HB1398 would create a new expedited process for property owners to remove unauthorized occupants from residential and commercial property. A property owner or authorized agent could apply to the director of law enforcement, swear under penalty of perjury that the occupant is not a tenant, former tenant, or family member, and that no related litigation is pending. After a preliminary investigation and a finding of probable cause, law enforcement would be authorized to serve notice, remove the person, remove their personal property, and restore possession to the owner.
The bill also creates new criminal offenses tied to unauthorized occupation and property misuse. It would establish first- and second-degree “criminal trespasser property damage” offenses for people who unlawfully occupy property and intentionally damage it above specified dollar thresholds, as well as offenses for presenting false documents to detain real property and for fraudulently listing or advertising residential property for sale or rent without authority. The bill states that it would not disturb rights, penalties, or proceedings that arose before its effective date and would take effect upon approval.
Impact
HB1398 would amend Hawaii Revised Statutes chapters 666 and 708 by adding a law-enforcement-based removal remedy and several new property-related crimes. It would expand the role of the Department of Law Enforcement, and potentially county police chiefs and their designees, in resolving unauthorized occupancy disputes outside the ordinary civil eviction process. It would also create new misdemeanor and class C felony penalties for certain conduct involving unlawful occupation, property damage, false conveyances, and fraudulent rental or sale listings, affecting property owners, occupants, law enforcement, and prosecutors.
Sentiment
The bill’s stated purpose and report title indicate a generally pro-property-owner, anti-squatter approach, emphasizing the right to exclude unauthorized persons and to recover possession quickly. The available context does not include committee testimony or recorded votes, so there is no documented legislative debate in the provided materials. Based on the text alone, the bill appears designed to address concerns about squatting, property damage, and fraudulent real estate activity.
Contention
The main points of potential contention are the bill’s expansion of police authority into what is often handled through civil eviction proceedings, and the risk of removing people who may have disputed occupancy claims. The bill tries to limit that risk by excluding former tenants, immediate family members, and cases with pending litigation, and by requiring a preliminary investigation and probable cause. Another likely issue is the indemnity requirement and fee for applicants, along with the possibility of civil liability for wrongful removal and criminal liability for false applications, which may be viewed as either necessary safeguards or burdensome barriers depending on perspective.