A new article in Housing Policy details how small-scale landlords in Philadelphia avoid evictions in order to keep tenants in their homes and avert costs associated with evictions. In “Working With Them: Small-Scale Landlord Strategies for Avoiding Evictions,” in-depth interviews reveal that many landlords are willing to work with tenants to devise a payment plan, forgive late fees, or accept services in lieu of rent. Though these strategies vary among landlords, the research could inform eviction prevention policy to meet the needs of both tenants and small-scale landlords.
Through a series of 71 interviews with Philadelphia property managers and landlords, researchers identify 1) landlord perceptions of the eviction process; 2) strategies landlords use to keep tenants in their home, and; 3) methods for removing tenants without going through formal eviction proceedings. Of the 71 interviews, 47 were conducted with small-scale landlords who own fewer than 20 units.
Small-scale landlords seek to avoid evictions for a variety of reasons, including the desire to: protect valuable long-term tenants; avoid eviction-associated time commitments and costs; avoid performing costly repairs; or avoid risking a unit sitting vacant. The study found that many landlords were willing to work with tenants who were behind on rent. Landlords asserted that a prerequisite for this flexibility was open communication from tenants about the problems they faced paying rent. This communication allowed landlords to feel they had some level of control over the situation by setting concrete payment plans and timelines. Though most landlords attempted other strategies before resorting to eviction, some moved forward with eviction filings as soon as the lease was violated.
The researchers found landlords commonly developed flexible payment plans with tenants. Landlords emphasized that some amount of rent was better than nothing. If tenants showed a willingness to work with them, landlords would often accept some rent under the condition that the rest would be paid back later. Payment plans often entailed tenants paying a higher monthly rent until they were caught up on arrears or paying a series of lump sums. Some landlords accepted services in lieu of rent. Commonly accepted services included painting, cleaning, minor repairs, groundskeeping, and errands. Many landlords noted that when tenants were transparent and communicative, late fees would be forgiven to avoid putting the tenant in even more debt.
Though many landlords negotiated terms to keep tenants in their homes, they also expressed that sometimes negotiation was not feasible. When this was the case, some landlords asked tenants to move out under the condition that they would not have to pay back rent or go through the legal process. If landlords perceived tenants to be particularly difficult, they occasionally also offered a cash incentive to move out. This strategy was often less expensive and faster than the eviction itself, and it meant tenants could leave without the mark of an eviction on their record.
The authors implore policy makers to consider the tenant-landlord relationship in housing policy and programming. Eviction prevention programming, for example, can incorporate best practices around communication so that tenants and landlords can find solutions prior to going to court. Additionally, small-scale landlords play a particularly important role in low-income housing markets. In cities with rising prices and decreasing profit margins, policy makers should consider how they can best support both small-scale landlords and low-income renters alike.
The article can be found at: https://bit.ly/35iYFNZ