Beauty Mart Got Evicted: Here’s What Happened
On August 7, 2024, an Atlanta area beauty supply store created ripples in the community as it got evicted after missing rent payments. Beauty Mart on Upper Riverdale Road is known in the area for having been up and running for 35 years. The past-due rent was reportedly worth approximately $15,000.
But what made the news was the way the merchandise not removed by the business owner was handled during the eviction. The landlord filed an eviction lawsuit against Beauty Mart, which was granted by the Clayton County Court on July 26, and ten days later, the county sheriff’s department removed everything from the store and dumped it in the parking lot. Hundreds of residents who learned of the news on social media, like TikTok, rushed to the site to get their hands on the “freebies,” causing quite a commotion. The county sheriff and police officers took control of the situation on the 7th day of August and set up a perimeter to prevent people from accessing the goods, and then mobilized county inmates to move the items to a landfill. The process involved dozens of dump trucks and trailers.
The beauty industry is devastated by the news. On the one hand, many question whether the disposal of the merchandise was legal and whether the eviction was inevitable.
According to our columnist, Kyom Bae, Esq. of Sisun Law LLC, who specializes in real estate and commercial law, evictions with a remaining lease term must be preceded by a service of notice, and if an eviction order is issued by the court, the tenant must remove all personal and business property from the premises within the time frame set by the order. Eviction process is strictly regulated by state law, and in Illinois, for example, there are no specific laws about how to dispose of the unremoved personal and business property.
However, in Georgia, where Beauty Mart is located, the legal process for disposing of a tenant’s property in the event of an eviction or lease termination is relatively clear in the statutes (O.C.G.A. § 44-7-55 and 44-7-60).
- 44-7-55. Execution of Writ of Possession; Dispossessory Proceedings; Tenant’s Personal Property
(a) If it is granted, the judge shall order the sheriff or marshal to execute the writ by placing the landlord in possession of the premises and turning out the tenant, which shall authorize the removal of the tenant’s personal property, pursuant to subsection (b) of this Code section.
-
- 44-7-60. Retention and Disposition of Personal Property Left on Premises by Tenant
- The notice shall provide the tenant with no less than ten days from the date of the notice to remove the property. If the property is not removed within the time specified in the notice, the property shall be considered abandoned, and the owner or the owner’s agent may discard or dispose of the property in any manner without further notice or liability.
In other words, the goods from Beauty Mart were “legally” disposed of. Then, why couldn’t it be prevented from happening?
Beauty Mart was one of the early beauty supply stores near the Atlanta airport, but since the original owner, Jong-sook Jung, passed away five years ago, the second generation took over and seems to have gone downhill. After the manager who had been running the store for years quit, things may have gotten worse, which eventually ended up with eviction. While the late owner was actively participating in the United Georgia Beauty Supply Association(UGBSA) as an advisor during her lifetime, her son reportedly had no interaction with the association or really anyone from the beauty industry.
UGBSA President Mimi Park said, “I contacted the son several times after the passing of Jong-sook Jung, but there was no response. It’s a shame that we didn’t have an opportunity to prevent such an event, which could’ve been avoided if there was an association behind it.”
Nonetheless, many people remember the late owner Jung and feel sorry for the situation, so the UGBSA started a fundraising campaign on the 8th. The proceeds will be delivered to Beauty Mart in the name of those who wrote the check for transparent management of the donations.