A New York City property owner says he has spent nearly a decade and hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to remove a man from his building, calling the drawn-out court fight a "Twilight Zone" that has left him financially and emotionally drained.
Adele Noel, who owns a multi-family property in Queens, told Fox News that the ordeal began roughly nine years ago when a man he identifies as Brett Flores moved into the property and has refused to leave. Noel described the situation as a nightmare that New York's tenant-friendly legal system has done little to resolve.
The case highlights a growing frustration among small landlords in New York, where eviction proceedings can stretch for years and squatters can exploit legal protections originally designed for tenants facing genuine hardship.
Noel said Flores initially entered the property through a personal connection. What was supposed to be a short-term arrangement turned into a permanent occupation, with Flores allegedly refusing to pay rent or vacate the unit. Noel told Fox News he has been fighting in court ever since, racking up legal bills he estimates have exceeded $100,000.
The landlord described feeling trapped by a system that, in his view, rewards bad-faith occupants and punishes property owners who play by the rules. He compared the experience to living in the "Twilight Zone," a place where logic and fairness seem inverted.
"It's like the 'Twilight Zone.' You can't believe this is happening in America."
Noel said the financial toll has been staggering. Beyond legal fees, he has lost years of rental income from the occupied unit, money he says he needed to maintain the building and support his family. The property, which he described as a key part of his livelihood, has become a source of constant stress rather than stability.
The case fits a pattern that has drawn increasing attention in New York and other states where eviction laws tilt heavily toward occupants. Under New York law, a person who occupies a property for 30 days or more can claim certain tenant protections, even without a lease or any rental agreement. That legal threshold means property owners must navigate the formal eviction process through housing court, a system notorious for backlogs and delays.
For landlords like Noel, the result is a Catch-22. They cannot physically remove an occupant without risking criminal charges for illegal eviction. But the courts move slowly, and occupants who know the system can file motions, request adjournments, and drag proceedings out for months or years at a time. Property rights disputes that stretch across years are not unique to squatter cases, but few hit individual owners this hard.
Noel said Flores has used every procedural tool available to delay the case. Each court appearance brings new filings, new adjournments, and new costs. The landlord told Fox News he feels like he is being "drained dry" by a process that offers no meaningful timeline for resolution.
New York's housing courts have faced criticism for years over crushing caseloads and glacial timelines. The COVID-19 pandemic made things worse. Eviction moratoriums that began in 2020 created a massive backlog, and courts are still working through cases that piled up during the shutdown period.
Even before the pandemic, landlord advocates argued that the system was structurally biased against property owners. New York's 2019 Housing Stability and Tenant Protection Act expanded tenant rights and made it harder to evict occupants in many circumstances. Critics say those protections, while well-intentioned, have been weaponized by bad actors who exploit them to live rent-free indefinitely.
Noel's case illustrates the human cost of that dynamic. He is not a corporate landlord with a legal department and deep pockets. He is a small property owner who depends on rental income and now finds himself subsidizing an occupant he says has no legal right to be there. Cases like this raise the same fundamental tension seen in court decisions that keep rewriting the rules while leaving the people affected scrambling to keep up.
Noel said he has reached out to elected officials and advocacy groups for help but has received little meaningful assistance. He told Fox News he wants lawmakers to address the loopholes that allow squatters to exploit tenant protections and to create an expedited process for cases where occupants have no lease, no rental history, and no legal claim to the property.
"I'm pleading for help. Someone has to do something about this."
His frustration echoes complaints from landlords across the state who say they have been abandoned by a political establishment more interested in tenant advocacy than balanced property rights. In a city where housing politics run hot, small landlords often find themselves without a political constituency willing to fight for them.
The squatter issue has gained national attention in recent years, with high-profile cases in New York, California, and other states prompting calls for legislative action. Some states have moved to strengthen property-owner protections. Florida, for example, signed a law in 2024 that allows police to immediately remove squatters under certain conditions, bypassing the lengthy court process. When people unlawfully occupy private property, the legal response often depends entirely on which state the property sits in.
New York has not followed suit. Efforts to pass similar legislation in Albany have stalled, with tenant advocacy groups arguing that stronger eviction tools could be used against legitimate tenants facing hardship. That tension between protecting vulnerable renters and preventing abuse of the system remains unresolved.
Nine years into his fight, Noel said he sees no end in sight. The legal process grinds forward at its own pace, indifferent to the financial and emotional toll on the property owner caught inside it. Every month that passes means more lost income, more legal fees, and more frustration.
Noel told Fox News he has considered selling the property, but the ongoing squatter situation makes that difficult. Prospective buyers are unlikely to take on a building with an entrenched occupant and an active court case. The property that was supposed to be his investment has become an anchor. The situation calls to mind other legal fights over who controls property and what happens when courts move too slowly to deliver a practical result.
The case also raises questions about what happens to small landlords who simply cannot afford to keep fighting. Not every property owner has the resources to sustain a nine-year legal battle. Some walk away, effectively surrendering their property to occupants who outlasted them in court. Others face foreclosure when they can no longer cover mortgage payments without rental income.
Noel said he plans to continue the fight, though he acknowledged the toll it has taken. He urged other landlords facing similar situations to speak out and push for legislative reform. Without changes to the law, he warned, cases like his will only multiply.
New York's political leaders have shown little appetite for squatter reform in recent legislative sessions. The issue cuts across competing interests in a city where renters vastly outnumber property owners and housing affordability dominates the political conversation. For lawmakers, siding with landlords carries political risk, even when the facts of a case suggest clear abuse of the system.
Flores has not made extensive public comments about the dispute. Fox News reported that efforts to reach him were not successful. His side of the story remains largely unheard in public, though the court filings presumably reflect his legal position.
When a property owner spends nine years and six figures trying to reclaim his own building, the system is not protecting anyone. It is just running out the clock.
