Bill to allow expedited removal of occupants from residential property moves to NC House floor

Yahoo

01-04-2025

The North Carolina Legislative Building as it appeared on March 14, 2025. (Photo: Brandon Kingdollar/NC Newsline)
The North Carolina House Rules Committee advanced a bill Tuesday that would permit the expedited removal of unauthorized persons from residences, though some lawmakers voiced concerns over issues of due process.
Under House Bill 96, which was approved by the Judiciary 1 Committee last week, property owners and their representatives would be allowed to request law enforcement officers to remove individuals who are unlawfully inhabiting a residence they own and refuse to leave. A tenant who is holding over after a lease term has expired would not be subject to the bill as it does not apply to properties that were offered 'as an accommodation for the general public,' nor to circumstances in which payment for continued residence was demanded or paid or a contract permitting residence was agreed upon.
Upon the property owner's request, a county magistrate would be empowered to authorize the expedited removal of the occupant and require law enforcement to evict them from the property within 24 hours as well as potentially arrest them if they have violated trespassing or other laws. The bill also provides for law enforcement to 'stand by to keep the peace' while the property owner changes locks and removes the occupant's personal belongings, shielding officers from liability for complying with the law in good faith.
The bill would also protect property owners and their representatives from liability if the occupant's personal belongings are destroyed or damaged during the removal process unless the removal is found to be wrongful. In cases of wrongful removal, occupants can bring civil action to recover the property, costs and damages incurred, and a civil fine and attorneys' fees. And if the occupant and the owner are engaged in litigation prior to removal, expedited removal is prohibited.
Rep. Steve Tyson (R-Craven), who is a realtor and general contractor, said the bill is designed to target people who unlawfully inhabit homes and apartments where there was never a valid lease. Tyson said the bill was motivated by concern that such removals can be held up in court and appeals 'practically forever,' and he felt it necessary to make the process 'fair for the property owner.'
'Anybody can get a lease online now and print it out,' Tyson said. 'You can go somewhere online, find a copy of the deed to the property if you're savvy and see how the owner of the property signs their name. And so, it puts law enforcement in a very precarious position.'
But Rep. Sarah Stevens (R-Surry), who is an attorney, said she has 'genuine concerns' over the lack of due process for occupants under the expedited removal bill, adding that she plans to vote against the bill on the floor.
'There's a tremendous amount of violation of due process in this procedure,' Stevens said. 'A magistrate has no authority to take evidence to determine if there's any fairness or hear from the other side at all.'
She said even with the liability waiver at the state level, the bill puts law enforcement at risk for litigation over potential due process violations at the federal level.
Tyson said the penalties for filing for expedited removal under false premises act as a sufficient deterrent to property owners, even without an initial opportunity for the occupant to present their case.
'If an unscrupulous landlord — and there are a few of those out there as we know — goes in and swears this affidavit on this expedited removal and he perjures himself, it's punishable as a class F felony,' Tyson said. 'That's up to five years in prison.'
Rep. Carla Cunningham (D-Mecklenburg), who put forth a similar proposal in the previous session, said 'we need to do something' because property owners are losing out on tens of thousands of dollars because they are unable to remove people unlawfully living in residences they own.
'You get nothing and you are the one responsible for the property taxes on the property,' Cunningham said. 'I don't know if this is the right way to do it, Representative Stevens, but we've got to do something because people are losing money.'
While in favor of the bill creating an 'express lane' for removal, Rep. Reece Pyrtle (R-Rockingham), a former police chief, raised concerns over the onus placed on law enforcement to supervise the removal of occupants' personal belongings. He advised turning to a separate civil process for that aspect of the law. 'Being a law enforcement officer, being on the scene, I don't want to get into a he said-she said over a piece of property.'
The bill was one of 20 that received the Rules Committee's approval Tuesday afternoon. All bills in the House of Representatives must first win approval from the gatekeeper panel before proceeding to the full House for a vote.