The Story of a Squatter in Oregon Who “Took” a Property, and the Increasing Trend of Disputes Leading to Unfavorable Outcomes for Landlords

“I used to believe stealing was wrong,” real estate investor and developer George McCleary says at the conclusion of a viral video shared online last month, but as it turns out, if one steals a house it may not even violate law in any jurisdiction in which one operates.

This video documents how McCleary easily obtained a rental listing in Portland, Oregon by falsifying documents to gain entry. Once inside, he then used taxpayer-funded legal aid programs to avoid being evicted before eventually receiving $10,000 to leave after nine months without facing legal ramifications.

Commenters speculate that McCleary, a boutique real estate firm owner who has worked real estate for two decades, didn’t actually break into one of Portland’s rental homes and trash it as depicted on video; nevertheless, given Portland’s robust tenant protections this scenario remains plausible given robust tenant rights legislation in Oregon. Furthermore, this video serves to expose the dangers associated with expanding tenant rights across cities as an answer to housing affordability crises.

McCleary’s video, which has amassed more than 6 million views online, outlines his experience navigating to vacant rental properties listed online and following YouTube video instructions to gain entry and break into lockboxes. Once inside he created fake lease documents before calling utility companies to change bills in his name.

“When the owner arrived, I politely explained that this house now belonged to me and they needed to leave,” McCleary explains in the video. The police eventually arrived and showed up, viewing fake documents and utility bills showing this was indeed a civil dispute.

McCleary recounts that when the owner hired a lawyer, he turned to a legal advocacy group which provided one who was 100% free and funded by taxpayers. After months-long efforts by both sides to evict a squatter from their property, the owner gave up and issued a check for $10K in settlement.

“I didn’t even have to clean the house up – which is great because I do a lot of drugs, which leaves a trace behind in my house,” McCleary states satirically. “So it worked out that I got nine months free rent that otherwise would have cost three grand monthly, plus an awesome cash for keys check – with no charges levied against me whatsoever!”

Although this story may seem far-fetched, similar situations have occurred across the nation in recent years. According to estimates provided by the National Rental Home Council, over 1,200 properties in Atlanta are now occupied by squatters; one case involved illegal strip club use on this property.

Here are more instances from recent headlines:

In Beverly Hills, squatters took over a mansion and held wild parties there; charging for tables and rooms while using a fake lease agreement to stay put. Meanwhile in Texas, another squatter with an extensive record of evictions locked a homeowner out of her own home before creating a lease agreement for it – eventually leading her out for good.
Squatters in Maryland took over a woman’s home while she was away and sold the furniture worth $50K at auction.
Chicago homeowners often struggle to evict tenants quickly; one homeowner, in particular, struggled for six months with an eviction proceeding against a squatter with a criminal history who changed locks on two-flat property last year despite an incident of gun violence at that property.
New York homeowner Valerie Johnson spent three years trying to evict an illegal squatter, eventually leaving her with an expensive utility bill by the time of arrest.
Property crimes rarely result in prosecution and can cause significant losses for property owners, who must continue paying taxes and other homeownership costs even though they no longer have access to their own properties.

Troubles often begin with legal lease agreements. Once tenants move in and pay the initial required deposit, they may breach the lease terms by failing to pay rent, damaging property or engaging in other violations of contract.

But even in the absence of grand theft and fraud, policies that expand tenant rights may have unintended but detrimental repercussions for small landlords–and, consequently, for the wider housing economy.