patrick.net

I actually understand what you're trying to do better than you do. You just don't want to hear why it would fail. Why didn't you just write your post and implore everyone to kiss your ass... "Clap Please!" sorta of your Jeb Bush moment, isn't it?

HunterTits says

No. Because nobody will actually be living there, except maybe one sublet tenant at a time. Just like with AirBnB'd units.

Nope no problem here, got 30 people on a lease, and I'm just going to leave it up to them to decide which one at a time wants to live in my back yard garden shed.
What happens when one of them gets fired from their job, but then they remember they are on your backyard lease, and your town has an eviction moratorium in effect at the time?
Things could get quite shitty, LITERALLY!

Off the subject, an anecdote herewith:
My friend in Santa Cruz bought one of those tool sheds and put it on a wooden platform in his back yard.
He ran an extension cord to it, and a surfer dude rented it from him and he lived in it.
A girl wanted to rent his garage which was full of gasoline fumes from his lawnmower and weed whacker.

HunterTits says

Why? Why would the IRS give a flying shit? Local zoning and residency limits enforcement is not their beef. They only care that they get what is taxable from all that and that it isn't money laundering.

I like the idea, like I said. And I get it's a local zoning issue and you'd be paying the taxes, so why would the IRS care. But I think you kind of just brought up the issue though. Money laundering.

I know people do the same with office spaces and I know that's not what you're referring to. Renting out rooms with a desk to hundreds of people potentially and schedule your time to get the room(s). It's the residency that you're looking to fix. If the LLC is tied to a property, which for liability it should be, at least from my understanding. Doesn't it kind of look like money laundering on paper when filing taxes? Money laundering is beyond me, I know what it is and never really looked into because I don't need to.

If a "rental" so to speak is generating 5x's or more than neighboring landlords filing taxes, I'd have to image the IRS has some algorithm and might report it as weird activity to some three letter law enforcement agency. And I get you'd be doing this all above board and paying all taxes, but I'd account for attorney fees at some point because it does seem like a good way to launder money and it's possible you might need to defend yourself at some point.

The other avenue to market to would be cops and firefighters that have to live in the city they were hired in. Chicago for example, cops, FF and teachers all have to live in Chicago city limits. Don't know if it's the same out in CA for certain cities. I know two Chicago cops that would do the ADU thing and actually move to a more expensive suburban area with a real house and yard and keep their CPD job for the money. You'd have to be careful not to have too many government employees "living" in an ADU or they might sue you. So maybe not worth, though it was their decision to lie.

Also, wouldn't drivers license be an issue? I know most DMV employees are dolts, but wouldn't at some point they notice 50 people living at the same property with the same apartment/unit number? Some cops are vigilantes as well. If you park a CA plate for a year or 2 in say Idaho, they may fuck with you. I'm paranoid about liability and getting in trouble to be honest, so I overthink shit like this.

Again, love the idea, just thinking of holes to poke in it in a positive way. Liability wise for the owner it seems low to none besides local officials finding out, but it just looks like an Airbnb which would be used rarely. The liability is all on the person "living" in the ADU it seems.

Shit, school districts... that's another avenue. That one is more risky for the parent though. There was a parent in my high school that lived out of district and got caught sending his kids. He paid $8k in property taxes with pennies... lol. The penalties here in IL are insane if caught living out of district. Our district pulled a huge move and labeled my nephew as homeless.... lol. It's not based on property value here. It would have been something like $15k/yr to get him into our average district as a non-resident. Not joking. IL sucks though. For now.....

Sorry for the novels, just thinking (hopefully) and typing. Hopefully not too many errors.

You need a tax attorney to flush out any concerns your clients would have. I'm not so sure fraud could stick if you aren't the one lying or breaking any laws.

HunterTits says

TOk, tell me how this doesn't work.

I just think that going forward any investment in CA real estate is a bad idea. Not that other places aren't going to embrace the suck, but CA has a way of leading the pack. Tampa just voted unanimously for rent control.

I think staying out of city limits might be a good strategy (in red states) but would periodically require selling and purchasing further out.

I can see rent control becoming a real thing all over if the only alternative is massive homelessness.

HunterTits says

RWSGFY says

Aren't there laws regulating how many people can legally live in a unit of a certain size?

Sure, slumlords violate them all the time, but if we are talking "strictly above the board" model this would be one of the obstacles.

How so? Not enforced proactively. Only if neighbors complain/report. Which they won't because at most would be one person/couple showing up at a time, much like if it were AirBnB'd.

Even the authorities in SF don't care when units are converted to de facto dorms.

And in this case, all that exists on paper at the landlord end is the lease between him and the out of state LLC/Corp that is subletting out.

"Strictly above board" and "not enforced proactively" are two different things.

WineHorror1 says

I can see rent control becoming a real thing all over if the only alternative is massive homelessness.

Which will only serve to make the problems worse.

RWSGFY says

Aren't there laws regulating how many people can legally live in a unit of a certain size?

In Prince William County, VA (DC suburb) a judge struck down such a law when it was applied to 14 non-related folks renting a 3-bedroom townhouse. Law was racist against illegals, you know.

You all have no answers? If you think voters are going to stand for mass homelessness, you're smoking crack. If it gets worse, you should expect anything to happen.

Misc says

As the property owner would be in on the scam, they could be liable for fraud, conspiracy to commit fraud, and since most paychecks are electronic, conspiracy to commit wire fraud. Since the number of charges brought against the property owner would depend on the number of renters, it could be a lengthy prison sentence as well as restitution to the aggrieved employers.

So wouldn't all those mailstop businesses, like Mailboxes etc, the UPS store, etc, also be a part of scam where a person has a residence but it's really just a mail stop with a suite no?

I mean when I was a globe trekker, I used a mailstop just outside of Boston & I paid the owner, to get my mail forwarded to various hotels around the continent. Otherwise, I'd have an overflowing mailbox at home which would pretty much tip off any burglar, that the resident was 'on the road' and not at home.

HeadSet says

RWSGFY says

Aren't there laws regulating how many people can legally live in a unit of a certain size?

In Prince William County, VA (DC suburb) a judge struck down such a law when it was applied to 14 non-related folks renting a 3-bedroom townhouse. Law was racist against illegals, you know.

So it might meet the same fate in CA.

Rin says

I used a mailstop just outside of Boston & I paid the owner, to get my mail forwarded to various hotels around the continent.

I'm curious how that worked out with junk mail. Do you even get that crap at a mailstop and if so did they forward it?

Tenpoundbass says

I actually understand what you're trying to do better than you do. You just don't want to hear why it would fail. Why didn't you just write your post and implore everyone to kiss your ass... "Clap Please!" sorta of your Jeb Bush moment, isn't it?

Just cut the bullshit. Want me to quote your 'remote access in a shed' crap?

I just don't want to hear any more of YOUR half-assed crap since you destroyed your credibility on the subject.

Tenpoundbass says

Anyone that needs to rent my mailbox to defraud employers in San Francisco,

There is no fraud involved. Cut the bullshit.

Misc says

The only difficulty I see is if the employer found out about the scam.

That's right. Nor would it be fraud. And even if so, the landlord would not be on the hook.

RWSGFY says

"Strictly above board" and "not enforced proactively" are two different things.




94
 



FJB
 
ignore

So what?

HunterTits says

Misc says

The only difficulty I see is if the employer found out about the scam.

That's right. Nor would it be fraud. And even if so, the landlord would not be on the hook.

If a court found fraud, just who would be considered the perp?

HunterTits says

So what?

Asphinctersayswhat?

Rin says

Misc says

As the property owner would be in on the scam, they could be liable for fraud, conspiracy to commit fraud, and since most paychecks are electronic, conspiracy to commit wire fraud. Since the number of charges brought against the property owner would depend on the number of renters, it could be a lengthy prison sentence as well as restitution to the aggrieved employers.

So wouldn't all those mailstop businesses, like Mailboxes etc, the UPS store, etc, also be a part of scam where a person has a residence but it's really just a mail stop with a suite no?

I mean when I was a globe trekker, I used a mailstop just outside of Boston & I paid the owner, to get my mail forwarded to various hotels around the continent. Otherwise, I'd have an overflowing mailbox at home which would pretty much tip off any burglar, that the resident was 'on the road' and not at home.

You were not lying to someone for financial gain.

In the case presented the employee is making false and misleading statements to his employer for a financial gain --- hence fraud.

Since the landlord would be in on the scam (if not actively recruiting for it), there would be conspiracy to commit fraud.

Misc says

You were not lying to someone for financial gain.

Here's the thing ... what prevents someone from starting his own mailstop business at home, an LLC with general liability insurance, but then add an AirBnB add-on as a benefit to being a customer? In other words, a B&B timesharer where one gets one's mail. Since the average person won't pay the extra price if he's just looking for a UPS mailstop, this may be a feasible way to attract the right customer.

Realize, not all businesses have to be in the town center next to the library or market deli.

Now, is it fraud that some Indiana person wants to spend a week in California & get his mail there? Hell, even I might go for it if seeing hoes were legal in California.

FJB says

I'm curious how that worked out with junk mail. Do you even get that crap at a mailstop and if so did they forward it?

He put everything in a pouch and sent it. I simply paid for the bag and postage as extras.

The idea of having a ghost address is a service that already exists, though I don't know there are a lot ghost address vendors. But you could use one of those instead, and as they're started specifically to offer privacy, I think they'd be better equipped to protect your info than someone renting an ADU. Then just add a VPN and you're all set.

The cost for ghost address service is quite a bit cheaper than $300 a month, maybe a hundred a year.

NuttBoxer says

The idea of having a ghost address is a service that already exists, though I don't know there are a lot ghost address vendors. But you could use one of those instead, and as they're started specifically to offer privacy, I think they'd be better equipped to protect your info than someone renting an ADU. Then just add a VPN and you're all set.

The cost for ghost address service is quite a bit cheaper than $300 a month, maybe a hundred a year.

Huh, yeah, why would you need an ADU? Anyone could offer this service from their own home. As long as you don't advertise the purpose it to commit fraud?

HunterTits says

Just cut the bullshit. Want me to quote your 'remote access in a shed' crap?

At least you can quote me, and I'll either stand by it, say I misspoke or apologize for the lack of clarity.
While YOU on the other hand go back and make edits after the fact, then try to retrofit them into the argument.

Tenpoundbass says

At least you can quote me, and I'll either stand

Here's your fucking quote:

Tenpoundbass says

...you say you would put remote access in the ADU(from what I found that's a shed or a detached dwelling

Tenpoundbass says

While YOU on the other hand go back and make edits after the fact, then try to retrofit them into the argument.

I can't edit your shit. Nice try.

WineHorror1 says

Huh, yeah, why would you need an ADU? Anyone could offer this service from their own home. As long as you don't advertise the purpose it to commit fraud?

Yup. Could use a duplex or a condo, too.

Misc says

In the case presented the employee is making false and misleading statements to his employer for a financial gain --- hence fraud.

So? How Is the landlord culpable for that.

Guess what address on file I have with my employer?

A UPS mailstore box. It is because I moved around a lot and wanted a secure place to receive my packages, originally.

Now I use it for financial/government shit. Hell, even the DMV accepted it.

And if they took issue with that, they'd go after me, not the UPS store.

Three other ppl at work live in other parts of CA. They rent a house for when they have to shoe up in Palo Alto for mandatory mtgs/events/etc. If my employer has an issue, they do not go after the landlord who has zero relationship with their tenant's employers anymore than the UPS Store does in my case.

Even if a person runs an outright mail order scam from a UPS store or POB, for example, the store is not liable.

And there is no fraud if the requirement from the employer is that the employee's state of residence is in California and the employee comes into work physically as required abd said employee complies, which is the case as planned.

So, no fraud UNLESS the employer requires a sworn affidavit from the employee that sez they are not doing this shit explicitly but do.

Oh, and the State will not only not be against any of this, but encourage it.

It is the state where the 'second' home is that will have the problem, if any. But they would have a tough case law hill to climb.

WineHorror1 says

As long as you don't advertise the purpose it to commit fraud?

Important piece to understand when having this kind of discussion. Giving out a fake home address is legal as long as the intent is not to defraud anyone. There multiple court cases that support this.

NuttBoxer says

WineHorror1 says

As long as you don't advertise the purpose it to commit fraud?

Important piece to understand when having this kind of discussion. Giving out a fake home address is legal as long as the intent is not to defraud anyone. There multiple court cases that support this.

Yeah, I'm 50/50 on this idea.

Is there anyone here that would actually start a business doing this? If so, how sure are you that it would pass the liability test?

NuttBoxer says

Giving out a fake home address is legal as long as the intent is not to defraud anyone.

The question is whether or not a sublet to a time sharer is not a legal address?

Sorry to hearken back to the O.J, Simpson trial, but wasn't Kato Kaelin more or less a squatter at the house, which is why he was asked to testify? And then the joke was that Judge Lance Ito wouldn't let Kato sleep in the courtroom since he didn't have a permanent address.

Rin says

The question is whether or not a sublet to a time sharer is not a legal address?

That's the biggest problem in my mind. You need to change your drivers license. If you don't, you're defrauding the government (whatever) and there are consequences for that. It's a grey area.

I'd just move and make the same elsewhere to be honest. Or change careers. That's another fault I find with the idea is that you can't live/buy cheaper and still make the same income. We would make less in CA and pay more COL versus IL. We're not in tech though.

WookieMan says

You need to change your drivers license. If you don't, you're defrauding the government (whatever) and there are consequences for that.

Not true. People who have stalkers, and LEO's don't have their home address on their ID's. Again, if the purpose is privacy, there are several court cases supporting our rights.

NuttBoxer says

People who have stalkers, and LEO's don't have their home address on their ID's.

They probably obtain a court decision allowing them to do that.

For the rest of us:

... failing to update a license or registration is actually a crime in most states. Generally, the crime is a misdemeanor (punishable by less than a year in jail) and/or fines. Of course, the harshest of these penalties are rarely imposed absent blatant and knowing disregard of the law, but best not to chance fate.

So not strictly legal, albeit lightly enforced.

Let me refer you to case 94-5721, United State Court of Appeals. If there is no intent to deceive and no benefit is obtained, it's legal.

Further, how can someone prove it's not your address? It can be done, but will take some effort. So again, if you're not defrauding anyone, unlikely it will ever come up.

NuttBoxer says

Further, how can someone prove it's not your address? It can be done, but will take some effort. So again, if you're not defrauding anyone, unlikely it will ever come up.

Hiding your physical address 9 out of 10 times is to defraud someone. Set up a trust with a title company for ownership if privacy is of concern. Former boss did that so tenants couldn't search "John Doe's" address and find him.

Either way, if you want to live a fun life, I'd skip out on being anal about privacy. You're a known commodity. Trust me.

I'm not defrauding anyone, and I've been doing it for years now. It actually increases my enjoyment of life, because I know no one will ever show up at my door un-announced, because they can't find it. I can't be easily sued, falsely accused of a crime, or stalked by some random psycho who doesn't like how I drive.

You're welcome to post any info you can find about me here in this thread. Good luck.

WookieMan says

Hiding your physical address 9 out of 10 times is to defraud someone.

No it is not. Show us the law or legal case law that says otherwise.

NuttBoxer says

WookieMan says

You need to change your drivers license. If you don't, you're defrauding the government (whatever) and there are consequences for that.

Not true. People who have stalkers, and LEO's don't have their home address on their ID's. Again, if the purpose is privacy, there are several court cases supporting our rights.

@NuttBoxers What do you do about the driver's license address?

Is the address present on yours or not?

Patrick says

@NuttBoxers What do you do about the driver's license address?

Is the address present on yours or not?

CA gave me the option of putting my mailing address or physical address on my driver's license last time I renewed.