Terminally ill 5-year-old and family evicted from home after landlord decides to sell their house for $60K over market

Gillian Sisley

A man who has decided to sell a home he inherited 11 years ago is putting a family with a terminally ill toddler in a position that could leave them homeless. He has posted on Reddit about the situation to find out whether or not he is wrong for the choice he’s made.

*This is a work of non-fiction sourced from social media discussion boards and verified experts/specialists.*

The author, a 47-year-old landlord, explains that he inherited his father’s house 11 years ago. He has since been renting out the house to a ‘nice family’ for the last 5 years.

The family renting his home hasn’t caused any issues. However, they have tragically been struggling with their youngest child’s terminal cancer diagnosis.

Raising a child who is terminally ill is every parent’s worst nightmare. Psychology experts state that a parent’s most important job for a terminally ill child is ensuring that they have the most comfortable life possible, and that they are preparing for a ‘peaceful death’.

That said, the author was recently given the offer of a lifetime:

“A month ago I was approached by a realtor about selling my property. He had a buyer who was interested and was ready to offer $60,000 over market because of the location. This was an opportunity I couldn’t pass up.”

The author then reached out to the father of the family renting his home, as he often does around this time to renew their lease for another year. However, this time he communicated his new circumstances, which did not go well, as he details in his post:

“To say that he was upset was an understatement. It turns out that he and his wife are currently in hospice with their son who has a terminal heart condition. The doctors have given him a month or two to live. I knew the boy was sick but I never knew it was so serious.”

The furious father didn’t stop there, stating that there was ‘no way’ they could pack up their home and find a new rental in time:

“The hospice where they are currently in residence is over three hours away and he thinks it’s terribly unfair that I expect him to sacrifice any of the time he has left with their son in order to move. He called me a heartless sociopath.”

Though the author appreciates the difficulty of the situation, and doesn’t want to make things harder for them, he still feels that it’s ‘not his responsibility to take care of them’. His wife has suggested that they pay for the family’s moving costs and an AirBnb for after they get out of hospice.

But the author still doesn’t feel it’s his responsibility to take care of this family or their situation at his own expense. His wife has been giving him the cold shoulder ever since.

Although the situation above is heartbreaking, in the eyes of the law a landlord has done nothing wrong as long as they stand by the leasing agreement they have with a tenant. A landlord is not obligated to renew a lease with a tenant once the original lease concludes, and they don’t have to have a good reason for not renewing.

What do you think?

Is the author truly a heartless sociopath for expecting a family to spend the last few months of their child’s life trying to find alternate housing, so that he can make a quick buck?

Or has the author done nothing wrong, and though the situation is unfortunate, it’s not ethical for the family to expect the author to not move forward with the deal simply because of their personal issues or struggles?

Interested in a new income stream in 2023? Considering joining the NewsBreak Contributor Program (note: this is an affiliate link).

Comments / 432

Published by

Your news source for viral content about complex relationships, society, and culture.


More from Gillian Sisley

Comments / 0