How Does an Eviction Affect Your Record?

Eviction court filings remain public record indefinitely in Pennsylvania, even when filings are dismissed, withdrawn, or the renter is not found at fault. Data show that in Pennsylvania between 2015 and 2022, one in five eviction filings was settled, dismissed, or withdrawn. Growing evidence finds that landlords often use eviction filings to facilitate debt collection, extract fees, or control tenant behavior and that the threat of eviction can exacerbate tenants’ housing instability.

Landlords often rely on tenant screening reports to apply blanket denials to applicants with any history of an eviction filing, even when an applicant’s renter eviction history is misrepresented or when the tenant was found not at fault. These practices disproportionately affect women of color and households with children, which tend to be more likely to have evictions filed against them.

This study explores the collateral costs of eviction court filings for tenants in Pennsylvania. The authors interviewed and conducted surveys with 29 Pennsylvania residents who had “best-case” outcomes for an eviction filing in the previous five years, meaning they had their case resolved with a dismissal, withdrawal, or a win, between 2019 and 2023 and received legal aid services. The study used semistructured surveys and a mixed quantitative and qualitative method called concept mapping to assess the effects of costs and losses from eviction filings on tenants’ well-being.

The authors find that regardless of outcome, eviction filings have severe consequences on nearly every aspect of tenants’ lives, including health, housing instability, and economic prosperity, even years after their court dates.

Key findings

• About 69 percent of participants had moved from the property where their landlords had filed to evict them, and a vast majority of those who moved (89 percent) agreed they were forced to move. Participants largely attributed this to landlords’ refusal to make repairs. Others noted landlords refused to take rental assistance, filed repeated eviction cases without cause, enacted large rent increases, or engaged in illegal discrimination and harassment.
• Of those who moved, about 74 percent were in another rental property, 20 percent were in a temporary or unstable situation, and 1 person became a homeowner.
• After eviction filings, 43 percent reported being less willing to advocate for repairs.
• Eight in 10 participants said their eviction filing limited their future housing options. Some were unable to secure housing until somebody applied on their behalf.
• More than half of those who searched for housing submitted at least 10 applications, reporting a typical fee of $50 per application. On average, those who moved spent $650 on rental application fees.
• Sixty-five percent of those who moved said a prospective landlord asked about their eviction record, and half reported that landlords denied their request because of their filings.
• About half of the tenants who moved after their eviction filing reported a period of subsequent homelessness, which they attributed to the inability to find housing quickly. Many accepted substandard conditions with landlords who would rent to them.
• Participants identified costs associated with court attendance, including child care, transportation, and threats to job stability.
• Managing the eviction filing also affected health and relationships. All concept mapping participants said their eviction filing “caused or worsened stress, depression, or anxiety” and often strained their relationships.

Policy implications

• The authors noted that legislators can automatically seal eviction records from public view to limit discriminatory screening practices.
• Statewide antiretaliation protections can help tenants assert their right to safe and habitable housing and can be augmented by better access to legal counsel.
• Upstream interventions, such as prefiling diversion, can help avoid the long-term costs of an eviction filing.