Comments on this legislation Post new comment Text and Analysis Add to Watch List
Previous Next
- Introduced by Rep. Shanelle Jackson (D) on April 26, 2012, to mandate that landlords evicting a tenant must provide a shipping/storage container large enough to hold the tenant’s furniture and other property, and then store the property for an unspecified length of time.
- Referred to the House Judiciary Committee on April 26, 2012.
- Reported in the House on September 20, 2012, with the recommendation that the bill be referred to the Committee on Local, Intergovernmental, and Regional Affairs.
- Referred to the House Local, Intergovernmental, and Regional Affairs Committee on September 20, 2012.
- Referred to the House Judiciary Committee on April 26, 2012.
Comments
1) Re: 2012 House Bill 5578 (Mandate landlords provide storage for evicted tenant belongings ) by right to do bussiness on May 10, 2012This bill is a fine example of the quality lawmakers we have working for our great state. Please review her other bills Tusgkee Airman Highway, I had to evict someone and watch the neighbors pick through their canned food. Our lawmakers could end this easily, however they refuse to make Michigan a Business friendly enviorment, bringing the Businesses to Michigan is the Key to put Michigan back to work. Its simple Michigan is not in a Growth enviorment, it needs a kickstart . and all they think of is dumpsters and re-naming I-75 !!!!!!!
Tenants take three to four months to get out and sometimes a lot more. They should take the responsibility to have thier belongings moved to another location if they want to keep them. Landlords are already at a great loss with non paid rent, court costs, servers fees, and shariff move out fees. Not to mention any damages the tenants skip on. We're in the rental business, not a free storage business. Talking about regulations that hurt small businesses....this one gets 5 stars. How about the person that came up with this idea purchasing a large storage complex we can send tenants belongings to and they pick up the costs if they're so concerned.
"It's called a dumpster."
Someone please explain to me how it is a lawmaker can rewrite landlord tenant and contract law. Seriously. Once judicial determination is made on the breech of contractual arrangement, the tenant, being found responsible for the breech must move out. Why must the landlord take on financial burdens of a storage unit, for an indefinite amount of time, when a court has determined there are no outstanding obligations to the tenant? This is when a tenant would reach out to family, friends or organizations to store any property or even sell it. Would this also apply to businesses? As for the outstanding storage bill, that looks like another court case. When you look at it, the tenant was evicted for nonpayment of rent, so what makes one even come up with the concept that there will be reimbursement on the storage bill?
Your new comments should be made in the box below.
