Tenants will not allow access to make repair

Page 4 of 5  
On 18 Oct 2005 08:43:37 -0700, " snipped-for-privacy@wdeans.com"

Shut off the water anyhow !!!!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Is this a troll? Please tell me this is a troll.
No one who has one functioning brain cell would allow tenants to push them around like this.
Can I come into my property and fix a leak that is damaging my house? Please?
This is a troll.
Right?
Steve
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No, apparently it's not. I think he's right for being cautious. In the movies, he'd find 3 friends, nicely armed, and they'd walk right into the place. In the real world, you bring the cops, after they've been programmed by a judge to assist you.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 20:28:12 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

showed them the 2 page single spaced letter I had given him saying why. It didn't win him any points but the police called me. I said he was welcome to come over and get his stuff, but I wanted to know when so I could have a friend there (I was 25 years younger then.) They said they, the police would come with him, and they did.
He asked for his deposit back. I said I had to keep part until I knew how many long distance calls he'd made. He was from Iran and could have spent hundreds of dollars already, but I think he spent nothing. He never came back for the rest, though he probably stole 40 or 60 dollars from me earlier. (long story.)
Remove NOPSAM to email me. Please let me know if you have posted also.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
clipped

I haven't followed this entire thread, but now you are at the point of intrigue. Very curious situation - have you tried calling the police? If so, what was the response? I asked a retired cop, out of curiosity. He said it depends on wording in lease. Assuming the lease allows specific conditions for access, and advance notice, then if the landlord shows up with copy of lease, copy of written notice, proof of receipt, then police could enforce the landlord's access and protect him. There are lots of scenarios, of course, but proceeding without clear legal authority can be dangerous. That brings to mind the new gun law in Florida that allows shooting somebody if y'all are in danger. How that plays out is a tad scary.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Gun law: It'll primarily be of use when an intruder enters a home. This brings Florida in line with other states, and the "castle concept" which dates back hundreds of years.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
clipped

As I understand it, there is a lot more to it. Quote from Wash. Post:
"Florida law already lets residents defend themselves against attackers if they can prove they could not have escaped. The new law would allow them to use deadly force even if they could have fled and says that prosecutors must automatically presume that would-be victims feared for their lives if attacked."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I like it, but I wonder if juries will see things the same way. I mean, if you could've driven away from an apparently unarmed carjacker, but instead, you shot him, you may be on shaky ground (although you were probably right in shooting him). Shaky ground because odds are that you put bystanders in danger by using a gun outside of your own home. And, if the person really was unarmed...uh oh.
The NRA urged Floridians to contact their lawmakers about this. Their main concern was that the way the law was written before, it *almost* required someone in their own home to try and flee from an intruder, instead of simply picking up a gun and ending the situation. That's just plain silly, and this new law eliminates the problem.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 27 Oct 2005 18:58:04 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

I'm not sure how this would be different from other states. I never finished law school, but I did finish the first year, and Criminal Law was a first year course (the most interesting one.). Check elsewhere for details (If I were good at this, I'd be a lawyer now.) but even in cases of self-defense, people are expected to retreat if possible rather than use lethal force (especially I guess when the attackers aren't using lethal force yet.) *except* when one is in his own home. Like Doug says, this has been the law for 100's of years. With its origin in England.
I've never heard this but maybe? Florida had aspects of Spanish law in its system (like the state of and maybe the parishes and cities of Louisiana have a lot of French law in their system) and maybe Spanish law is different on this. Or maybe there is some other reason that Florida was different.

Like I say, there has for centuries been a difference between inside one's home and everywhere else.

It's hard to say what one means and it's hard to write laws that say what one intends in all situations. There is a series of Uniform Codes that are suggested for states to adopt so that, at least in areas where the state legistlatures of different states want the same thing, they can adopt the same language and make life a little simpler. As of 1970, the only one that was really possible was the Uniform Commercial Code, 90% or more of which had been adopted by all 50 states iirc. The UCC governs trade. I'm not sure there is a unifrom criminal code, but it's certain the whole thing would not be adopted because the various states have such different views.
Still, aiui, no state has tried to change the law in this particular situation from what it was 230 years ago. Based on your wording I suspect Florida made some sort of mistake with the previous law.
Off-topic, but a lot of the laws that some people complain about as if they are new and bad have been the law in this country (the USA) for 100 or 200 years.
Like the law against trap guns. I think lethal traps for unoccupied-at-the-moment property has been illegal for hundreds of years, no matter how upsetting it is to come home and find that one has been robbed. Yet when a burglar is shot by a trap gun and sues the homeowner and wins, everyone is outraged. (Well I'm annoyed too, but I don't blame liberals because it's not a new law.)
All in all, I wouldn't try to break into the tenant's home when they are threre, because they will claim they thought the landlord was a burglar and that he never said who he was. Really. if they are on trial for murder, or even assault with a deadly weapon, of course they will claim this.
Remove NOPSAM to email me. Please let me know if you have posted also.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
mm wrote: clipped

That is the "big deal" about the new Florida law. It's a "Gunfight at OK Corral" kind of thing. You haven't read about the billboards warning tourists?

"The "Castle Doctrine" simply says that if a criminal breaks into your home, your occupied vehicle or your place of business, you may presume he is there to do bodily harm and you may use any force against him.
It also removes the duty to retreat if you are attacked in any place you have a right to be."
from......http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/Releases.aspx?IDV85

the criminal, but with this law it is on the side of law-abiding victim. I beg to differ, but this law is on the side of the gun owner, including dirty cops and criminals who have had the good luck not to have been caught yet.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Everyone's view on this will differ: I see more of a safety problem than a legal problem with the new law, if, as you say, it appears to encourage gunfights in front of supermarkets (to use an extreme example). Just as there are people too stupid to operate a car (or a toaster), there are gun owners who are not competent to use their guns safely in public, and perhaps not at a gun range, either. I know two such people. I'm envisioning an elderly person with shaky hands, pulling a gun in a parking lot....and there goes someone's child, 50 feet behind the intended target.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Sounds like an excellent law to me. And those arguing the concept that the "home is your castle" already applies, don't know what they are talking about. In many state, NJ, NY, CA, being prime examples, under current law, if your home is invaded by an armed robber, you have the obligation to retreat if possible, rather than respond with deadly force. People have been prosecuted for defending their homes from armed attackers. If some career criminal invades someones home, and the homeowner shoots them, the homeowner shouldn't be second guessed and put in the position of having to prove they couldn;t have escaped.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Interesting. I wasn't aware that this was the deal in NY. Do you have a link for something I can read about this?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Doug Kanter wrote:

back outside the residence :o)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Just as

One of the stupidest things I ever saw anyone do involved a gun. Police were called to my neighborhood because a man had a pellet pistol that looked like a large caliber revolver. The man was a little off, and carried it around in a backpack.
The police arrived, and confronted the man, who was standing in front of a big oleander bush. The two officers drew weapons, one a shotgun the other a 9mm Glock. They were positioned in the vee of the opened doors of the cruiser.
My friend Kenny, And I use the term "friend" loosely, goes around the building to get a closer look at what is going on. This puts him in a straight line made from the officers to the man, then through the bush to Kenny.
I asked him later what he was thinking, and he said the bush would have protected him.
Kenny and I don't talk a lot any more.
So, you have people so stupid that they will actually get into the fray just to get a better view................ Steve
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
clipped

made of kryptonite :o)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote

Must be something about people named Kenny. I knew a guy who thought it was fun to peep at neighbor ladies when they were dressing/undressing. He used a high power magnifying device. You're probably thinking binoculars, right? No. He used a rifle scope, attached to his rifle. One of the neighbors caught him and called the cops. But, for some reason, all they could do was yell at him. (I would've thought that was considered "brandishing"). The rifle was empty and had a cable lock through it, but even so....you don't do that.
A couple of months later, he decided he wanted a pistol permit. You need signatures from 3 people who consider you to be of good moral character blah blah blah. The idiot went to 3 neighbors, including the husband of the woman he had aimed his rifle at. :-) Naturally, the husband told him to stuff it, then called the police and informed them that the same guy who did the rifle thing was now looking for a handgun. Kenny got his 3rd signature elsewhere, but was turned down for his permit. As far as I know, he never tried again.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Steve you, Maradcliff and a couple of others in this thread may want to secure and read a copy of the landlord tenant regulations for your state. You might be surprised exactly how much trouble you could get into by turning off the water.
You could wind up paying triple damages. The sad thing is your tax dollars would be paying the opposing attorney and you would be the defendant paying your own attorney.
The deck is stacked for the tenant in almost every case.
Colbyt
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

As has been stated and restated before, turning off the water to harass the tenants is one thing. Turning it off because there is a break in the pipe or an uncontrolled leak is another.
How in the world could an owner be held liable for stopping damage to his property especially when prevented from doing so by interfering tenants?
Yes, there is procedure and protocol to be followed. It seems like this landlord has devoted more time to discussing it on this newsgroup than actually going to the persons who know and regulate such things.
I can guarantee that if this had happened at my property rental, the case would be closed by now. Anyone barring me entrance would be trespassed immediately by a police officer, and required to vacate the premises. But, then, the laws regarding a daily, weekly, monthly rental, or rental for only a specific time period are different from a month to month open ended situation. So, I cannot really compare my rental with the OPs.
I just think that I would have taken a much more direct approach, and that I would have had the situation in hand a lot sooner. But then, my daughter and SIL are local POs, and I can always get things done a little faster than the average guy. Or at least get steered to the right person a lot faster.
However, my rental is a vacation rental, and the rental agreement allows me access 24/7. I don't deal with scum, and that seems to be the problem here.
Something smells of fish here.
Steve
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

We live in a different world than our parents. Common sense and logic are now unusual traits.
Liberalism and post modernism are now the order of the day.
Each person now must create, maintain, and defend their own universe, as we can no longer depend on law, courts, or enforcement to be able to do the right thing, even when it is obvious.
And it is only going to get worse.
Steve
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.