A new section called “protections for victims of abuse” has been added to the HUD Section 8 lease contract used in public housing projects and in private subsidized rentals. The lease states in plain English that “criminal activity” cannot be grounds for eviction if any “tenant or immediate member of the tenant’s family is the victim or threatened victim of domestic violence, dating violence or stalking” (Section 8, e, (2)).

This HUD lease makes it absolutely clear what is being asked for under proposed Massachusetts legislation (H.1241 and S.755) that would give special housing “rights” to victims of domestic violence.

What criminal activity?

So let’s be specific.

• The husband is beating up on his wife at midnight, knocking her about, bruising her, throwing a chair that dents the wall. All criminal activity. Landlords, ignore it. Can’t evict.

• The boyfriend, not a tenant, stalks his girlfriend-tenant, busting the outer front door lock to get in, pounding on the tenant’s apartment door, then breaking through. All criminal activity. Landlords, ignore it. Can’t evict.

• The husband and wife are in a loud, heated verbal fight at 2 a.m. when a neighbor-tenant knocks on the door and yells at them to stop fighting and be quiet. The husband opens the door, yells at the neighbor and throws a plate at her as she runs down the hall. The plate wasn’t thrown at the wife, but it nevertheless intimidates her. Some criminal activity. Landlords, ignore it. Can’t evict.

Threatening others

Curiously, the HUD lease does provide for evicting a victim of domestic violence for other good reasons and for domestic-violence-related activity in one limited circumstance: “If the owner can demonstrate” that the domestic-violence-related activity is “an actual and imminent threat to other tenants or those employed at or providing service to the property.”

What’s curious is that the victim does not get this protection, only other tenants or employees. Even for these others, however, the burden on the landlord is clearly very difficult. The landlord must prove to a judge that there is “an actual and imminent threat” to others. What’s absurd here is how slow the court process always is, yet only it can respond and determine the “actual and imminent threat.”

Clearly, the thrust of these provisions is to restrict the landlord’s ability to act even when admitted criminal activity is taking place, even when a clear abuse to the victim is taking place.

Eviction as social control

In a difficult domestic violence situation, the landlord could call the police or call a domestic violence advocate and seek intervention in this manner, as any ordinary citizen or neighbor could do. But what is being denied to the landlord is to use his or her specific power to evict. The ostensible reason for this denial is to avoid evicting the victim because of the abuser’s actions.

But here we get into a tangle of problems. Not evicting the victim also often means not evicting the abuser. It means leaving the domestic violence situation alone and letting it continue. This does nothing to cure the problem and it may exacerbate it. Knowing that he cannot be evicted may encourage the abuser in his abuse. Or alternatively, knowing that she does not face the threat of eviction may encourage the victim to tolerate the abuse. The threat of eviction may actually motivate the victim to face her situation and take her own action to end the abuse. Often the victim’s best choice of action when caught in ongoing domestic violence is to quietly and suddenly escape from the home and find a safe haven. Staying in the home – as the proposed legislation would encourage – is often not the way to end domestic violence.

In all these respects, eviction or the threat of eviction acts as social control, as social pressure on the couple or either person involved to act in ways to end the abuse. Having a roof over one’s head is quite important to people and will affect their actions strongly. A police chief in Charlottesville, SC, discovered he could stop drug dealers from dealing by threatening them with eviction from housing projects. Our legislators should be very careful when they meddle in the rights of landlords to control people living in their property through actual or threatened eviction.           

 

Action Alert:
Victims of domestic violence bills 
 

Please take the time to call, write or email the people below. They have control over this domestic violence legislation. They are the Co-Chairs of the Housing Committee. Urge them not to move either bill out of committee. AND they are your own state senator and representative. Urge them to vote NO on H.1241 or S.755 if either bill is brought up for debate in the House or Senate.

Your call, letter or email can be short and sweet. Be sure to state the bill numbers. If you wish, you can use the information in these related articles on this website to formulate your objections.

We need many owners to act. Numbers count!

Below is the contact information for the Housing Co-Chairs and a website address where you can find the name and contact information for your own state legislators.

Representative Kevin Honan
Co-Chair, Housing Committee
State House, Room 38
Boston, MA 02133
617-722-2470
Rep.KevinHonan@hou.state.ma.us

Senator Susan Tucker
Co-Chair, Housing Committee
State House, Room 424
Boston, MA 02133
617-722-1612
Susan.Tucker@state.ma.us

Web address to find who your own state legislators are:

    www.wheredoivotema.com

Enter your street address. You are looking for “Rep in General Court” and “Senate in General Court.