際際滷

際際滷Share a Scribd company logo

UD Records 5 17 2010

Download as PPT, PDF
E
EGDunn

Presentation on how Washington court record systems are often used as blacklists that unfairly keep rental applications from obtaining housing.

1 of 12
Download to read offline
The SCOMIS Blacklist: How unfettered public access to unlawful detainer records impacts access to justice in Washington Eric Dunn, Staff Attorney Northwest Justice Project 401 Second Ave. S., Ste. 407 Seattle, Washington 98104 Tel. (206) 464-1519, ext. 234 [email_address]
Eviction Records in Washington SCOMIS Case management system for 39 superior courts Launched in 1977, practically statewide by 1985 Data entered by court clerk upon case filing
Inclusions & SCOMIS-sions SCOMIS contains: Party names, filing date, case type Eviction appears as unlawful detainer Docket entries (recent cases only) Cases archived after 18 months Appear on a separate screen Often cryptic, not informative of case outcome SCOMIS does not contain: Case outcome/disposition Access to actual documents Docket entries of archived cases
油
Why is SCOMIS a problem for tenants? A SCOMIS record is permanent A SCOMIS record is free A SCOMIS record can be accessed from anywhere in the world (by internet) Any person can access a SCOMIS record Many residential landlords in Washington refuse to rent to applicants with unlawful detainer records in SCOMIS
油
D.I.Y. Tenant-Screening
Chilling Effect That residential landlords routinely deny housing to applicants with unlawful detainer records deters tenants from contesting unlawful detainer actions Ability to secure housing in the future more important than one particular tenancy Tenants commonly move out after receiving unfiled summons & complaint, rather than remain and allow landlord to file suit Effectively undermines many tenant rights RLTA can only be enforced judicially
The Unhouseables the increasingly popular use of tenant screening reports has resulted in a new class of people who are unable to access rental housing because of past credit problems, evictions, poor rental histories or criminal backgrounds. While tenant screening agencies are not responsible for this issue, it is a serious problem that must be addressed by those working with tenants, particularly those in need of affordable housing. HousingLink, Tenant screening agencies in the Twin Cities: An overview of tenant screening practices and their impact on renters, Summer 2004
Sealing/Redacting court records GR 15(c): court may seal or redact a court record (civil or criminal) to protect a persons safety or privacy But, access to court records constitutionally protected Thus, sealing a court record extremely difficult: Privacy/safety interest must be compelling Must outweigh public interest in access to the record Court must hold hearing, exercise original discretion Order to seal must be narrowly-tailored Extent of records sealed, duration of order limited Seldom realistic to seal record pro se Sealing/Redacting Court Records
Sealing/Redacting SCOMIS Sealed documents removed from view But, existence of action remains available Case number, party names, notation case sealed, case type, and cause of action/charge Possibility of redacting SCOMIS recognized by Indigo Real Estate Services v. Rousey, 151 Wn. App. 941; 215 P.3d 977 (2009) Preserving rental housing opportunities potentially is a compelling privacy interest sufficient to support redaction No statutory right to deny existence of case
Should courts more readily seal/redact unlawful detainer records from SCOMIS? Yes, because: Chilling effect on tenants undermines access to justice Public policy in access to rental housing is more important than economic interests of private housing providers SCOMIS is not designed or maintained for use as a tenant-screening implement and should not be appropriated for such use Tenant-screening reports are commercial speech and the government has important interests that justify curtailment No, because: Other alternatives, such as limitations on the reporting of unlawful detainer suits or the use of same in rental decisions, are possible Unconditional access to public records is more important than tenants rights or rental housing access Other ideas (pro/con)?

More Related Content

UD Records 5 17 2010

  • 1. The SCOMIS Blacklist: How unfettered public access to unlawful detainer records impacts access to justice in Washington Eric Dunn, Staff Attorney Northwest Justice Project 401 Second Ave. S., Ste. 407 Seattle, Washington 98104 Tel. (206) 464-1519, ext. 234 [email_address]
  • 2. Eviction Records in Washington SCOMIS Case management system for 39 superior courts Launched in 1977, practically statewide by 1985 Data entered by court clerk upon case filing
  • 3. Inclusions & SCOMIS-sions SCOMIS contains: Party names, filing date, case type Eviction appears as unlawful detainer Docket entries (recent cases only) Cases archived after 18 months Appear on a separate screen Often cryptic, not informative of case outcome SCOMIS does not contain: Case outcome/disposition Access to actual documents Docket entries of archived cases
  • 4. 油
  • 5. Why is SCOMIS a problem for tenants? A SCOMIS record is permanent A SCOMIS record is free A SCOMIS record can be accessed from anywhere in the world (by internet) Any person can access a SCOMIS record Many residential landlords in Washington refuse to rent to applicants with unlawful detainer records in SCOMIS
  • 6. 油
  • 8. Chilling Effect That residential landlords routinely deny housing to applicants with unlawful detainer records deters tenants from contesting unlawful detainer actions Ability to secure housing in the future more important than one particular tenancy Tenants commonly move out after receiving unfiled summons & complaint, rather than remain and allow landlord to file suit Effectively undermines many tenant rights RLTA can only be enforced judicially
  • 9. The Unhouseables the increasingly popular use of tenant screening reports has resulted in a new class of people who are unable to access rental housing because of past credit problems, evictions, poor rental histories or criminal backgrounds. While tenant screening agencies are not responsible for this issue, it is a serious problem that must be addressed by those working with tenants, particularly those in need of affordable housing. HousingLink, Tenant screening agencies in the Twin Cities: An overview of tenant screening practices and their impact on renters, Summer 2004
  • 10. Sealing/Redacting court records GR 15(c): court may seal or redact a court record (civil or criminal) to protect a persons safety or privacy But, access to court records constitutionally protected Thus, sealing a court record extremely difficult: Privacy/safety interest must be compelling Must outweigh public interest in access to the record Court must hold hearing, exercise original discretion Order to seal must be narrowly-tailored Extent of records sealed, duration of order limited Seldom realistic to seal record pro se Sealing/Redacting Court Records
  • 11. Sealing/Redacting SCOMIS Sealed documents removed from view But, existence of action remains available Case number, party names, notation case sealed, case type, and cause of action/charge Possibility of redacting SCOMIS recognized by Indigo Real Estate Services v. Rousey, 151 Wn. App. 941; 215 P.3d 977 (2009) Preserving rental housing opportunities potentially is a compelling privacy interest sufficient to support redaction No statutory right to deny existence of case
  • 12. Should courts more readily seal/redact unlawful detainer records from SCOMIS? Yes, because: Chilling effect on tenants undermines access to justice Public policy in access to rental housing is more important than economic interests of private housing providers SCOMIS is not designed or maintained for use as a tenant-screening implement and should not be appropriated for such use Tenant-screening reports are commercial speech and the government has important interests that justify curtailment No, because: Other alternatives, such as limitations on the reporting of unlawful detainer suits or the use of same in rental decisions, are possible Unconditional access to public records is more important than tenants rights or rental housing access Other ideas (pro/con)?