To amend section 2909.07 and to enact sections 1923.16 and 2913.53 of the Revised Code to provide for the expedited removal of unauthorized occupants from residential property and to prohibit the use and sale of fraudulent deeds.
SB 5 would create a new expedited process for removing unauthorized occupants from residential property in Ohio. Under the bill, a record owner or the owner’s authorized agent could ask law enforcement or a court officer to immediately remove a person who unlawfully entered and remains in a residential premises, so long as specified conditions are met, including that the property is residential, the occupant is not an immediate family member, and there is no pending litigation over the property. The bill sets out a sworn complaint form, requires verification by the responding officer, and authorizes immediate service of a notice to vacate and restoration of possession to the owner.
The bill also creates a new offense of “title fraud” to address fraudulent deeds and related real-estate scams. It would prohibit knowingly presenting a false lease, deed, or other instrument to remain on property, as well as listing or renting residential property without legal title or authority. In addition, SB 5 amends Ohio’s criminal mischief statute to add unlawful occupation of a residential dwelling that causes at least $1,000 in damage as a felony offense, while preserving existing penalties for other forms of property damage and tampering.
SB 5 would add two new sections to the Revised Code, create a new summary removal procedure in landlord-tenant/property possession law, and expand criminal penalties tied to unlawful occupation and fraudulent real-estate conduct. It would give sheriffs, police officers, constables, and bailiffs authority to remove certain unauthorized occupants without the ordinary eviction process when the statutory conditions are satisfied, and it would allow owners to recover damages if the removal was wrongful. The bill also would create a new title-fraud offense and make fraudulent deed, lease, sale, or rental activity subject to criminal prosecution, including a first-degree felony for certain conduct involving unauthorized sales or rentals of residential property.
The bill’s stated purpose and structure suggest strong support for property owners and law enforcement tools to address squatting and deed fraud. Even without recorded committee testimony or votes in the provided materials, the measure appears framed as a response to urgent property-rights and public-safety concerns, with built-in penalties for false complaints and wrongful removals to provide some procedural safeguards. Overall, the available context points to a generally favorable posture toward faster removal of unauthorized occupants and tougher treatment of real-estate fraud.
The main points of contention are likely to center on due process, the risk of wrongful removal, and the scope of law-enforcement authority. Critics may be concerned that the expedited procedure could be used against lawful occupants or in disputes that are not fully resolved, especially because the process bypasses traditional eviction litigation when the statutory conditions are met. Supporters are likely to emphasize the need to quickly restore possession to owners and deter squatting and title fraud, while opponents may focus on the adequacy of the bill’s safeguards, the penalties for false statements, and the potential for disputes over whether an occupant is truly unauthorized.