Legislation targeting squatting gains momentum

Depending on whom you ask, legislation aimed at curbing squatters—or people living without permission on a property they don’t own—is a solution in search of a problem or is an important tool in combatting property problems caused by scammers and the homeless.

Sen. Mike Gaskill, R-Pendleton, is in the latter category. He’s the author of Senate Bill 157, one of six bills introduced this year that deal with property rights and squatting. Gaskill’s bill is the only one that is progressing.

The Senate approved it 48-1—a bipartisan vote—and it now moves to the Indiana House, where the chamber’s leader has indicated an interest in approving the bill.

The legislation is meant to make it easier for property owners to oust people who are camping or living in a property where they have never had permission to stay—informally or formally through a lease or other legal interest.

It does so by requiring law enforcement to act swiftly to remove someone from a property if the owner signs an affidavit swearing the person has never had permission to be there. No court action is required.

“You don’t want a court hearing or an emergency possession order; you want that person out of your house immediately,” Gaskill told fellow lawmakers. He explained a scenario in which a person coming back from wintering in Florida might find someone squatting in their home.

But critics say those kinds of squatting incidents are relatively rare and that existing laws can handle them.

Police can arrest someone who is in a building without permission. And building owners can take someone to civil court if they overstay a lease or rental.

“It’s not legal to just break into my home or enter my home and then refuse to leave,” said Sara Coers, associate director of Indiana University’s Center for Real Estate Studies. “I can call the police and have them removed for trespassing.”

And some fear that the emphasis on squatting—particularly the spate of bills introduced this year after several years without discussion of the issue—is part of a national conservative push tied to frustrations about illegal immigration and homelessness.

Several lobbyists and Democrats have warned the proposed legislation in Indiana could worsen landlord-tenant matters; they have argued squatter cases would be better hashed out in court.

“We don’t support squatting,” said Andrew Bradley, senior director of policy and strategy for Prosperity Indiana. “But we want to make sure that the language in any of these bills that move forward isn’t so broad that it captures up innocent tenants and their families and vulnerable households in a too-wide net.”

The bills’ authors have pushed back, saying the legislation has adequate protections for all sides and does not deal with landlord-tenant matters.

Of the six bills, only SB 157 is moving forward. House Bill 1079 is still alive, but a committee on Feb. 17 removed all language related to squatting.

What constitutes squatting?

The authors of the squatting bills introduced this year have said they are trying to remedy a situation in which a homeowner returns to his or her house or apartment to find a stranger living there. In these scenarios, the “squatters” have never been given permission or had a lease to live at the property, but they claim they live there.

In anecdotes relayed by lawmakers, squatters can have utilities turned on in their names and have mail sent to the property’s address, which can then complicate a determination about whether the person legitimately lives at the property. That can make it hard for police or the courts to know how to react, meaning that removing the person can take days or weeks.

Lawmakers say their proposals would allow for a swifter removal of squatters because property owners would not be required to go to court.

SB 157 would instead require police to remove alleged squatters within 48 hours unless the person can provide written evidence of a past or present lease or other legal claim to the property.

And the bill attempts to make it easier for police to act quickly by freeing officers from liability if they remove a person who later is determined to have had a claim to be there. In those cases, property owners could be charged with perjury for lying on an affidavit the police used as the basis for removing someone from the property.

The bill’s authors said during committee meetings that their goal was to clear up language for both homeowners and police officers in scenarios that fall somewhere between a traditional trespassing case and a situation in which a lease has expired.

Is this common?

Experts generally offer two descriptions of squatting.

In one, a person—usually someone who is homeless—begins living in a vacant house or building without permission. These cases are often dealt with using trespassing laws when a property owner alerts police.

Another example is a tenant who has overstayed an expired lease or a visit and continues to live in a place where he or she no longer has permission or a legal claim. That is a case that would likely end up in civil court, Coers said, because it’s difficult to accuse a person of trespassing if they were once welcomed into a home.

SB 157 would not apply in the second example but might apply in the first, although critics of the bill said existing trespassing laws make the legislation unnecessary.

And it’s unclear whether the kind of squatting described by lawmakers—in which someone takes over a house while its owners are temporarily away—is a common problem in Indiana or anywhere.

Indiana Legal Services, which represents tenants and works in small-claims courts where squatter-related cases would be heard, said it has not seen an increase in cases filed against squatters.

Christopher Lee, vice president of government affairs at the Indiana Apartment Association, testified last month that the group’s members have not had many problems with squatters. But he said he heard squatting was a top concern for similar organizations in other states.

National squatting data is hard to come by, in part because incidents are rare, The Washington Post reported in April. Instead, the news organization pointed to a few high-profile cases that involved fake leases and belligerent squatters, which catapulted the issue into the public eye. The result has been legislation in several states, often filed by conservative lawmakers.

Squatter incidents in Indiana have generated similar headlines but typically deal with vacant homes and are dealt with using trespass laws.

Last year in LaPorte County, Chicago-based WBBM-AM 780 reported the Sheriff’s Office removed nine people who were identified as squatters from the vacant home of a person who died years earlier.

In 2023 in Indianapolis, a woman broke into a home that was for sale and rented out half the duplex on Facebook Marketplace, according to WRTV-TV Channel 6. In 2022 in Clark County, a woman tried to claim she had “squatter’s rights” to stay in a vacant house. But WDRB-TV Channel 41 in Louisville reported that police arrested her and charged her with breaking into the home.

Coers said the real estate industry tends to latch on to trending news items and social media outcry to push legislation. But she said she hasn’t seen any evidence to support the idea that squatting has become a national problem or needs a new law to control.

“People think this is a problem we need to proactively address, and it’s usually overblown,” she said. “It’s not as big a problem as they might think.”

But the Pacific Legal Foundation, which testified for SB 157 in a Jan. 22 committee hearing, maintains that instances of squatting—specifically incidents for which trespassing laws don’t apply—are growing. The nonprofit law firm has been lobbying for similar legislation in statehouses across the country and has offered lawmakers model legislation.

“Squatting is an issue that’s been popping up around the country and [has] become much more of a property rights problem than anyone really anticipated,” the foundation’s legal policy manager, Kileen Lindgren, told IBJ.

Other states

Over the past two years, squatting-related legislation has been introduced in 18 states and become law in a handful.

Several of the bills introduced in Indiana borrow ideas and wording from laws passed elsewhere. Gaskill, the Pendleton senator, said during the Jan. 22 committee hearing that he modeled his bill after a law in Florida. He said he has seen squatters in his county “quite a bit.”

When asked about the similarity of Indiana’s bills to one another and to those in other states, Lindgren of the Pacific Legal Foundation said other states’ laws have “absolutely” had an impact that has caught lawmakers’ attention. She said her organization has not worked with any Indiana lawmakers to craft legislation but has done so in other states.

Most Indiana lawmakers who introduced legislation told IBJ or said during a committee hearing that they did so after hearing from constituents.

Rep. David Abbott, R-Rome City, told IBJ he had heard about the squatting problem from home flippers a few years ago. As to why he filed the bill this year, he said the problem has grown and could increase further because of problems related to illegal immigration.

News organizations in other states have also reported that squatter legislation has ties to immigration concerns.

Senate President Pro Tem Rodric Bray said he is unsure whether squatting is happening more often today. But he said members of his caucus—and their constituents—are hearing more about it, which has led to the increase in squatting-related bills filed.

“We’ll probably get something over the finish line,” he said. “I think it’s of interest to our caucus.”•