to house millions without meaningful recourse.  It also creates a very real risk that mortgage lenders will pull back from the market.  For many areas of the country, the real estate market is strong and is poised to lead a recovery, as long as lenders don't pull back and decimate demand. If lenders pull out, the next Great Recession could easily become the next Great Depression. The HUGE expansion of the definition of a "Covered Dwelling" is problematic and amounts to a seizing of property and an interfering with the right to contract of Mom & Pops landlords.  Under this proposed Act, most of our houses would be considered a "Covered Dwelling," so our renters could quit making payments, without penalty.  If you can't collect rent for a year, you have a cause of action for rent (but no penalties) against an insolvent renter with no assets.  Even if you ruin your ability to borrow more by seeking forbearance, you still have to pay the principal, interest, property taxes, and insurance, and other expenses to your lender, regardless of your ability to collect rent during a time when the government would not let you evict. 

I apologize for going so negative on this one. This just looks too much like a third world country seizing a mine, only this time, it's the US seizing our houses and seriously undermining our ability to keep our promises to repay our lenders by preventing us from renting our houses to people who will pay rent. Many of us have deep reserves and will survive, but a seizure by any other name is still deeply disturbing.  

Some form of the law will likely be passed by Friday.  If the current version strikes you as a bad idea, please consider contacting your representatives.  

Thanks,
Mark

[Bryan Devitt]

Originally posted by @Theresa Harris:

Originally posted by @Bryan Devitt:

Originally posted by @Theresa Harris:

With all due respect, why should any one get housing for free at the expense of the landlord?  If the govt wants to buy houses and house people for free, that is one thing; but why do they think it is okay for anyone to be forced to house people for free?  All this would do is cause discrimination against certain groups of people (regardless if it is legal or not).

 More people rent a place to live than rent out a place to live, it is merely a large population of votes to buy, nothing more, nothing less. Any time you see a law pushed in public, it is almost always for votes, any time you see one pushed in private (i.e. Friday night of a holiday weekend vote) it is to steal more money from tax payers or take more control. Very rarely are laws there to actually help people/society in the long term 

True, but then they shouldn't be surprised when there are fewer rentals available and more people are looking for places to live.

 This is when they do what parts of CA have done, but nationally. They use the lack of housing as a reason they need to take total control of the situation and control rent, eliminate discrimination (via not allowing background checks of any sort), etc. The government (and everyone that rents and wants someone else to give them handouts) ignores that this issue was created by government intervention and insists full control is the only way to fix it. The government does this with everything they touch really, dip a toe in the water, contaminate the pond and insist the only way to fix it is if they're the only one's allowed in the pond.