THE CARITAS PROJECT

POST EVICTION LIABILITY INITIATIVE

            In our work with Maricopa County’s elderly homeless population, we have identified a specific legal problem which complicates the rehousing of many of our clients—post eviction liabilities to former landlords.  As we will discuss in more detail below, these liabilities take two forms.  First, the eviction judgement itself, and second, landlords’ post judgment claims for damages.  Given Metro Phoenix’s overheated housing market, the limited funds available to subsidize housing and the restrictions on use of those funds, these liabilities often effectively become a nearly impenetrable obstacle to finding new housing for many elderly Arizonans.  The Caritas Project believes that legal remedies exist to alleviate these problems.  Finding and implementing these remedies will require a significant investment of time and resources.  We hope you will consider supporting this initiative with a generous contribution to support our efforts on behalf of the least fortunate among us.

EVICTION JUDGMENTS

            A forcible detainer proceeding, more commonly called an eviction, is a civil suit by a landlord to recover possession of a rented property.  These proceedings can be based on failure to pay rent, or in some cases, on violation of other provisions of the lease (i.e., illegal activity on the premises, property damage or nuisance complaints).  For the purposes of this discussion, we will focus on nonpayment of rent.  In Maricopa County, evictions are generally litigated in Justice Court before a Justice of the Peace who is often not an attorney.  It is not uncommon for ten to fifteen such cases to be scheduled in a half hours’ time, often without participation of the tenant.  Judgment in the amount of unpaid rent, late fees, any property damages alleged in the pleadings, filing fees, costs of litigation and attorney’s fees is almost inevitably rendered against the tenant, along with an order granting the landlord right to take possession of the premises.  This leaves the former tenant homeless and often several thousand dollars in debt.

            While in theory the Arizona Landlord Tennant Act provides the tenant with various defenses and a right to appeal, in practice, the vast majority of defendants in eviction proceedings lack the financial resources and requisite legal knowledge to use these statutory provisions in their defense.  Further, the truncated appeal time provided in the statute make obtaining legal help in a timely manner a practical impossibility for virtually all tenants.  It is not an overstatement to say that in a decade of work with several thousand elderly homeless, we have almost never encountered a client whom we could assist with an eviction appeal.

            Unfortunately, in the current real estate market in Maricopa County an unpaid eviction judgment is often a sentence of homelessness.  An evicted elderly person trying to survive on a Social Security check has no viable options.  Most subsidized housing programs require settlement of unpaid judgments as a criteria for eligibility.  Landlords are often unresponsive to overtures to settle, and slow to provide confirming paperwork when paid.

POST JUDGMENT CLAIMS

            We have identified a second area of concern relating to post eviction liability, namely post judgment damage claims by landlords.  These claims, unlike the judgments issued in Justice Courts after at least the pretense of a hearing, have not been adjudicated in any way.  They are usually characterized as “cleaning fees” and “property damage” (indistinguishable from ordinary wear and tear).  Unfortunately for our clients, almost all subsidized housing programs require resolution of these claims as a prerequisite for eligibility.  Again, these are unadjudicated assertions of liability, often completely unsupported by documentation, sometimes amounting to thousands of dollars.  Funds allocated by various programs to resolve these claims are rapidly depleted, wasting resources that could otherwise more effectively be used to mitigate homelessness, and unreasonably delaying the rehousing process.

WHAT WE HOPE TO DO

            Caritas intends to engage in an intensive review of the statutes and administrative regulations governing post eviction liabilities and develop legal strategies to resolve these obligations on behalf of individual clients.  We further intend to formulate targeted changes to statutory and regulatory language that will, in the future, facilitate resolution of these claims and streamline rehousing efforts on behalf of our clients.  We hope you will agree that this is a worthwhile effort to help alleviate the housing crisis in Maricopa County and will support us in this endeavor with your contributions.

MORE ABOUT CARITAS

     A few millennia ago, King Solomon observed that, “The race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, nor bread to the wise, nor riches to the intelligent, nor favor to men of skill; but time and chance happen to them all.”  Eccles. 9:11. Some things never change.  Sometimes we make bad choices.  Sometimes ill fortune finds us.  Some fare worse than others.  How do we as a society treat those who end up on the bottom of the heap?  And who among us is closer to the bottom of the heap than our senior citizens who find themselves facing homelessness?

At any given time, estimates are that more than 1300 Maricopa County residents over the age of 55 are experiencing homelessness, sometimes for the first time in their lives.  They no longer have the resilience of youth, often no longer have the ability to work, and find themselves alone, without a spouse, family or friends they can turn to, even for a couch to sleep on or a few dollars for food.  As one man told me, facing such circumstances for the first time at the age of 72, “I’m so scared.  I don’t know what’s going to happen to me.”

     For a significant number of the elderly homeless, legal issues are at the root of their difficulties.  A simple consultation with an attorney could clarify, or even solve those problems, but legal services are nearly unaffordable to much of the population, completely so to someone subsisting on Social Security payments or less.

    The Caritas Project is the only pro bono legal organization in Maricopa County focused exclusively on serving the elderly homeless.  In a typical year, Caritas provides services to around 200 individuals.  Some examples of our work:

•      Ms. W. has some serious mental health issues requiring expensive medication four times a year.  At some point, she developed a fear that her treatments would no longer be covered by insurance and skipped one.  As a result, she experienced a psychotic episode, and was committed to a mental hospital.  While there, her landlord evicted her.  We met her a few days after she was discharged from the hospital.  When we understood what had happened to her, we advised her to get her treatment immediately, and assured her that we would represent her in dealing with any insurance coverage issues.  She got the treatment made a full recovery and is now housed and employed.
•      Albert’s sole income was a Social Security check of $750.00 per month.  Due to child support arrearages, he had $300.00 deducted from his check every month.  Since he was unable to work, he was left to live on $450.00 per month, and often did not eat the last two or three days before he received his Social Security payment.  The youngest of his children was 27 years old, and all of the money was going to the State of Arizona for AFDC reimbursement.  Caritas petitioned the court for a reduction in the arrearage payment.  Ultimately, the Court lowered Albert’s payment to $100.00 per month, and the State agreed to waive all interest on the arrearages.  This increased Albert’s spendable income by over 40% and made his life at least a bit easier.
•      KM had managed to save about $2,700.00 when someone fraudulently obtained his ATM card information and drained his account.  He made a fraud claim to the bank, but had difficulty communicating with them due to a speech impediment resulting from Parkinson’s disease.  Consequently, the bank ignored him for over a year.  Caritas contacted the bank, demanding an explanation.  Ultimately, KM got all of his money back.