Is anybody aware of LL that has attempted to enforce vac-cine requirement?

Specifically whether attempted eviction on basis of nuisance or hazardous to other tenants?

I truly believe a LL could do this IF AND ONLY IF, they could show where this was a valid business decision. So I will ask this question again, because I didn't a single answer before:

How will doing so save you money?

Yes Ken, I would assume that this makes some of them feel good. The scam aspect of C-19 has literally broken some peoples brains. They will do whatever they can and whatever they are told to make it stop because they don’t realize that they can just make it stop by choosing to not participate in the hysteria.

I was a tenant up till about 10 years ago. I had multiple rental properties before I bought my own personal residence. And this morning, I try to put my self in the position of Dino’s tenant.

It's hard to imagine any judge evicting a family because of their medical care.

However, I would assume until told otherwise that a landlord could select a new tenant for a vacancy with vaccination as a screening requirement. Some retail stores are doing it.

It would make a lot of difference which city your rental is located in. I can see evicting the unvaccinated in Seattle, but is sure as anything isn't happening anywhere in Idaho.

Has anyone seen proof yet that the vac-cines even work?

Oh, I forgot, there's boosters now. Silly me!

In a similar type of situation, I don't mind if my tenants own a gun, but they have to be reasonable. Keep it locked up. No children access.

Sure they have 6. Just read the report that Joe from CA submitted as proof that they don't work.

For those that tried to respond directly to my question above, thank you for your thoughts.

Sadly, it looks like the reading comprehension skills of some who responded have declined significantly. It also appears they have experienced a significant increase in their blood pressure. Clearly, it would not make sense to attempt such a risky eviction at this point.

For those that chose to respond to a different topic, try reading the first post above again. I asked whether anybody was aware of whether it had been tried and what happened in court.

NE,

No, your assumption on legal and legislative matters is definitely not a safe bet.

I always want to know how the courts are handling various issues It doesn't matter whether it applies to me. If you don't care what the courts are doing on this issue, I would be stunned. You should want to know. This can eventually have an impact on LL liability as various related issues work their way through the courts.

When that happens, those paying attention to such things will know how to avoid liability from some ambulance chasing tenant lawyer. Those oblivious to important developments (and such a case would be immensely important) in the court system will need to be content by continuing to post their well-known beliefs at the same time they are writing a check to satisfy the judgment some tenant obtained against them (which won't be covered by insurance).

NE,

Another problem with reading comprehension.

No sensible person would expect a law requiring landlord to be required to enforce anything of that sort.

We're talking about related corollary issues. An example would be something similar to liability that has been established to exist for LL concerning smoking by some residents in the building.

If you don't see the value in knowing how the courts rule on related issues, there really is nothing else I can say other than I find your posts entertaining. Keep posting and best of luck to you.

Dino,

I would be afraid of the slippery slope that a mandate would create. Do you evict for flu shots? How about not getting a physical, or because someone smoked in the past.

So your question -CAN a LL enforce a standard.......yes they can.....but why. Medical screenings really isn't what typical LLs do.

Should they enforce standards which they do not have direct control of? Does your application ask if they have had there shots? I do hope yours doesn't. I would expect the LL that does that will not have to worry about an eviction, instead I think HIPPA would beat them up. That said, it is sorta crazy though that in some states, they actually want businesses to do the policing.

So can the govt deputize LLs into this task....I suppose if you took govt cash on a specific tenant - they can try and bully you around.

As for one tenant bothering another one, yes you can and should evict - normally. But if one tenant is bothered or afraid because another neighbor does or doesn't have shots........boy life is too short to even listen to that.

Ray,

Glad to see you provided a thoughtful answer but like so many others you did not actually read my posts. Just read what I posted, not what you are guessing I posted from the short title.

I don't even have any un-vaccinated tenants. Every tenant I've got wanted to get vaccinated as soon as they were allowed. In fact, I suspect they would have been vaccinated before they were allowed if they could have managed it somehow.

I am only interested in whether there have been any court rulings on this issue.

If you don't know, it's no crime to simply say so.

How can so many people just look at the short title of the post and don't bother to read the actual posts. Yes I should have chosen a more precise title but there is very little space available for the title. There just isn't enough room.

dino, short answer to your original question, no.

On the other hand, How do you even know that all of your tenants have had there shots?

Have you asked them?

If so, why?

[[[[...... it’s safe to operate under the assumption that most posters who asked a question here are looking to do what they asked........]]]]]

N.E.

Although some of the responses have been short on information value and thought they definitely made up for it in entertainment value.

Since these posts do not change the world, they do not change public opinion, and they do not change public policy, it is not a good idea to allow them to raise your blood pressure.

Much better to relax.

I am not so sure you would say that if you gained one but at the same time caused you to lose ten from those that were undecided. It might be a net loss.

Besides, only an insignificant percentage of the population are even paying any attention to this issue. Of those that do pay attention, only a small percentage of those have the ability to understand the issue and see through the propaganda on both sides. Events over the past year have proven that.

There are just too many people on both sides I would never associate with. Moreover, I know you have absolutely no idea what I think on this issue. I simply don't feel any need to persuade anybody. It doesn't bother me that many people are fools in this world. Let them be played by others with some political or financial interest in the outcome. The vast majority of successful people share that view.

The bottom line is that when someone expresses their personal view on this discussion board, and five or ten others express their agreement, there are a hundred others reading that view that you will never hear from. Of those hundred, almost all simply don't care about that personal view or they disagree with it and are perfectly happy not caring whether anybody knows. They don't feel the need for approval from others.

They also avoid increasing their blood pressure as should everybody since it accomplishes nothing.

I have spent decades where my job was to assess how people will react to news and what actions they will take with their money. I was good enough at it to get into real estate and be able to take it easy.

Dino, you may find the article on the following webpage interesting -

www.rocketlawyer.com/real-estate/landlords/eviction/legal-guide/can-landlords-evict-tenants-who-refuse-vaccination

Interesting article. Looks like Arizona, Florida and Montana are places to relocate to for landlords looking to escape rental related coronatarianism.

It still leaves the question hanging out there as to why a landlord would want to get involved in this? Besides feeling like they are making a difference, what kind of liability do you open yourself up to on the other end if you start policing this and fail to police it properly?

Thanks Jeffrey, seems mostly similar to what we have seen with some employers, but what I'll be interested in is now that some employers have instituted mandates, what will the courts allow and what will they strike down. Also what will courts allow or strike down on state prohibitions against mandates. Also waiting for lawsuits from employee claiming employer did not protect employee from illness. Should be interesting.

Eventually there will be a case regarding landlord liability so that will be especially interesting.

I generally try to screen for personal responsibility to avoid such potential problems. In fact, I consider personal responsibility as important as any other item. The desire to pay the rent is just as important as the ability to pay the rent. The tenants that have both are the best to look for. They are the ones that will not be filing frivolous lawsuits.

Thanks Jeffrey, seems mostly similar to what we have seen with some employers, but what I'll be interested in is now that some employers have instituted mandates, what will the courts allow and what will they strike down. Also what will courts allow or strike down on state prohibitions against mandates. Also waiting for lawsuits from employee claiming employer did not protect employee from illness. Should be interesting.

Eventually there will be a case regarding landlord liability so that will be especially interesting.

I generally try to screen for personal responsibility to avoid such potential problems. In fact, I consider personal responsibility as important as any other item. The desire to pay the rent is just as important as the ability to pay the rent. The tenants that have both are the best to look for. They are the ones that will not be filing frivolous lawsuits.

NE,

I'm not talking about losing tenants.

I'm talking about your effort in the battle for the hearts and mind of the public.

Dino, understood. In the real world and in this regard, I’m sure I have won more hearts and minds than I have lost. But that’s another topic.