Smart Locks Could Make Heartless COVID Evictions More Efficient

from the dumb-is-smarter dept

Like most internet of broken things products, we’ve noted how “smart” door locks often aren’t all that smart. More than a few times we’ve written about smart lock consumers getting locked out of their own homes without much recourse. Other times we’ve noted how the devices simply aren’t particularly secure, with one study finding that 12 of 16 smart locks that they tested could be relatively easily hacked thanks to flimsy security standards, something that’s the primary feature of many internet of broken things devices.

In addition to being easily compromised, there are additional layers of concerns arising from the use of such locks. Privacy experts, for example, say many smart lock vendors’ terms of service are overly broad, allowing the sharing of too much data with valued partners and landlords. And as smart locks become the norm in “smart” cities, there’s also growing concern that such technology could make it easier than ever for landlords to evict users without much in the way of transparency or renter rights.

While the smart technology in this case is advertised as an increase in efficiency, ethicists studying the rise of “smart” cities worry that the detachment created by the removal of physical interactions will make it easier to distance a landlord from the impact of his decision:

Adam Henschke, an applied ethicist working on areas that cross over between ethics, technology and security at the Australian National University, tells me that one of the concerns that people like himself have with smart cities is exactly this ? the power that such technologies have over access to basic goods and services. Henschke admits that while it?s not uncommon for landlords to have the power to change people?s locks as part of normal eviction processes, this technology obviously raises a bunch of other issues.

“His first concern is that it could be psychologically easier for a landlord, real estate agent or building manager to lock a person out. ?If this is done in person, then whoever changes the locks likely has to confront the tenant in person,? says Henschke. ?Whereas, as this is being done remotely, it can be psychologically easier to make the decision to lock the tenant out.?

That said, the piece includes some quotes by folks who believe existing legal protections will simply extend to protect renters and homeowners under an automated system where eviction becomes less of a physical affair and simply a cold few lines of code. And you’d certainly hope that’s the case. But when you look at some of the new companies being created to make evictions a more efficient, gig-economy affair, fused with massive COVID-19 financial headaches, smart locks, and an apathetic/incompetent government, you have to pause and at least think about the potential ramifications of making eviction too automated and efficient:

“Civvl aims to marry the gig economy with the devastation of a pandemic, complete with signature gig startup language like “be your own boss,” and “flexible hours,” and “looking for self-motivated individuals with positive attitudes:” “FASTEST GROWING MONEY MAKING GIG DUE TO COVID-19,” its website says. “Literally thousands of process servers are needed in the coming months due courts being backed up in judgements that needs to be served to defendants.”

You’d hope that existing law and oversight steps up to protect the consumer, but as we work to make the eviction process a more automated and gig-worker backed affair (as usual only thinking about any potential problems after the fact if at all), it’s kind of hard not to think we’re going to find some creative ways to make existing problems worse.

Filed Under: , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Smart Locks Could Make Heartless COVID Evictions More Efficient”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

Economy of Greed

it’s kind of hard not to think we’re going to find some creative ways to make existing problems worse.

That’s the whole point of the US economy now. Make the rich richer, the poor poorer. If you think it’s gonna get better before it gets worse, think again. The US has long claimed that corporations have no societal responsibility while also arguing that government regulations should be done away with. That is a recipe for both the current political climate and the hardships US society faces. Left to their own decisions, by the laws of Capitalism, corporations will never stop victimizing society because helping society is more expensive. Corporations exist to make a profit in the US and nothing else. Until that mind set changes, and harsh penalties for harming society are enforced, expect the societal problems to only get worse.

Tanner Andrews (profile) says:

Existing Law May Bar Self-Help Evictions

It certainly will depend on your state, but at least some states have barred what we call self-help evictions. That is, the LL makes it impossible or unreasonable for the tenant to remain in the property. This can be done by cutting utilities, changing locks, disabling locks, disabling gate access, and by other means specific to properties.

The problem is that the tenant may be at least temporarily out on the street. The remedy here is either 3 months’ rent or actuals, whichever is greater. So ultimately it can come back to bite the LL if the tenant lawyers up.

The computer-driven nature of the lock does not appear to have any significance under the statute here. It would still fall within the rubric of “prevent[ing] the tenant from gaining reasonable access to the dwelling unit” and so would appear contrary to the form of the statute.

Many LLs count on tenants not knowing these things.

Anonymous Coward says:

The "heartless" characterization is bizarre. I never considered an automated cash desk "heartless" because it does not give bread to hungry people that cannot pay. But it is fair – if you cannot pay, you cannot take food in a supermarket, you go to a food bank instead. The system should be transparent and give protection to tenants through fairness. Roboautomated procedures for approving mortgages got us the subprime crisis, lets hope that laws will prevent roboevictions to take place. But "heartless" has no particular role in it, it’s all about the implementation of the procedure.

That Anonymous Coward (profile) says:

Re: Re:

So the asshole who evicted a mom & her kids by sending a print out of a smiling emoji pointing it itself with its thumbs that said guess whos moving??? YOU! Happy 5 day notice or some shit.

Heartless does play a role in it.

Yes they haven’t paid the rent, did you need to walk in and piss in all of their boxes as they were moving out?

Did you need to "invent" damage you claim was caused by the people you evicted so you could scam people on go fund me?

Yes poor thing you’ve not been getting full rent, but you might have not noticed the world is pretty much upside down. The odds of someone having a job & being able to move in and pay you rent is really fscking low right now. Yes it sucks to get to where you need to evict people, but costs you nothing to treat them with humanity, rather than some parasite whole stole your leveraged to the hilt income source.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

but this was my point all along – you do not need technology (or even a phone, for that matter) to be an asshole. If used in the proper way, a good process can protect both tenants and owners, by focusing on what people need: protection of their rights on both sides. If you knew what the situation were, and the income of the family etc, you could target govt help, for example, or make it easier to find an alternate rent, or take the murkiness out of the process, instead of leaving these delicate situations to can kicking and disputes. Eviction is too serious to be emotional about it, that is what I am saying, nothing else. Keeping a focus on both parties rights and needs is definitely something an automated process can do – if it is programmed in the right way and not abused by one side or the other. It is not necessarily heartless to use algorithms to optimize the organization and processes of a federal aid agency – an automated eviction process should be run with the same spirit.

Bergman (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

My state requires that my landlord give a ten day notice to pay up or vacate if something goes wrong with my rent payment and the landlord doesn’t have it before the deadline – something that has only happened to me six times in 15 years. One was a bank error, four were because the landlord lost the check after receiving it. The one that was even vaguely my fault was due to the landlord changing the due date for rent without informing me.

If payment is not made within 7 days of the 10 day notice, a 3 day notice is sent. At the end of the period, eviction begins unless payment is made.

That’s fair. But my landlord loves delivering the 10 day and 3 day notices at the same time in the same envelope. Which always leaves me wondering – are they being bizarrely efficient on saving on postage, or do I only have 3 days to pay before they evict me?

Supposedly, the timers run from receipt of the notices, but given they’re already breaking the law by sending me the 10 day and 3 day notices together, I always worry a bit that they’re counting from the day they mailed the notice.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

I work full time and there are lots of places I really like and I cannot afford to rent… are you suggesting it would be fair if I tried to? I don’t think there was anything "fair" in the subprime crisis, robo-mortgaging people into owning houses that they could not afford, then dumping all the losses on the fed balance sheet (which is, on the general population).

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...