Hi, there! Joe White here from Grow Property Management, your trusted property management company in Philadelphia.
So we’ve got a bit of a situation on our hands. My property management company recently took over a rental property here in Philadelphia, and almost immediately, we discovered that someone had already gained access to the property – either through a break-in or because they were scammed by someone else. Doesn’t really matter how it happened – what matters is this person was living there without permission from us or the property owner. In other words, we were dealing with a squatter.
Now, squatters in Philadelphia – and really across the state of Pennsylvania are extremely difficult to deal with. I’m not a lawyer, so I can’t give legal advice, but from my experience as a real estate broker and owner of a property management company, I can tell you squatters have a lot of rights. In fact, in many ways, they have more rights than an actual tenant, which is kind of unbelievable.
In this case, I expect it would take around 15–16 months to remove this person from the property, and cost the owner over $7,000 in legal fees and expenses. That’s just to get back into a property that someone illegally entered in the first place.
That said, I was able to get in touch with the guy and, somewhat surprisingly, he agreed to go through a background and credit check. He also agreed to sign a lease and even paid $50 towards it. That $50 is actually really important, because in contract law, any valid contract requires “consideration” from both sides. So him paying any amount – even a single dollar – makes it a legal lease. That officially moved him from being a squatter to being a tenant. And as strange as it sounds, tenants have fewer rights than squatters when it comes to eviction, so that actually works in the owner’s favor.
Now, instead of spending $7,000 and waiting over a year, the cost of eviction could drop to around $900 and take much less time. Still not ideal, but way more manageable.
But of course, it doesn’t end there. Even though he’s technically a tenant now, he hasn’t paid any rent – besides that original $50. He’s been in the property for months, hasn’t transferred any of the utilities into his own name, and the landlord is stuck paying for everything. Just last month, the gas bill alone was $400! The owner is stressed, on the verge of foreclosure, and has made the tough decision to sell the property – at a loss.
Because of the squatter-now-tenant situation, we can’t just go in and do showings. That would be considered harassment. So now the property has to be sold sight unseen, and buyers will have to be willing to take on the burden of evicting this guy themselves. It’s a fully rehabbed home, but we have no idea what condition it’s in now, and we know he’s not taking care of it. It’s a really unfortunate situation for the owner.
We’ve started eviction proceedings, working with an attorney, but the city requires landlords to go through mediation before eviction. The city wants us to forgive all back rent and just let him stay and start paying rent at some negotiated point. But we’re not on board with that at all. He’s had every chance to pay and has made it clear he doesn’t believe he should have to. If we accept that deal, he’ll never actually pay, and we’ll be right back in court a month later—except we’ll have to pay all the legal fees again and restart the process from scratch.
The city views our refusal as “unreasonable.” They almost treat us like we’re the problem. But come on—this guy broke into the property, hasn’t paid rent, won’t put utilities in his name, and is clearly taking advantage of the system. Yet somehow, we have to justify why we want to evict him with more than just non-payment of rent. That’s right: in Philadelphia, just not paying rent isn’t enough. We need to prove he’s violated the lease in other ways too.
Thankfully, we included in the lease that the tenant is responsible for putting utilities in their name. Since he hasn’t done that, we’re using it as an additional violation to prove default of lease. Hopefully, that’s enough for the courts to allow the eviction. But it’s always a gamble – the courts are often more sympathetic to the tenant, regardless of the situation. This guy, by the way, is fully employed. He’s a truck driver. He’s not struggling financially – he just doesn’t think he should have to pay rent. And if you ask him, he’ll straight up tell you that. He won’t even pretend he has a reason. It’s just entitlement.
So here’s the lesson: if you’re a landlord, make sure your lease is robust. Include clear clauses about utility responsibilities, behavior standards (like not threatening the landlord or using abusive language), and define specific defaults. That way, when situations like this come up, you’re not just relying on non-payment as your only reason for eviction. Courts may not care that someone’s not paying, but if they’re breaking other parts of the lease, that can give you a legal leg to stand on.
It’s frustrating. Incredibly frustrating. From our side, we’re just trying to help landlords manage their properties, protect their investments, and deal with people who are actively abusing the system. And yet we’re treated like the bad guys.
Anyway, that’s the situation. As a Philadelphia property management company owner, this is the kind of mess I run into more often than I’d like. If you’re in the rental game here, know what you’re up against. The laws don’t always make sense, and you’ve got to be prepared.
As always, happy rental property investing.
