Posted on 06/15/2006 9:47:11 AM PDT by CAWats
For the first time the office, in addition to imposing fines, is seeking to seize the landlords' properties, using a statute in the state code normally applied to antitrust cases.
Authorities allege that the landlords sought to circumvent local renter-protection laws by locking tenants out of their buildings, failing to make timely repairs, making false and misleading representations that the building was being condemned and turning off utilities.
At the low-rent Huntington Hotel downtown, electricity and water were turned off for extended periods, according to court documents, and tenants were threatened with violence or the removal of their property unless they vacated their units. At the apartment building where the Chans lived, the defendants started renovation work on the building and allegedly forced tenants to walk through an area open to potentially harmful construction dust
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Why not just refuse to renew their leases?
In NYC I know of a reprehensible individual who lived in the city rent-free for almost 10 years. His strategy: move in, never pay rent and pay a lawyer 5% of two year's rent to fight his eviction for years.
It can take up to three years in NYC to evict a tenant for nonpayment of rent.
Ruben Diaz and Maria Hernandez....wonder how many are illegal aliens?
Not legal in many large cities, where the socialist city governments decided long ago that the easiest way to buy the votes of the poor and/or lazy was to confiscate the property rights of residential landlords.
I'm not sure what the current situation in Boston is, but for many years it was simply illegal to take ANY residential "rental unit" off the market. One family had converted the dining room of their single family home into an extra bedroom that they rented out. Then when one of the couple's had a parent die, leaving a surviving spouse who couldn't live alone, they figured that when their current renter's lease expired, they'd give it to the elderly parent. They figrued wrong. Busybodies activists sued, and the homeowners lost in the trial court. I don't know if the case was ever overturned on appeal.
Not in Arizona, we have the most owner friendly laws. I can have a renter out on the street in just 15 days.
I don't see why someone should have to rent to someone they don't want to rent to.
Sweet. It's as if you actually owned your own property!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.